Industrial wind farms

[ridley1]

There's a proposal to develop 3700 acres of farmland a couple of miles from here into a wind farm for electricity.  The idea does not impress me. And it's not a case of NIMBY.

Anybody have any experience with these things?

[Ghosth]

Where is "here" ??

Working on building a big one on the ND SD border. Talking about 700 of them from what I have heard.
I think the biggest problem at least in this area is that we just don't have the infrastructure to handle the flow.

If your in an area that seems fairly windy, or have a wind defining structure such as a long ridge, or geographical feature, they can pay for themselves in a relatively short period of time. Big investment, but once its paid for your basiclly getting power for nothing.

[sluggish]

Very impressive to look at.  The problem with windmills is that they never recoup the energy used to build and erect them.

[TinmanX]

There are a ton of them along the Columbia Gorge on both the Oregon and Washington sides. I find them oddly beautiful both in themselves and for what they prevent being there. I would rather have these giant turbines around, silently turning than something belching smoke.

[68ZooM]

Agreed TinmanX, i like that drive on I-84, personally i think its a very viable solution and would like to see more models for homes also, i have a friend who runs windpower ( consistently windy here) and his initial cash outlay for the windpower system was around 30k, sure it sounds like alot but after 5 years hes paid it off, and the power company buys back his excess power, its a great system for certain areas, its just not for everywhere.

[druski85]

Very impressive to look at.  The problem with windmills is that they never recoup the energy used to build and erect them.

Now this I have a hard time believing. 

http://www.windenergyplanning.com/wind-turbine-efficiency/
Surely, this site is going to skew the numbers a bit in favor of wind power, but let's still assume you are talking an average of 4,000 MWh/year.  Without a doubt it takes a whopping amount of power to construct such a large piece of machinery. I'm not going to claim to be an expert in steel or concrete production, but I know both take a large amount of energy to create.  However, with a turbine lifespan of 20-30 years I can't imagine you're anywhere near the neighborhood of 80,000 - 120,000 MWh of power, even factoring in repairs. 

[sluggish]

Now this I have a hard time believing. 

http://www.windenergyplanning.com/wind-turbine-efficiency/
Surely, this site is going to skew the numbers a bit in favor of wind power, but let's still assume you are talking an average of 4,000 MWh/year.  Without a doubt it takes a whopping amount of power to construct such a large piece of machinery. I'm not going to claim to be an expert in steel or concrete production, but I know both take a large amount of energy to create.  However, with a turbine lifespan of 20-30 years I can't imagine you're anywhere near the neighborhood of 80,000 - 120,000 MWh of power, even factoring in repairs. 

No way you're going to get twenty years out of one before you have to replace the whole thing.  I look at the whole thing as maybe a break-even proposal.

[druski85]

No way you're going to get twenty years out of one before you have to replace the whole thing.  I look at the whole thing as maybe a break-even proposal.

http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea//news/article/2005/04/assessing-the-life-cycle-of-wind-turbine-production-25113

This site claims the average modern (in 2005) windmill put out 35 times as much energy as it took to produce, install, and decommission it.  Again, I'm sure these numbers are skewed in favor of wind power.  However, I do not think they are off by a factor of a 35x multiplier.  Do you work in the industry or are you taking a stab at it?

Edit: Also, they figured 7 months of power generation made up for it...if you don't want to read through the site. 

[ridley1]

http://windconcernsontario.wordpress.com/

wind's working at 10% capacity right now.  doesn't sound feasible, does it?

[sluggish]

http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea//news/article/2005/04/assessing-the-life-cycle-of-wind-turbine-production-25113

This site claims the average modern (in 2005) windmill put out 35 times as much energy as it took to produce, install, and decommission it.  Again, I'm sure these numbers are skewed in favor of wind power.  However, I do not think they are off by a factor of a 35x multiplier.  Do you work in the industry or are you taking a stab at it?

They are not considering all the implications.  The company that installs windmills.  They have specific equipment that is only used for the installation of windmills.  Not only do they use energy to do their jobs, but also used energy to be manufactured and delivered.  The factories that build said equipment.  They have specific machinery that only build the machines that put together the windmills.  That equipment requires energy to be produced and delivered. And on down the line...

Like I said,  when looking at the big picture, this is a break-even proposition at best.  But hey!  It creates jobs!  And jobs are what matters, right?

[MORAY37]

All these complaints.

One source of energy will run out and emits pollution and smog when burned. 

The other is completely renewable, will never run out, and emits nothing.

And somehow there is an argument?

[edog1977]

All these complaints.

One source of energy will run out and emits pollution and smog when burned. 

The other is completely renewable, will never run out, and emits nothing.

And somehow there is an argument?

Never runs out?  What happens when the wind stops blowing?  What about when the machines themselves fail?  I'd hate to see the bill for the purchase and installation of a new gearbox on one of those things.

[Jayhawk]

Up by Lake Benton, Minnesota they had some on the hills around there.  It was a pretty cool sight on the horizon.



I'm really surprised with the number of anti-wind power people.  Not doubting you sluggish, but where are you getting your numbers from?

[saggs]

There are a ton of them along the Columbia Gorge on both the Oregon and Washington sides. I find them oddly beautiful both in themselves and for what they prevent being there. I would rather have these giant turbines around, silently turning than something belching smoke.

Silent... Not hardly.

Ever stood under one, they are anything but silent, in fact they are very, very loud.  Many cattlemen in eastern Montana allowed wind farms on their grazing land, hoping to get dual use out of the land.  Turn out the cattle will not go near the things because the noise bothers them.

I'm all for alternative energy research and development, but just like anything wind power has a downside as well.

1- As others have mentioned they must operate for many years before they recoup the energy put into production and installation of them.
2- They don't run all the time and require just the right amount of wind, too little wind and they won't turn, too much wind and they won't turn (the blades feather in winds that are to high to prevent damage)
3- They kill bats and birds and mess up their migratory routes.

Having said that, I am not opposed to wind farms, if they prove to have a long lifespan they can be a valuable energy source.  But even if we build wind farms everywhere we can it will not come close to replacing other energy sources.

I still say the best, cleanest energy technology we have is nuclear.  It produces huge amounts of power from a small space, and emits zero pollution. (A 20 acre nuclear plant would produce more energy then 1,000s of acres of windmills) Plus we already have the Yucca Mtn. facility in NV, and companies like Energy Solutions in UT who are more then happy to make a huge profit disposing of the spend fuel rods.  So many people are paranoid about nuclear radiation without any valid reason.  Heck, the US Navy operates dozens of nuclear powered vessels with no problems, if nuclear is so bad how come all those sailors aren't impotent or having 2-headed babies, or have cancer?  How come submarines and aircraft carriers aren't having meltdowns every week?  And the casks they transport the depleted fuel rods in are the closest thing to indestructible man has ever built.

[Jayhawk]

Never runs out?  What happens when the wind stops blowing?  What about when the machines themselves fail?  I'd hate to see the bill for the purchase and installation of a new gearbox on one of those things.

When the wind stops blowing.    Sure winds patterns can change, but usually over a long period of time, and don't ya think they look into these things when building these farms.

I'm sure they are expensive to repair, but I'm sure other sources are very expensive as well.  As wind power becomes more prevalent, prices for replacement parts should drop.

Silent... Not hardly.

Ever stood under one, they are anything but silent, in fact they are very, very loud.  Many cattlemen in eastern Montana allowed wind farms on their grazing land, hoping to get dual use out of the land.  Turn out the cattle will not go near the things because the noise bothers them.

I'm all for alternative energy research and development, but just like anything wind power has a downside as well.

1- As others have mentioned they must operate for many years before they recoup the energy put into production and installation of them.
2- They don't run all the time and require just the right amount of wind, too little wind and they won't turn, too much wind and they won't turn (the blades feather in winds that are to high to prevent damage)
3- They kill bats and birds and mess up their migratory routes.

Having said that, I am not opposed to wind farms, if they prove to have a long lifespan they can be a valuable energy source.  But even if we build wind farms everywhere we can it will not come close to replacing other energy sources.

I still say the best, cleanest energy technology we have is nuclear.  It produces huge amounts of power from a small space, and emits zero pollution. (A 20 acre nuclear plant would produce more energy then 1,000s of acres of windmills) Plus we already have the Yucca Mtn. facility in NV, and companies like Energy Solutions in UT who are more then happy to make a huge profit disposing of the spend fuel rods.  So many people are paranoid about nuclear radiation without any valid reason.  Heck, the US Navy operates dozens of nuclear powered vessels with no problems, if nuclear is so bad how come all those sailors aren't impotent or having 2-headed babies, or have cancer?  How come submarines and aircraft carriers aren't having meltdowns every week?  And the casks they transport the depleted fuel rods in are the closest thing to indestructible man has ever built.

-Hm, the ones I remember were actually fairly quiet.  Not completely silent, sounded like a humming to me, could be different models (or my ears are just that bad).

-You do bring up some very valid downfalls of wind energy.

- Though I'm not worried about nuclear radiation seeping out of nuclear plants, I think the concern about a meltdown is valid.  It has happened before, yes they have very complex systems to prevent it, but a failure is always possible.