Hi George. I agree there is merit in asserting the naturallness of global warming. Whether we can substantially influence it or not, it is of prime importance that we turn more and more to renewables....if only from a viewpoint of limited natural resources.
Economics will - at the end - win the day. The cost of coal fired electricity rises - drastically, while the cost of renewable technology falls - not as drastically as we would hope. New solar technologies will surely give us some good surprises in future - i.e. the experimental use of neatly arranged empty biological diatom shells on a film which reflects photons and causes more electrons to be disturbed by a single photon. These panels are apparently 4 times more efficient than conventional PV's. To return to your indications about wind power generation: You hint at some sort of conspiracy to conceal the facts about wind generation. I do not think that such a secret, which is subject to investigation by so many engineers, scientsists and - investors - will remain concealed for long. I had the opportunity to attend a conference hosted by various Danish role players specifically about wind generation. The Danish grid is small in comparison, but Denmark must surely have one of the highest renewable to conventional generation ratio's in the world. They rely heavily on wind generation. I agree with your statement that the intermittency of wind generation causes problems - though not to the extent at which you hinted. In an extended grid with combined coal, solar and wind generation there is time, technology and location variation in system weak spots with a low probability of a total system collapse where most wind and solar generators do not contribute at any given time. In Germany, however, there is appr. 20 GW installed wind generation with 3.8 GW installed solar generation. The technology variation assistance will thus be small should there be an abnormally calm and sunny day throughout the country. There thus has to be a certain percentage of stand-by coal fired generation ability to cater for extreme high load / low generation scenarios. The impact here is in the capital cost of establishing this stand-by ability. The extent of local conventional stand-by generation can be limited by various means, i.e. emergency supply contracts with your neighbouring country. This neighbouring country serves to further extend the grid and create a larger time / position diversity of system weak spots and an overall lower probability of total renewable generation collapse. The point is, however, that every kWh generated by the potential 300W / sqm on a turbine blade constitutes a kWh of power not polluting the atmosphere and not depleting natural resources. You may bring about the old argument of the environmental cost of establishing the renewable equipment versus the environmental advantage - yes. But I bet if life time delivery versus "cost" of installation is closely scrutinized the answer will be a resounding positive for wind generation. I do not understand your indication of power consumed by a wind generator. Perhaps you may rephrase in terms of efficiency? Even if the inefficiency is 50% - as you proposed - it can only draw real power from the grid if the generators turn to motors. Is there any phase of operation of a wind farm where the generators actually become motors? I hope this contributed with regards to clarification of the items mentioned. Regards Sam On Jun 6, 6:45 pm, [email protected] wrote: > The essay "WIND ENERGY" > inhttp://findgeorges.com/ROOT/WRITINGS/ESSAYS/wind_energy.html > has been updated. > It has been known that the wind energy is one of the > biggest frauds of our time, based upon political > corruption and mass manipulation. > However, the section "Internal energy consumption" with > its details in Appendix points to a downright theft. > The technical evidence seems to indicate that wind > turbines have drawn - unpayed for - heavy > MegaWattHours from the grid. Exact estimation is difficult > due to the details of internal consumption kept > undisclosed by wind turbine manufacturers. However, > manufacturers' secrecy in face of the technical evidence > seems to call for a criminal investigation. > Georges. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Epistemology" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/epistemology?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
