Wind Turbines on Lake Ontario!

[muskybob]

Thank you to everyone that has had a voice, email, or letter against this proposal. You HAVE BEEN HEARD. Please remain vigilant If the funding from gov't sources ever goes thru for this we still might have a fight against us. Thank you again for protecting one our most valuable resources.

[jimski2]

The Globe and Mail yesterday had an article about the Trillium Company suing the Ontario government for backing off on the plan to build windmills in the lake. They spent millions on studies but now public opinion has scrapped the water wind mills project and they want their money back plus lost future earnings. The do gooders ideas can really get out of hand.

[muskybob]

The Globe and Mail yesterday had an article about the Trillium Company suing the Ontario government for backing off on the plan to build windmills in the lake. They spent millions on studies but now public opinion has scrapped the water wind mills project and they want their money back plus lost future earnings. The do gooders ideas can really get out of hand.

Too bad, NOT!!! Maybe they'll think twice about backing such a hair-brained idea next time.

[rolmops]

It is a good thing that this tax payers money robbing scheme has been exposed and disposed of.

On another note,by making this go away,we have not in any way advanced our very real need for alternative non polluting energy sources.

This means that we still have the same problems that haunt us,while countries like Germany and China are making giant strides toward environmentally clean and renewable energy,we are staying stuck with the same old same old. Germany has already 20% clean renewable energy and it has a roaring economy.

Having stopped this is one thing,now we have to think about tomorrow.

[Tim Bromund]

Despite all the negative propaganda and fear mongering, Nuclear is clean and very safe and is clearly the direction we should be going, IMO. Makes a lot more sense than the stupid pinwheels.

Tim

[LongLine]

Although we need clean energy, it's folly to ruin & rape virgin, pristine territory for it, especially a national treasure such as the great lakes. The power companies need to do a lot more homwork on their projects. They need to apply more real science to the projects and less marketing "spin." When the decision was made , Lechase (1 of the trusties) was quoted as saying "we're going to release this with a positive spin...right?"

Their marketing push with which they gained social & political support for, was environmental ie. "Go Green" & "Be the first", yet their real motivation, which is all they ever cared about, was the money. They didn't care about what the taxpayer or ratepayer had to pay but rather what they had to pay.

With Germany, one point to consider, which NYPA didn't want to address, is the grid. Germany has a relatively new grid (old one blown away in WWII). Another is that the average wind speed for the majority of Germany is over 5 m/s. The wind rating of ther Baltic & North seas are over twice what they are for anyplace in the Great Lakes.

It wouldn't bother me if every building in the city of Rochester had solar cells on it, or if they lined the entire thruway median with solar cells from Buffalo to NYC. However, I'll fight putting a Mega-acre solar panel farm out in Lake Ontario.

Tom B.

(LongLine)

[skipper19]

"However, I'll fight putting a Mega-acre solar panel farm out in Lake Ontario."

Like this one?.....I 65 100 miles south of Chicago.

hosting images

jpg upload

Ever see a field of crops that had stray crops?...like a field of beans and some corn popping up in there? Must be some seed mixed up here

upload bmp

Just found the new way to keep the pinwheel turning by the engineers. Mount the freakin thing on the big trucks goin down the hyway.....weeeee weeeee ...wEEEEEEEeeeee... CRASH!! ..CHIT!!...low underpass...oops

[ Post made via Android ]

[fish or swim]

An interesting report from the Netherlands

"A 300 MW nameplate windpark near Schiphol on August 28, 2011, a normal windy day, during 21,5 h would have increased the amount of natural gas needed for the electricity production of 500 MW with 47150 m3 gas. This would have caused an extra emission of 117,9 ton CO2 into the atmosphere.

The wind projects do not fulfill 'sustainable' objectives. They cost more fuel than they save and they cause no CO2 saving, in the contrary they increase our environmental 'foot print'.

A decision to invest thousands of millions Euros in the construction of wind developments 'to save fossil fuel and to reduce CO2 emission' is irresponsible. There are no savings, THERE IS LOSS!

We do not consider it likely that more knowledge of the factors influencing the present outcomes would change our results appreciably. "

http://www.clepair.net/windSchiphol.html

From Ireland as well

http://www.clepair.net/IerlandUdo.html

[rolmops]

Could it be that this new development had something to do with scrapping many current wind energy projects?

http://www.triplepundit.com/2011/09/wind-lens/

Not only does this system have the potential of producing up to three times as much energy as the conventional wind mills, it also can be build on floating bases. This would make it possible to have windmills on Lake Ontario at 15 or 20 miles off shore. Maybe this new development is on the horizon (maybe behind the horizon) for Lake Ontario. If it is,it may be a source for jobs and energy without the nasty side effects.

Heck,you would have to go to the 500 foot line to be able to see them.

[muskybob]

Let 'em put 'em down off Long Island if they want 'em that bad. No need for Lake Ontario then putting transmission lines all across our landscape.

[Tim Bromund]

Could it be that this new development had something to do with scrapping many current wind energy projects?

http://www.triplepundit.com/2011/09/wind-lens/

Not only does this system have the potential of producing up to three times as much energy as the conventional wind mills, it also can be build on floating bases. This would make it possible to have windmills on Lake Ontario at 15 or 20 miles off shore. Maybe this new development is on the horizon (maybe behind the horizon) for Lake Ontario. If it is,it may be a source for jobs and energy without the nasty side effects.

Heck,you would have to go to the 500 foot line to be able to see them.

And how exactly is the generated power going to get transmitted from 15-20 miles offshore???

[LongLine]

20 miles puts them just about in the shipping lanes. I imagine the freighters would love them, especially at night. Couple weekends ago they registered sustained 19 ft waves out there. That'd be kind of interesting - a runaway barge is one thing, a runaway turbine would be whole another world.

Tom B.

(LongLine)

[fish or swim]

http://www.triplepundit.com/2011/09/wind-lens/

New Japanese Wind Turbine Triples Power Output Without Increasing Size

They have a nice sounding story. Unfortunately the laws of physics say otherwise. Wind turbines are close to their limits now and it is impossible for that to change.

Betz Law - Law not theory

http://www.symscape.com/blog/virtual-wi ... s-betz-law

Given the technological sophistication of today's wind turbines, it's quite humbling to think that their theoretical maximum efficiency was derived by wind turbine pioneer Albert Betz in 1920. Betz' Law, as it is now known, is a relatively simple proof that the maximum efficiency of a wind turbine, irrespective of its design, cannot exceed 59%. Still, some believe laws are there to be broken - at least in the virtual simulation world.

Reality Check

CAE tools are only as good as the engineers and researchers that know when and where to apply them. Good practitioners know that when a simulation contradicts a well-proven law, such as conservation of energy, or in this case Betz' Law, there is likely a problem with their simulation and not vice-versa.

Lesson

So the lesson here is that you need to know your domain prior to picking up your CAE tool and not vice-versa. Then, when you find a simulation result that contradicts a physical law, you'll know it for what it is: a revolution in physics, or, most likely, a simple modeling mistake.

[rolmops]

http://www.triplepundit.com/2011/09/wind-lens/

New Japanese Wind Turbine Triples Power Output Without Increasing Size

They have a nice sounding story. Unfortunately the laws of physics say otherwise. Wind turbines are close to their limits now and it is impossible for that to change.

Betz Law - Law not theory

http://www.symscape.com/blog/virtual-wi ... s-betz-law

Given the technological sophistication of today's wind turbines, it's quite humbling to think that their theoretical maximum efficiency was derived by wind turbine pioneer Albert Betz in 1920. Betz' Law, as it is now known, is a relatively simple proof that the maximum efficiency of a wind turbine, irrespective of its design, cannot exceed 59%. Still, some believe laws are there to be broken - at least in the virtual simulation world.

Reality Check

CAE tools are only as good as the engineers and researchers that know when and where to apply them. Good practitioners know that when a simulation contradicts a well-proven law, such as conservation of energy, or in this case Betz' Law, there is likely a problem with their simulation and not vice-versa.

Lesson

So the lesson here is that you need to know your domain prior to picking up your CAE tool and not vice-versa. Then, when you find a simulation result that contradicts a physical law, you'll know it for what it is: a revolution in physics, or, most likely, a simple modeling mistake.

In that case there is a very serious discrepancy between Bernouilli's principles (which keep airplanes in the air) and the Betz law.............

[LongLine]

Cornelius - The difference in air pressure above & below the wing is what lifts the plane. (due to wing design) The engine/propulsion system provides the speed of the plane. That runways face the prevailing winds or that aircraft carriers turn into the wind for take off, only allows for planes to take off in more stable winds. i.e. no wind shear, no down drafts, etc. The wind does not "drive" the airplane. Yes headwinds slow the plane slightly & tailwinds help to push it along but only due to resistance/frictional effects.

The windwill on the other hand is purely driven by the wind. For this turbine to be 100% efficient, the wind must transfer all of its energy to the windmill, which it doesn't, hence this guys 59% maximum figure.

Tom B.

(LongLine)

[rolmops]

Bernoulli's principle can also be derived directly from Newton's 2nd law. "If a volume of air or fluid is flowing horizontally from a region of high pressure to a region of low pressure, then there is more pressure behind than in front. This gives a net force on the volume, accelerating it along the streamline".

This is probably the principle that allows these Japanese mills to be more efficient

By creating a greater low pressure area behind the wings than there normally would be, we increase the flow of air going to the wings,thereby increasing their speed.

Today's wind mills mostly operate by using a maximum speed which is limited and often less than the wind potential available. It seems that this other system can run at a much higher RPM and therefor be more productive.

[fish or swim]

This guy from Japan is making a claim that is impossible. There is only a certain amount of energy available from the wind. His claim is; he is going to extract more energy than is available. It does not matter what kind of equipment is invented it is impossible.

I see in the little picture all turbines are built side by side on the barges. With a proper wind farm design the turbines are 10 – 25 times the rotor diameter for spacing between turbines. So they do not interfere with the wind flow for the other turbines. Which also makes me suspicious.

Corporate welfare payments

Whenever the government starts throwing around money like this all the scum of the earth get in line to get their hands on it. They will lie, cheat, steal, do anything they have to get it. It doesn’t matter which country. It happens all over the world. They will dream up any kind of scam to get the money. They don’t care about anything else.

I think most people want to help out with pollution and reducing energy consumption. There have been some state programs such as the turn in your old appliances for a rebate off of a new, more energy efficient model. These are actually really good programs. They actually work. They are economically sensible and they create jobs. But they don’t get votes for the politicians so they aren’t used very often. Cars and trucks contribute around 60% to all pollution problems. But no politicians will ever dare go after peoples cars so nothing will ever happen with that. The politicians start these stupid windmill and solar panel projects for votes and campaign contributions. Nothing useful is ever accomplished.

We all hope for something better in the future. This link shows one possibility. It is legitimate and actually works.

http://www.potterdrilling.com/geothermal-energy/egs/

[skipper19]

I've seen the geothermal reactors in use out west where there are natural hot springs occuring on the surface. Makes the most sence of anything in use to generate power next to nuclear, but definitely safer in respect to the use of plutonium nuclear rods. Was a good idea in Japan.....until.

[ Post made via Android ]

[LongLine]

Yes greater change in pressure yields great velocity of flow - no question about it. This guys 'gizmo" will increase the wind speed that drives the blades. However greater speed = greater noise. Also greater pressure difference yields greater avian kill. Studies done at landbased windfarms showed very high numbers of dead bats & birds found behind the turbines which you wouldn't expect if they flew into the blades. Autopsies on bats found majority died from the sudden pressure changes that their lungs could not withstand.

I like how he says the openings can be used for fishing. Launching looks like it'd be a real trick.

I agree on geothermal - I find it hard to believe with all the drilling technology currently available that they can't drill deep enough; pump down some water then add just a little more energy to make steam to turn electrical generators - for a whole lot less money than is currently being squandered on wind turbines.

Tom B.

(LongLine)

[fish or swim]

Keep the @#$% things out of Lake Michigan too. All it will take is one to go in somewhere and we all know what happens next.

Fortunately they don't what them in Lake Michigan either.

http://www.mlive.com/news/muskegon/inde ... phati.html

Oceana County planners emphatic: No wind turbines on Lake Michigan

"It is not clear whether Scandia just did not do their research or they were not being factual with the commission and the public,"

I don’t believe it, the wind company lied?(sarcasm)

[LongLine]

One of the things I noticed early on in "wind campaigns" is that the "promoters" are more concerned with putting on a positive spin to their "schpeel" rather than base their proposals on sound scientific evidence on the subjects that the affected people have.

When questions are raised about local studies, they always point to other countries and/or to other environments where there are only questionable" studies that they have previously paid bigbucks for. They always place the onus on the affected people to come up with their own studies and of course when the affected people do, they are always denounced as "NIMBY'S."

Jobs, home values, health effects, environmental impact, electricity/maintnenace/grid costs, generating capacity...it doesn't matter, they do it to all areas.

Tom B.

(LongLine)

[LongLine]

Two interesting polls:

http://www.economist.com/debate/debates/overview/217

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/nat ... le2226443/

I know how I voted. (NFW!)

Tom B.

(LongLine)

[fish or swim]

On another note,by making this go away,we have not in any way advanced our very real need for alternative non polluting energy sources.

.

Hey Rolmops: I should have put this stuff in with the geothermal info. Nuclear fusion is another good possiblity for the future. All nuclear reactions produce radioactive waste but the fusion process is far less than today's reactors.

nuclear fission - splitting the atom, uranium, all modern reactors today are fission

nuclear fusion – putting atoms together

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ITER

ITER (originally an acronym of International Thermonuclear Experimental Reactor) is an international nuclear fusion research and engineering project, which is currently building the world's largest and most advanced experimental tokamak nuclear fusion reactor at Cadarache in the south of France.[1] The ITER project aims to make the long-awaited transition from experimental studies of plasma physics to full-scale electricity-producing fusion power plants.

The machine is expected to demonstrate the principle of getting more energy out of the fusion process than is used to initiate it, something that has not been achieved with previous fusion reactors. Construction of the facility began in 2007, and the first plasma is expected in 2019.[6] When ITER becomes operational, it will become the largest magnetic confinement plasma physics experiment in use, surpassing the Joint European Torus. The first commercial demonstration fusion power plant, named DEMO, is proposed to follow on from the ITER project to bring fusion energy to the commercial market.[7]

Furthermore, a fusion reactor would produce virtually no CO2 or other atmospheric pollutants, and its other waste products would be very short-lived compared to those produced by conventional nuclear reactors.

[Tim Bromund]

And in the interim, traditional Nuclear Power is a vastly preferable option to this other new age happy horsesh... stuff.

Tim

[rolmops]

There is probably some very good news just around the corner on the front of plasma physics. Last week on NPR Science Friday there was an interview with an inventor who is successfully cutting the cost of plasma science fusion by roughly 95%. Instead of using the traditional extremely expensive accelerators (billions) he came up with an idea of inserting the materials into a centrifuge loaded with very hot gasified lead and while the material is in the center of this centrifuge he bombards it with shots of extremely highly pressurized air thereby increasing the velocity of the material to where it turns into plasma. So far the project looks very promising.