Re: [Vo]: US Windpower
- Original Message - From: Robin van Spaandonk [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Vo]: US Windpower In reply to Jed Rothwell's message of Tue, 13 Jun 2006 23:39:58 -0400 (GMT-04:00): Hi, [snip] Since electric cars are more efficient than gasoline powered ones, I expect there is more than enough wind power in the world to generate all of the energy we now use. We need only two things: the ideal battery and HTSC power lines. An alternative would be to use Tesla's method of pumping energy into the Earth, and extracting it with tuned receivers. *No transmission lines required*. Of course all power transmitters would need to be owned by one entity, as there would otherwise be no way of determining who should get paid. Tesla did not 'pump energy into the earth'. He had a large antenna atop his Colorado transmitter and the idea was to pump energy into the cavity formed by the earth and the conductive ionosphere. Reportedly he was able to light a lamp at some distance without a wired connection. Lamp in this context does not necessarily mean an incandescent lamp, which has low resistance, but could be any of several versions of high frequency 'lamps' which Tesla demonstrated at various times. Supposedly his backers withdrew support when they realized that there would be no way to meter and charge for the power drawn. Tesla's system would have generated enormous borad spectrum radio noise which would have prevented the growth of AM radio broadcasting. The RF energy desnity would currently be regarded as a health hazard. Mike Carrell
Re: [Vo]: US Windpower
Mike Carrell wrote: Tesla did not 'pump energy into the earth'. He had a large antenna atop his Colorado transmitter and the idea was to pump energy into the cavity formed by the earth and the conductive ionosphere. Reportedly he was able to light a lamp at some distance without a wired connection. Lamp in this context does not necessarily mean an incandescent lamp, which has low resistance, but could be any of several versions of high frequency 'lamps' which Tesla demonstrated at various times. Supposedly his backers withdrew support when they realized that there would be no way to meter and charge for the power drawn. Tesla's system would have generated enormous broad spectrum radio noise which would have prevented the growth of AM radio broadcasting. The RF energy density would currently be regarded as a health hazard. Judging by the Tesla Cults that pervade the Internet, I think Tesla himself was/is a health hazard. OTOH, CQ up in Canada seems to be in good health. :-) A recent survey stated that Canadians are in better health than Americans. Could this be because Canadians that get sick, just die quick? Fred Mike Carrell
Re: [Vo]: US Windpower
Frederick Sparber wrote: Mike Carrell wrote: Tesla did not 'pump energy into the earth'. He had a large antenna atop his Colorado transmitter and the idea was to pump energy into the cavity formed by the earth and the conductive ionosphere. Reportedly he was able to light a lamp at some distance without a wired connection. Lamp in this context does not necessarily mean an incandescent lamp, which has low resistance, but could be any of several versions of high frequency 'lamps' which Tesla demonstrated at various times. Supposedly his backers withdrew support when they realized that there would be no way to meter and charge for the power drawn. Tesla's system would have generated enormous broad spectrum radio noise which would have prevented the growth of AM radio broadcasting. The RF energy density would currently be regarded as a health hazard. Judging by the Tesla Cults that pervade the Internet, I think Tesla himself was/is a health hazard. OTOH, CQ up in Canada seems to be in good health. :-) A recent survey stated that Canadians are in better health than Americans. Could this be because Canadians that get sick, just die quick? Nah, they just eat healthier than folks in the States. We bust the budget on health care and then eat a diet that negates it all. The Canadian diet is not so great either for that matter, but it's not as bad as the U.S. diet. By rights, heart disease should be a rare illness, affecting only those with congenital heart defects and those with a congenital problem regulating their cholesterol level. Instead it's the most common cause of death among middle aged and older people here. Sorry, this is 'way, 'way off topic. Fred Mike Carrell
RE: [Vo]: US Windpower
I wonder what the environmental impact would be to tap it. Wind farms of that magnitude surely would have some net-effect on the low altitude weather patterns of the region they are located and the regions down wind of them the closest analogy I can think of is hydroelectric damming. -j -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2006 9:11 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: [Vo]: US Windpower http://www.capecodtoday.com/news246.htm Report: Enough wind offshore to electrify America Wind power offshore can equal the present capacity of all landed power plants. U.S. Dept. of Energy report is another big leap forward for Cape Wind T here is as much wind power potential (900,000 megawatts) off our coasts as the current capacity of all power plants in the United States combined, according to a new report entitled, A Framework for Offshore Wind Energy Development in the United States, sponsored by the U.S. Department of Energy, Massachusetts Technology Collaborative, and General Electric. more ___ Try the New Netscape Mail Today! Virtually Spam-Free | More Storage | Import Your Contact List http://mail.netscape.com
RE: [Vo]: US Windpower
John Steck wrote: I wonder what the environmental impact would be to tap it. Interesting point. I doubt it would be significant. Total wind power equals the total solar energy that intercepts earth, and that is immense compared to human energy consumption. Wind farms of that magnitude surely would have some net-effect on the low altitude weather patterns of the region they are located and the regions down wind of them the closest analogy I can think of is hydroelectric damming. Probably the closest similar physical effect would be the heat islands caused by urban areas, and their effect on the weather. Whatever the effect, I am sure it would not be as bad as the effect of coal-fired power generation and a billion automobiles burning gasoline. - Jed
RE: [Vo]: US Windpower
At 11:05 am 14/06/2006 -0400, Jed wrote: John Steck wrote: I wonder what the environmental impact would be to tap it. Interesting point. I doubt it would be significant. Total wind power equals the total solar energy that intercepts earth, and that is immense compared to human energy consumption. Interesting - I hadn't thought of that. I was thinking the same effect as a small range of mountains - or even hills. 8-) Frank
Re: [Vo]: US Windpower
In reply to Jed Rothwell's message of Tue, 13 Jun 2006 23:39:58 -0400 (GMT-04:00): Hi, [snip] Since electric cars are more efficient than gasoline powered ones, I expect there is more than enough wind power in the world to generate all of the energy we now use. We need only two things: the ideal battery and HTSC power lines. An alternative would be to use Tesla's method of pumping energy into the Earth, and extracting it with tuned receivers. *No transmission lines required*. Of course all power transmitters would need to be owned by one entity, as there would otherwise be no way of determining who should get paid. [snip] Regards, Robin van Spaandonk http://users.bigpond.net.au/rvanspaa/ Competition provides the motivation, Cooperation provides the means.
[Vo]: US Windpower
http://www.capecodtoday.com/news246.htm Report: Enough wind offshore to electrify America Wind power offshore can equal the present capacity of all landed power plants. U.S. Dept. of Energy report is another big leap forward for Cape Wind T here is as much wind power potential (900,000 megawatts) off our coasts as the current capacity of all power plants in the United States combined, according to a new report entitled, A Framework for Offshore Wind Energy Development in the United States, sponsored by the U.S. Department of Energy, Massachusetts Technology Collaborative, and General Electric. more ___ Try the New Netscape Mail Today! Virtually Spam-Free | More Storage | Import Your Contact List http://mail.netscape.com
Re: [Vo]: US Windpower
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Report: Enough wind offshore to electrify America Wind power offshore can equal the present capacity of all landed power plants. U.S. Dept. of Energy report is another big leap forward for Cape Wind That is astounding. There is also enough wind power in North and South Dakota to power the entire U.S., but they are farther from population centers than offshore locations. Europe has roughly 4 times as much offshore wind power capacity as their present consumption. Since electric cars are more efficient than gasoline powered ones, I expect there is more than enough wind power in the world to generate all of the energy we now use. We need only two things: the ideal battery and HTSC power lines. Wind power projections keep rising as the size of wind turbines increases, because they sweep a larger cross-section of the atmosphere. It would be interesting if carbon fiber towers and turbine blades 1 km long could be developed. - Jed
