Live data from Hacker News

The U.S. wind industry now employs more than 100K people

washingtonpost.com

61–70 of 331 posts

Re: The U.S. wind industry now employs more than 100K people

#61
post #6

I live in a school bus, traveling the country. I think wind turbines are absolutely beautiful; I always marvel at them when we drive by. Does anybody here know how to break into this industry, working on a mobile, on-site basis? Maybe with embedded tech?

Windmill technology is fairly low tech. there are a few things around the wings but besides that it's not really a "tech" business IMO.

We did some work a while ago which involved using high spatial and temporal resolution wind datasets to build optimization tools which figured out the best place to build wind farms given constraints like geographic restrictions, number of turbines, nameplate capacity, etc.

Re: The U.S. wind industry now employs more than 100K people

#62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As we electrify our transit sector, there will be a bump in consumption.

Those stats are not for electricity, they're for total energy consumption including transportation.

In fact it wouldn't be surprising if much of the savings is actually due to efficiencies in transportation

Re: The U.S. wind industry now employs more than 100K people

#63
Vaclav Smil has written extensively on the embodied chemistry of Wind-turbines, I figure it's worth sharing here because it seems relevant to the conversation. Chemical, petroleum, and nuclear engineers are scarce in Silicon Valley.....

"Wind turbines are the most visible symbols of the quest for renewable electricity generation. And yet, although they exploit the wind, which is as free and as green as energy can be, the machines themselves are pure embodiments of fossil fuels.

Large trucks bring steel and other raw materials to the site, earth-moving equipment beats a path to otherwise inaccessible high ground, large cranes erect the structures, and all these machines burn diesel fuel. So do the freight trains and cargo ships that convey the materials needed for the production of cement, steel,and plastics. For a 5-megawatt turbine, the steel alone averages 150 metric tons for the reinforced concrete foundations, 250 metric tons for the rotor hubs and nacelles (which house the gearbox and generator), and 500 metric tons for the towers.

If wind-generated electricity were to supply 25 percent of global demand by 2030 (forecast to reach about 30 petawatt-hours), then even with a high average capacity factor of 35 percent, the aggregate installed wind power of about 2.5 terawatts would require roughly 450 million metric tons of steel. And that’s without counting the metal for towers, wires, and transformers for the new high-voltage transmission links that would be needed to connect it all to the grid. A lot of energy goes into making steel.

Sintered or pelletized iron ore is smelted in blast furnaces, charged with coke made from coal, and receives infusions of powdered coal and natural gas. Pig iron is decarbonized in basic oxygen furnaces. Then steel goes through continuous casting processes (which turn molten steel directly into the rough shape of the final product). Steel used in turbine construction embodies typically about 35 gigajoules per metric ton.

To make the steel required for wind turbines that might operate by 2030, you’d need fossil fuels equivalent to more than 600 million metric tons of coal. A 5-MW turbine has three roughly 60-meter-long airfoil, each weighing about 15 metric tons. They have light balsa or foam cores and outer laminations made mostly from glass-fiber-reinforced epoxy or polyester resins. The glass is made by melting silicon dioxide and other mineral oxides in furnaces fired by natural gas. The resins begin with ethylene derived from light hydrocarbons, most commonly the products of naphtha cracking, liquefied petroleum gas, or the ethane in natural gas.

The final fiber-reinforced composite embodies on the order of 170 GJ/t. Therefore, to get 2.5 TW of installed wind power by 2030, we would need an aggregate rotor mass of about 23 million metric tons, incorporating the equivalent of about 90 million metric tons of crude oil. And when all is in place, the entire structure must be waterproofed with resins whose synthesis starts with ethylene.

Another required oil product is lubricant, for the turbine gearboxes, which has to be changed periodically during the machine’s two-decade lifetime. Undoubtedly, a well-sited and well-built wind turbine would generate as much energy as it embodies in less than a year. However, all of it will be in the form of intermittent electricity—while its production, installation, and maintenance remain critically dependent on specific fossil energies.

Moreover, for most of these energies—coke for iron-ore smelting, coal and petroleum coke to fuel cement kilns, naphtha and natural gas as feedstock and fuel for the synthesis of plastics and the making of fiberglass, diesel fuel for ships, trucks, and construction machinery, lubricants for gearboxes—we have no nonfossil substitutes that would be readily available on the requisite large commercial scales.

For a long time to come—until all energies used to produce wind turbines and photovoltaic cells come from renewable energy sources—modern civilization will remain fundamentally dependent on fossil fuels."

Re: The U.S. wind industry now employs more than 100K people

#64
post #6

I live in a school bus, traveling the country. I think wind turbines are absolutely beautiful; I always marvel at them when we drive by. Does anybody here know how to break into this industry, working on a mobile, on-site basis? Maybe with embedded tech?

Any chance you're interested in rock climbing? Some of the repair work can only be handled by rope workers. There aren't a lot of them, and they're certainly in demand. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xUjCD-fFU9k http://www.nytimes.com/cwire/2011/06/06/06climatewire-compan...

I do climb, and I love heights (I'm a little weird).

That would be an awesome job.

Re: The U.S. wind industry now employs more than 100K people

#65
post #6

I live in a school bus, traveling the country. I think wind turbines are absolutely beautiful; I always marvel at them when we drive by. Does anybody here know how to break into this industry, working on a mobile, on-site basis? Maybe with embedded tech?

This sounds an awful lot like the people from the 1950s who thought that dams looked awesome. The dam in the Yosemite Valley was put there because many thought it would look beautiful and bring more people out into nature. It is almost universally considered a huge mistake.

Re: The U.S. wind industry now employs more than 100K people

#68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I think wind turbines are absolutely beautiful They are. Like living sculptures. There's just something extremely dignified about them. Like finally growing up after the childishness of strip-mining. The adults are here.

I couldn't disagree more. They popped up as I was growing up - littering the coastline and countryside. They can be seen from great distances and serve to make the place seem an awful lot smaller. I for one can't wait until we develop a way to live without them - the only condolence is that they move us away from the coal and gas industries. I do hope that solar leaves them in its wake and we can be done with the mon…

Compared to ripping the tops of mountains in West Virginia and states nearby and filling in the beautiful valleys to strip mine coal, a huge win.

Re: The U.S. wind industry now employs more than 100K people

#69
post #29
post #17

The article does not respond to the claim of the president that windmills kill birds. Do they really in a significant way? Is it worthy of being called an environmental disaster?

Everything has pro and cons. Windmills have just a few cons like don't block the air space (bad for a few birds (but less bad than water power plans for fish), helicopters, planes) and some noise (but that's true for every powerplant technologies except photovoltaic panels). The good thing windmills are very eco-friendly. Only water/hydro and photovoltaic/sun-energy falls in the very same category.

Dams are usually ecological disasters. The Hetch Hetchy Valley was dammed up and it destroyed a natural resource on par with Yosemite. People have been trying to remove it for years, but the San Francisco residents refuse to let it go since it supplies such a large amount of power to them.

Re: The U.S. wind industry now employs more than 100K people

#70
post #17

The article does not respond to the claim of the president that windmills kill birds. Do they really in a significant way? Is it worthy of being called an environmental disaster?

Looking at the statistics, I'm not sure that wind turbines are any worse than man-made structures generally (or other human-caused threats, including other types of power plants).

https://www.fws.gov/birds/bird-enthusiasts/threats-to-birds....

Post reply on HN