Why Not Use Windmills?

[charrob]

.


oil exploration produces the loudest sound on earth, destroys hearing for marine mammels such as dolphins, porpoises, and whales, and causes strandings where they come to the beach in large numbers to die...these are beings...equal in every way to humans with brains to body size ratio the same as humans...killing them is no less than murder...

http://photos-e.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-snc3/hs371.snc3/23828_116431551703804_100000108791083_292824_45136 3_s.jpg



42,000 gallons of oil spilling into Gulf Of Mexico each day... Why not use windmills which, prior to the Gulf spill, were actually in the planning stages to go into production by 2015 off the east coast rather than exploring oil which will take until 2020 to go into production? Considering there's only 1 year's worth of oil (at most), and the wind on the ocean is infinite...


YouTube - Oil Spill to be Set Ablaze (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E6ih8EOPgFw&feature=player_embedded)




The answer, my friend, is blowin' in the wind
By TED DANSON AND ANDREW SHARPLESS

There are many good reasons not to like the idea of opening vast seascapes off America's coasts to oil and gas drilling, from the risk of devastating accidents like the recent Gulf of Mexico blowout to the folly of further endangering our climate for just a few months' worth of fossil fuels. But here's one reason you probably haven't heard: The rush to pump will undermine our efforts to build cleaner ocean wind farms - and push the United States further behind in the race to lead the fast-growing market for offshore wind technologies.

At first glance, it's hard to see the link between building offshore wind turbines and President Obama's March decision to open long-closed areas off the Eastern Seaboard and the Gulf Coast to oil and gas exploration and leasing.

The link - and the unwelcome surprise - is that energy companies cashing in on those new offshore rigs will compete directly with the infant U.S. offshore wind industry for the limited supply of specialized ships, equipment and marine engineering talent. So pushing to drain these relatively puny offshore oil reserves will end up delaying another administration goal: Creating a robust U.S. offshore wind industry that can produce clean energy and thousands of good jobs for generations.

The Obama administration clearly understands offshore wind's potential for combating climate change and bolstering coastal communities. Prompted by studies showing that offshore turbines could provide enough electricity to power the entire country, it has moved to encourage the growth of an offshore wind industry. And the move offshore seems a natural for U.S. wind companies, already world leaders in inventing, building and selling the equipment needed to transform land-based breezes into electrons.

When it comes to harnessing ocean gusts however, the United States trails its foreign competitors. In Europe, companies have already installed several hundred offshore turbines. As a result, European engineers have amassed years of hands-on expertise in overcoming the special challenges posed by erecting wind turbines in the briny deep. They've learned how to make electronics and transmission cables that can resist corrosive saltwater, and how to operate the special - and expensive - ships needed to move and install their jumbo turbines. Even China has gotten its feet wet in building offshore wind, looking to gain an edge in an emerging world market that forecasters predict will be worth billions.

The U.S. offshore wind industry, meanwhile, has been stuck in the doldrums, with little more than paper plans for about a dozen farms, mostly off the East Coast. But last year, some of those projects - including farms off Delaware and New Jersey - moved closer to reality, winning key backing from the public, environmentalists, government officials and investors. Some experts predicted the farms could be up and running by mid-decade. After decades of talk, offshore wind finally looked ready to walk.

The White House's offshore drilling plan, unfortunately, strings a new tripwire. If successful, the push to build new rigs off the East Coast will raise demand for the specialized "jack up" ships used to erect large at-sea structures. Offshore wind companies may have to wait in line for years - or spend hundreds of millions of dollars to build their own ships, which can also take years. Similarly, a new rig boom will push up demand and prices for specialized computer chips, mechanical parts and maritime expertise used by both the offshore wind and oil industries.

This conflict doesn't have to occur. There is no compelling reason for the United States to open these offshore oil reserves. Economists say it is unlikely the drilling will even dent domestic energy prices, adding that we will continue to rely heavily on imported oil to quench our petroleum thirst. And it seems ill-timed to uncork a new source of carbon dioxide, just as we are beginning to fight climate change.

The administration should stop working at cross-purposes . We should stop looking beneath the seafloor for energy solutions, inadvertently creating new obstacles for the emerging offshore wind industry. This is the time to look up, to the plentiful ocean breezes that power mighty waves. We are poised to be a global leader in the renewable energy industry. We should urge our policymakers to favor clean more than dirty technologies, to boost our economy and provide affordable energy for our homes and businesses. As Bob Dylan crooned in 1963, "the answer is blowin' in the wind."

ABOUT THE WRITERS


Actor Ted Danson is a board member and Andrew Sharpless is the CEO of international ocean conservation group Oceana. Readers may write to them at: Protecting the World's Oceans, 1350 Connecticut Avenue NW, Suite 500, Washington, D.C. 20036.

This essay is available to McClatchy-Tribune News Service subscribers. McClatchy-Tribune did not subsidize the writing of this column; the opinions are those of the writer and do not necessarily represent the views of McClatchy-Tribune or its editors.

Posted on Mon, Apr. 26, 2010 07:19 AM



What amazes me most about the 'drill-baby-drill' palinites, is there's currently no shortage of oil. If there was a shortage, 9 out of 10 vehicles on the roads would not be single-occupant SUV's!




http://www.kansascity.com/2010/04/26/1903413/the-answer-my-friend-is-blowin.html

[Old Ducker]

What do you have against birds?

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-01-04-windmills-usat_x.htm

[pcosmar]

.




What amazes me most about the 'drill-baby-drill' palinites, is there's currently no shortage of oil. If there was a shortage, 9 out of 10 vehicles on the roads would not be single-occupant SUV's!






Well I would love to have windmills on my farm, but aside from the cost of the windmills themselves , the legal battle to place them would cost me even more. More that the hardware itself.

As to the single occupant "SUV'. Show me an electric (or any other alternative) that has 4WD and will haul loads. I need to haul tons.
Until then.
Drill baby drill.

[charrob]

Show me an electric (or any other alternative) that has 4WD and will haul loads. I need to haul tons.


For people who need trucks, etc., in their work is different...

What I see commuting in an urban area on a daily basis, and i've actually objectively counted during rush hour, are single occupant SUV's and people having trucks for "the image" are by far the greatest number of vehicles on the road. -it's ridiculous; i work near the D.C. area where people sit in lines of traffic for hours getting to their destinations. When prices went up awhile back, people starting trading in their gas-guzzlers for efficient Honda-fits, etc. But, when the prices decreased, voila, they go back to buying SUV's.

I think there should be an exception for people who need trucks for making a living; my cousin is a tractor trailor driver who drives cross-country and it was hard when diesal prices went up... but for people who literally only have big vehicles to commute, by themselves, on highways to offices everyday, (and there's tons and tons and tons of these people living and working in urban areas) i'd personally like to see the prices go up again dramatically. these people imo are just pigs at the trough.

but the prices are low right now-- so there's not even any shortage.

as for palin and drill-baby-drill, i honestly hate (and God forgive me, i know i'm not supposed to hate anyone) that woman more than i've hated anyone in my entire life: she is the personification of evil in my eyes.

[charrob]

What do you have against birds?

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-01-04-windmills-usat_x.htm

birds are also dieing flying into offshore oil rigs and being zapped... and that's not counting the slow, painful, deaths they constantly experience when they swim into even small amounts of oil (which are continuously spilling from production oil rigs) and their feathers are glued to their bodies and they cannot fly... many also drown....

the easy solution, which was written in the article you provided, would be to make sure the blades of the windmills were located twice as high as the flying patterns of birds... since east coast windmills have not yet been built (but are in the planning stages), there's already a fix, so no need to worry.

[Acala]

Get government out of energy. No subsidy, no "resource management, no liability shields, no permitting, no wars, no externalizing or socializing costs. Let the market decide what energy is most efficient.

[Zippyjuan]

oil exploration produces the loudest sound on earth,
Sorry, you lost me after this. The loudest sound on earth?

Windmills are nice and I support using them. But they will not be able to meet all our energy needs by themselves (and check out the bird killing article- fits nicely with your picture of the oil covered bird).

Don't get me wrong, I think of myself as an environmentalist too. But I am also a realist. We aren't going to get rid of oil. Energy production is messy. Drilling for oil and gas is messy but considerably less so than it used to be. The well going off in the Gulf is an excepetion- not the rule. Coal is dangerous and dirty too. Nuclear produces hazardous waste which will be around long after you and I are dead. Electrical vehicles sound clean but still need something to make the energy to power then and in most cases that is coal or some natural gas. They require batteries which use large amounts of toxic chemicals which will later need to be recycled or disposed of. Solar panels are made with petroleum products. Petroleum is used to make the plastics that almost everything you own has in it. Synthetic fibers in clothing is made from petroleum as are fertilizers we use to grow enough food for everybody to eat.

I would challenge you go go through one week avoiding any products using petroleum. You can't. Even the soles of your shoes are made with it.

I do what I can to reduce my own energy consumption (I don't even drive a car but walk or ride a bicycle everywhere).

By the way, the loudest recorded sound in the world? That was when the volcano at Mt Tambora blew its top. It was hears 1600 miles away. Oil rigs and oil exploration are not that noisy. Krakatoa was literally heard around the world when it blew- even over 2000 miles away. Oil exploration does sometimes use explosives to create soundwaves to help with underground seismic exploration but even those are nowhere near as loud as that.

[charrob]

Sorry, you lost me after this. The loudest sound on earth?

hi, it's written on page 23 of the following .pdf document:

http://na.oceana.org/sites/default/files/o/fileadmin/oceana/uploads/Climate_Change/Toxic_Legacy/Toxic_Legacy_FINAL.pdf



Windmills are nice and I support using them. But they will not be able to meet all our energy needs by themselves (and check out the bird killing article- fits nicely with your picture of the oil covered bird).


i read the bird killing article: in it it specifically stated that an easy fix is to make sure the blades of the windmills are placed twice as high as the flying patterns of birds... since offshore east coast windmills have not yet been built but are currently in the planning stages, that's an easy fix.



Don't get me wrong, I think of myself as an environmentalist too. But I am also a realist. We aren't going to get rid of oil. Energy production is messy. Drilling for oil and gas is messy but considerably less so than it used to be. The well going off in the Gulf is an excepetion- not the rule. Coal is dangerous and dirty too. Nuclear produces hazardous waste which will be around long after you and I are dead. Electrical vehicles sound clean but still need something to make the energy to power then and in most cases that is coal or some natural gas. They require batteries which use large amounts of toxic chemicals which will later need to be recycled or disposed of. Solar panels are made with petroleum products. Petroleum is used to make the plastics that almost everything you own has in it. Synthetic fibers in clothing is made from petroleum as are fertilizers we use to grow enough food for everybody to eat.


there's less than one year's worth of oil off the east coast, but, critical wetlands required for the survival of marine animals completely line the east coast. What kind of crazy person would allow this to go through when windmills have not only been in the planning stages but were planned to be in production by 2015 (five years before production offshore drilling).

i've read what , prior to the gulf oil spill, people who live in texas said about their beaches... they always literally get oil on them when they swim in the ocean, always have tar balls on the bottoms of their feet from just walking the beach. 20 years after Exxon Valdez spill there's still dire consequences for wildlife in alaska... the shortsightedness of this just baffles me. If anything, natural gas is a better solution for wildlife and can be used until we can even find cleaner solutions... and we have so much natural gas right now that we are closing down wells in this country.

also, the east coast is lined with pristine beaches: when we go each summer, i spend the entire day in the water (rarely lay on the beach)... can you imagine what's going to happen to businesses lining the east coast when people start having to wash tar off their bathing suits and feet? it's sickening, it really is.



I do what I can to reduce my own energy consumption (I don't even drive a car but walk or ride a bicycle everywhere).


i'm like that too :) . Even for small amounts of grocery shopping, i have this nifty storage container on the back of my bicycle and just put stuff in there.

[Anti Federalist]

Why not windmills?

Good question...

Ask all the trendy, "eco conscious" yuppies out on the Cape that are opposing this. They are they ones continually harping about global warming, and ecological disaster yet they'll have this project bogged down for decades in the courts.

And let me ask you, you've stated that you on or near the MD coast: would you mind having your sea view obscured by hundreds or thousands of windmill towers?

Windmills won't make all the plastics, synthetic rubber, fertilizers and other chemicals that modern life is wholly dependent on either.

[Anti Federalist]

If anything, natural gas is a better solution for wildlife and can be used until we can even find cleaner solutions... and we have so much natural gas right now that we are closing down wells in this country.

Drilling for natural gas entails the exact same risks and uses the exact same technology that drilling for oil does.

[Stary Hickory]

If wind and solar energy were more efficient producers of energy the FREE market would already be using them, not forced to by government threats of violence
True Story

[charrob]

Why not windmills?

And let me ask you, you've stated that you on or near the MD coast: would you mind having your sea view obscured by hundreds or thousands of windmill towers?


not at all, and as technology is evolving the windmills are increasing in size and decreasing in number.

my concern is wildlife, as well as destruction of what, is now, pristine east coast beaches where , personally, i'll spend 5 or 6 hours in the water when we go down in the summers... that's not going to happen if i start getting tar and oil on my bathing suit and tar balls on my feet. East coast businesses who rely on the summer tourist season, will be devastated. to destroy nature like this for short term gain is ridiculous.

[awake]

Build all the solar panels and wind mills you want, do it on your own property and with your own money. If the investment fails to pay off , then do not seek any type of government assistance.


Of course the opposite is the case where wind and solar markets are concerned.

[charrob]

Drilling for natural gas entails the exact same risks and uses the exact same technology that drilling for oil does.

if it's in gaseous form, how does it get spilled into the water? how does it clog the nasal passages of dolphins and porpoises who then die? how does it stick the feathers of a seabird to its body so that it can no longer fly, and it drowns?

[Todd]

It's fine to use them to supplement your home etc. but the most obvious reason not to rely on them exclusively is REALITY. Read the book "Trashing the Planet". It explains quite thoroughly why it cannot work on a large scale.

[charrob]

If wind and solar energy were more efficient producers of energy the FREE market would already be using them, not forced to by government threats of violence
True Story

if you read the article (which apparently you have not), you would have seen that they were already in the planning stages and that, BECAUSE OF OBAMA'S OIL EXPLORATION DESIRES, these projects will no longer have the resources required that the OIL EXPLORERS will take from them:


The link - and the unwelcome surprise - is that energy companies cashing in on those new offshore rigs will compete directly with the infant U.S. offshore wind industry for the limited supply of specialized ships, equipment and marine engineering talent. So pushing to drain these relatively puny offshore oil reserves will end up delaying another administration goal: Creating a robust U.S. offshore wind industry that can produce clean energy and thousands of good jobs for generations.

The White House's offshore drilling plan, unfortunately, strings a new tripwire. If successful, the push to build new rigs off the East Coast will raise demand for the specialized "jack up" ships used to erect large at-sea structures. Offshore wind companies may have to wait in line for years - or spend hundreds of millions of dollars to build their own ships, which can also take years. Similarly, a new rig boom will push up demand and prices for specialized computer chips, mechanical parts and maritime expertise used by both the offshore wind and oil industries.

[charrob]

Build all the solar panels and wind mills you want, do on your own property and with your own money.

Drill for oil all you want, do on your own property and with your own money.

The U.S. as a whole owns offshore continental areas.

[Todd]

If wind and solar energy were more efficient producers of energy the FREE market would already be using them, not forced to by government threats of violence
True Story

That would be the case if we actually had a free market. Government has had a way of stifling innovation and technology from coming into the mainstream.

In Charrobs defense, I would be very willing to put in solar panels on my home and utilize basic windmill technology .............if the government were to give me the incentive to do so. How about a tax credit for the cost of converting my home for starters.

[charrob]

That would be the case if we actually had a free market. Government has had a way of stifling innovation and technology from coming into the mainstream.


and the subsidies we give oil companies alone create an uneven playing field...

[Todd]

and the subsidies we give oil companies alone create an uneven playing field...

That speaks to the problem of giving a subsidy to anyone. But you're right.

[Anti Federalist]

if it's in gaseous form, how does it get spilled into the water? how does it clog the nasal passages of dolphins and porpoises who then die? how does it stick the feathers of a seabird to its body so that it can no longer fly, and it drowns?

Because, unless it's a shallow gas pocket, it does not come out of the ground in a pure gaseous form.

In deep depth gas wells, the gas comes out of the ground mixed with condensate, paraffins, light oils, poisonous hydrogen sulfide and sulfur dioxide (this is what you see being flared off) and oil contaminated salt water.

The drilling process is exactly the same.

[JeNNiF00F00]

Why not have windmills? Well there isn't enough wind in some places for one thing. Here in SC the power company had wind turbines in Texas, but got rid of them I think because they were inefficient. They also looked into solar panels and again they weren't efficient for the costs required to keep them up and running. Plus the other thing is that these aren't little farm windmills, these are massive wind turbines that are about 20 stories high so you need massive amounts of land/water to put these things on and again, you have to have enough wind to make them go. Also the power grids are all off for the entire US to have this type of technology. They need to totally uproot ALL of the power grids and change them in order for anything to really happen, and again with this, the costs right now are way out of the ballpark in order for anyone to do much about it.

[charrob]

Because, unless it's a shallow gas pocket, it does not come out of the ground in a pure gaseous form.

In deep depth gas wells, the gas comes out of the ground mixed with condensate, paraffins, light oils, poisonous hydrogen sulfide and sulfur dioxide (this is what you see being flared off) and oil contaminated salt water.

The drilling process is exactly the same.

that's really a shame. Truthfully i don't have a clue why Obama wants to drill offshore for natural gas....wells are shutting down all over the country right now because we have so much of it...

[Anti Federalist]

not at all, and as technology is evolving the windmills are increasing in size and decreasing in number.

my concern is wildlife, as well as destruction of what, is now, pristine east coast beaches where , personally, i'll spend 5 or 6 hours in the water when we go down in the summers... that's not going to happen if i start getting tar and oil on my bathing suit and tar balls on my feet. East coast businesses who rely on the summer tourist season, will be devastated. to destroy nature like this for short term gain is ridiculous.

You won't get tar balls on your feet.

The gulf tar balls you are speaking of are the result of naturally occurring oil "seeps" on the sea floor.

But I'm all for windmills as a stopgap measure.

I wish the eco trendie hypocrites down Cape felt the same way.

[w2992]

the free market should decide. oil should not be subsidized by wars. remove restrictions to hemp farming for alcohol fuel and hemp clothing.

[charrob]

Why not have windmills? Well there isn't enough wind in some places for one thing. Here in SC the power company had wind turbines in Texas, but got rid of them I think because they were inefficient. They also looked into solar panels and again they weren't efficient for the costs required to keep them up and running. Plus the other thing is that these aren't little farm windmills, these are massive wind turbines that are about 20 stories high so you need massive amounts of land/water to put these things on and again, you have to have enough wind to make them go. Also the power grids are all off for the entire US to have this type of technology. They need to totally uproot ALL of the power grids and change them in order for anything to really happen, and again with this, the costs right now are way out of the ballpark in order for anyone to do much about it.

i've been going to the Ocean every summer my whole life and no matter how hot, and stagnant the air is anywhere is, there's always lots of wind and big waves at the beach.

[fisharmor]

Drill for oil all you want, do on your own property and with your own money.

The U.S. as a whole owns offshore continental areas.

True, and I doubt you'd find many here who are big fans of that, either.

Why not use windmills?

Math. As in, windmills can't possibly generate the amount of energy we consume.


The more complicated answer:
Because for the last century government has been subsidizing automobile travel and punishing other forms of travel,
combined with government subsidizing plowing over wild areas in order to build new zoned suburbs,
combined with government financially punishing those living in areas where you don't need an automobile,
combined with government making it impossible to defend yourself in most urban areas,
combined with government chasing industry out of urban areas and ultimately out of the country....

...all these factors and more add up to a society where we use far more energy than necessary.

[Stary Hickory]

That would be the case if we actually had a free market. Government has had a way of stifling innovation and technology from coming into the mainstream.

In Charrobs defense, I would be very willing to put in solar panels on my home and utilize basic windmill technology .............if the government were to give me the incentive to do so. How about a tax credit for the cost of converting my home for starters.

Why force me to subsidize your desire for solar panels? If you think government is too big into energy then demand they get out of it and don't ask for special breaks. And yes a tax credit for a specific purpose is a special break.

[fisharmor]

Why force me to subsidize your desire for solar panels? If you think government is too big into energy then demand they get out of it and don't ask for special breaks. And yes a tax credit for a specific purpose is a special break.

True, but consider:
All we need is a 5-year tax nonliability for people who buy grid tie-ins for their homes.
For most people that will get them half way through the cost of the system, and it will give people a taste of what's possible when they don't have to feed Leviathan (namely, the complete and permanent elimination of one of their bills).

I see the moral point you're making, but consider the pragmatic point of how many converts we'd win if something like that were to happen.
No, it wouldn't shut the greens up - but it would be a good chance for us to convince more everyday working slobs that their government masters aren't doing right by them.

[Todd]

Why force me to subsidize your desire for solar panels? If you think government is too big into energy then demand they get out of it and don't ask for special breaks. And yes a tax credit for a specific purpose is a special break.

Of course I'm for the government out of it completely. The way the system currently works is what I'm speaking to. And that concept is no different than Dr. Paul's idea giving tax credits for any number of things in the current system.

So how is me getting back the money I pay in taxes you subsidizing me?

[Stary Hickory]

Of course I'm for the government out of it completely. The way the system currently works is what I'm speaking to. And that concept is no different than Dr. Paul's idea giving tax credits for any number of things in the current system.

So how is me getting back the money I pay in taxes you subsidizing me?

it certainly is not a problem when it is for everyone regardless of circumstance. But when you are given a break and others are not the burden falls to the rest. If you want to not pay taxes and protest then hey go ahead, but to ask for a government favor that is not something I want to continue whatsoever.

[charrob]

You won't get tar balls on your feet.
The gulf tar balls you are speaking of are the result of naturally occurring oil "seeps" on the sea floor.


since there's one year's worth of oil under the seabed of the continental east coast, shouldn't there also be tar balls one would get when swimming off east coast beaches?




I wish the eco trendie hypocrites down Cape felt the same way.


agreed. it doesn't make sense that they'd voice complaints about offshore windmills-- as long as marine life is not affected, and the waters remain clean for swimming, ... it seems strange . -if the windmills are installed further out in the ocean where they wouldn't be as noticeable from the beach, do you think they'd object to that?

[Vessol]

If a private investor wants to harness wind power, that's awesome. Personally I think there is a lot of untapped potential in many renewable energies, especially thermal.

[awake]

"Drill for oil all you want, do on your own property and with your own money."

That is exactly my point, I would not drill for oil on my property if it were my own money and I owned all the risk of that stupid move. If some one however wanted to lend me 100 million to explore my property with a government guarantee that if I find nothing that the government will force you to repay the loan , then hell yea, where do I sign up.

The wind and solar markets aren't markets at all, they are completely artificial price and production controlled - no risk, regulated profits, tax funded. One big Bubble mal-investment on top of the mountain of others that they are burying us in.

Wind is a great idea, let the market decide if it is usable, not government force and theft.

[Todd]

This chapter is about 20 years old and I'm sure the technology of wind energy has come a long ways, but here is what Dr. Ray had to say about it (http://www.unfitnews.com/authors/dixyleeray/DLR.ttp.10.PowerFromAtomSunWind.htm).



Like solar power, the energy generated by windmills ultimately comes from the sun, since that is what sets the atmosphere in motion. Also like solar power, windmills have legitimate and important applications in some places and for some purposes. They have been used for many years to pump water, and when placed in persistently windy areas—such as the North Sea coast of the Netherlands or much of the American Midwest—they work very well for this purpose. But producing electricity introduces significant problems.

In remote and windy areas, where connections to a transmission line are unlikely, windmills can produce modest amounts of electricity, given favorable winds that blow steadily at about 15 miles per hour. [10-15] For the last two decades, substantial efforts have been expended to develop windmill technology to the point where multi-kilowatt to megawatt amounts of electricity can be demonstrated. Most of these efforts have failed and been abandoned. Some representative windmill projects are the following:

1. A two megawatt windmill with 100-foot blades built with $30 million ($15,000 per installed kilowatt) of taxpayers’ money by Southern California Edison. It rarely worked and was auctioned for salvage in 1983 for $51,000. [10-16]

2. In Alameda County, California, at Altamont Pass in the hills between Oakland and Stockton, up to 7,000 windmills have been installed. The noise, when they operate, is so great that the operators have had to establish a fund to buy out nearby homeowners who sue. Said one: “You can hear that continuous whipping, whistling roar only for so long before you go raving mad.” Many of the 7,000 windmills are not operating. Maintenance problems have proved to be severe. Wind never blows steadily or evenly. It pulses, and that contributes to the unpleasant sound and the stresses on the vanes. [10-17] Also, significant numbers of birds, including eagles, are killed by flying into the whirling blades.

3. Experimental windmill “farms” in North Carolina and Vermont have been closed down because of noise complaints from neighbors, and in the Goodnoe Hills of the Columbia Gorge in Washington State an ambitious windmill project failed because of too many breakdowns.

Despite discouraging experience, private industry has been quite successful in developing small (17 to 600 kilowatt) machines that are dependable and economic. There are about 17,000 such turbines in California. U. S. Windpower operates 3,400 windmills of 100 kilowatts each in the Altamont Pass.

If windmills prove to work as their designers intend and without expensive maintenance, how many would it take to make a major contribution to this nation’s electricity supply? According to a study done at Lockheed, wind power could supply 19 percent of America’s power with 63,000 windmills having towers over 300 feet high, blades 100 feet across, and a steady wind. No one has suggested where these machines might be installed.
Since recent experience demonstrates that smaller windmills are more dependable and efficient, the number required to make a 19 percent contribution to the United States electricity supply is probably much larger than the 63,000 identified in the Lockheed study. [10-18]

I cannot leave the subject of wind power without recounting the story of the world’s first and only (though temporary) nuclear-powered windmill. It came about, inadvertently I’m sure, in 1980, when a group of students at the University of Wisconsin planned a rock-music concert, where the electricity needed for lighting, sound amplification, and other needs was to be supplied by solar power. But when the students found they would need at least two acres of solar collectors, they settled for three windmills instead. Came the day of the concert—and no wind. But the students had taken this problem into account and switched to their backup system, which was a hookup to the city of Madison’s electrical supply. The windmills turned nicely, although one of them went backward. Since 32 percent of Madison’s power comes from nuclear plants, it could be said that one of the three windmills used by the students was nuclear-powered! Irony of ironies. [10-19]

Wood waste, biomass, geothermal, wind, photovoltaic, and solar thermal power presently supply less than one percent of the nation’s electricity. This may increase and it may even double or triple, but for the foreseeable future, it will not make much of a difference.

[JeNNiF00F00]

i've been going to the Ocean every summer my whole life and no matter how hot, and stagnant the air is anywhere is, there's always lots of wind and big waves at the beach.

They are working on this, but its not going to happen over night. Also, again the other big costly problem is the POWER GRIDS.

Tell me how many people you know who have multi million dollar homes on the beach that actually want to look at wind turbines the size of sky scrapers, when they look out of their picture perfect view of the ocean that they paid for?

Also since you've been to the beach so often in your life, you would know that salt will corrode anything over time and again costs come up. Ever lived at the beach and owned a car more than 5 years that didn't start having problems with rust or the rubber seals around your car exterior dissolve due to the salt in the air? Now imagine multiple metal wind turbines that being in the water itself, and the upkeep it would take to keep everything working smoothly. Then the use of gasoline to lift the workers in helicopters to get up there and give them constant maintenance. Then you have to worry about the visibility of these things at night for passing ships. It all boils down to $$$$.

[charrob]

Wind is a great idea, let the market decide if it is usable.

...but how can it compete if the government subsidizes oil companies?

------------------------------

i'm going to be scrunched for this one, but i'm going to say it anyway: we would not have the highway system in this country if it had not been subsidized by taxpayer money. As long as its been proven that windmills are efficient in producing energy, i don't have a problem with taxmoney helping out to get the system started so we are on our way to a future with renewable energy. ...but that's just me...

[Vessol]

...but how can it compete if the government subsidizes oil companies?

------------------------------

i'm going to be scrunched for this one, but i'm going to say it anyway: we would not have the highway system in this country if it had not been subsidized by taxpayer money. As long as its been proven that windmills are efficient in producing energy, i don't have a problem with taxmoney helping out to get the system started so we are on our way to a future with renewable energy. ...but that's just me...

However if you subsidize wind power, when will it stop? We should work to stop all energy subsidization and then create a free market for all sources. Not work to expand the government's power and measure over energy sources.

[Bruehound]

Why not use the free market to determine the source of energy that is most beneficial?

[torchbearer]

windmills are very noisy and have been known to kill livestock because the livestock is never able to sleep around them. no shit.

[Vessol]

Why not use the free market to determine the source of energy that is most beneficial?

We first need to create that free market, by getting rid of government subsidization.

[charrob]

Tell me how many people you know who have multi million dollar homes on the beach that actually want to look at wind turbines the size of sky scrapers, when they look out of their picture perfect view of the ocean that they paid for?

-that sounds a bit fussy to me, but couldn't they build the windmills further offshore so they're not as visible?



Also since you've been to the beach so often in your life, you would know that salt will corrode anything over time and again costs come up. Ever lived at the beach and owned a car more than 5 years that didn't start having problems with rust or the rubber seals around your car exterior dissolve due to the salt in the air? Now imagine multiple metal wind turbines that being in the water itself, and the upkeep it would take to keep everything working smoothly. Then the use of gasoline to lift the workers in helicopters to get up there and give them constant maintenance.


right, salt does corrode. aluminum doesn't rust...are there other metals like this?



Then you have to worry about the visibility of these things at night for passing ships. It all boils down to $$$$.

-well we already have unmanned lighthouses-- plus those in ships should be aware that they need to watch out for these... reminds me of crabpots on the Chesapeake... coming home at night trying to avoid them is like going thru an obstacle courses ;) ...but then windmills will be a heck of alot easier to see then crabpots...

[charrob]

windmills are very noisy and have been known to kill livestock because the livestock is never able to sleep around them. no shit.

we're talking offshore windmills off the east coast...

[torchbearer]

we're talking offshore windmills off the east coast...

we have windmill farms on old derrick platforms in the gulf.
texas got the benefit of them because louisiana laws protect monopolies for the power companies.
the people putting the windmills up wouldn't have been allowed to sell their own power on the market in louisiana. they would have to first sell it at wholesale to a another utility company.

[Vessol]

we're talking offshore windmills off the east coast...

seacows :P

[MelissaWV]

Some people really hate windmills :(

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2514/4190418889_ca0a4e94b5.jpg

[charrob]

However if you subsidize wind power, when will it stop? We should work to stop all energy subsidization and then create a free market for all sources. Not work to expand the government's power and measure over energy sources.

i'd like to see a stop to subsidizing oil companies, that's for sure.

[Vessol]

On a forum I visit someone once called Ron Paul the "Don Quixote" of politics :(

[Todd]

we're talking offshore windmills off the east coast...

Is that type of technology even feasible? sounds made up.

[MelissaWV]

On a forum I visit someone once called Ron Paul the "Don Quixote" of politics :(

It's relevant.

To dream the impossible dream
To fight the unbeatable foe
To bear with unbearable sorrow
To run where the brave dare not go
To right the unrightable wrong
To love pure and chaste from afar
To try when your arms are too weary
To reach the unreachable star

This is my quest
To follow that star
No matter how hopeless
No matter how far

To fight for the right
Without question or pause
To be willing to march into Hell
For a heavenly cause

And I know if I'll only be true
To this glorious quest
That my heart will lie peaceful and calm
When I'm laid to my rest

And the world will be better for this
That one man, scorned and covered with scars
Still strove with his last ounce of courage
To reach the unreachable star

[bossman068410]

not at all, and as technology is evolving the windmills are increasing in size and decreasing in number.

my concern is wildlife, as well as destruction of what, is now, pristine east coast beaches where , personally, i'll spend 5 or 6 hours in the water when we go down in the summers... that's not going to happen if i start getting tar and oil on my bathing suit and tar balls on my feet. East coast businesses who rely on the summer tourist season, will be devastated. to destroy nature like this for short term gain is ridiculous.

Ok if your really concerned over natual wildlife have you concidered the natural occuring oil that seeps into the environment. Does drilling oil out of the ocean floor stop that and actually CLEAN UP the Oceans?

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2000/01/000127082228.htm

[charrob]

Some people really hate windmills :(


...oh that's funny... on another post here, it sounded like people don't like the 'view'... hard to understand, but can't help but wonder if they couldn't just build them further offshore to minimize people's view of them... -don't know...well gotta go...

[charrob]

Ok if your really concerned over natual wildlife have you concidered the natural occuring oil that seeps into the environment. Does drilling oil out of the ocean floor stop that and actually CLEAN UP the Oceans?

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2000/01/000127082228.htm

i've read about that... the minute amount of seepage that occurs naturally in nature is easily accommodated by marine life...time to go....

[JeNNiF00F00]

-that sounds a bit fussy to me, but couldn't they build the windmills further offshore so they're not as visible?



right, salt does corrode. aluminum doesn't rust...are there other metals like this?



-well we already have unmanned lighthouses-- plus those in ships should be aware that they need to watch out for these... reminds me of crabpots on the Chesapeake... coming home at night trying to avoid them is like going thru an obstacle courses ;) ...but then windmills will be a heck of alot easier to see then crabpots...

Yeah but you need fields of them to work. It will be like having a city of windmills the size of buildings planted somewhere in the water. http://www.treehugger.com/clipper-liberty-wind-turbine.jpg

http://www.consumerenergyreport.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/offshore-wind.jpg

Imagine running into a field of these things :D

[bossman068410]

i've read about that... the minute amount of seepage that occurs naturally in nature is easily accommodated by marine life...time to go....

Really were's the study?
What if the bacteria that eats the oil grows then feeds more wildlife in the oceans?
Now you run away.

[jkr]

vertical
axis
wind
tUrbines
!

[Anti Federalist]

since there's one year's worth of oil under the seabed of the continental east coast, shouldn't there also be tar balls one would get when swimming off east coast beaches?

Completely different geological formation.

And don't be fooled, there's a lot more than a year's worth.

Those are estimates from surveys done in the 70s and 80s.


agreed. it doesn't make sense that they'd voice complaints about offshore windmills-- as long as marine life is not affected, and the waters remain clean for swimming, ... it seems strange . -if the windmills are installed further out in the ocean where they wouldn't be as noticeable from the beach, do you think they'd object to that?

Line loss.

Every mile longer of transmission line from source to end user decreases efficiency.

At some point you reach a zero point where so much is lost in transmission that becomes unfeasible.

[Anti Federalist]

...oh that's funny... on another post here, it sounded like people don't like the 'view'... hard to understand, but can't help but wonder if they couldn't just build them further offshore to minimize people's view of them... -don't know...well gotta go...

See above ^^

[Todd]

http://www.consumerenergyreport.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/04/offshore-wind.jpg

Imagine running into a field of these things :D

Well, at least it's not made up like I thought. Don't know if that's practicle though.

[RedStripe]

If wind and solar energy were more efficient producers of energy the FREE market would already be using them, not forced to by government threats of violence
True Story

lol what free market

[angelatc]

That would be the case if we actually had a free market. Government has had a way of stifling innovation and technology from coming into the mainstream.

In Charrobs defense, I would be very willing to put in solar panels on my home and utilize basic windmill technology .............if the government were to give me the incentive to do so. How about a tax credit for the cost of converting my home for starters.

You might want to call an an accountant. There are a bunch of tax credits out there for that type of stuff.