171–180 of 331 posts
I still think kite based systems have a ton of potential. I've also designed a super low cost wind power system anyone can just stick in their yard. Basically a flat wide pole you stick in the ground that the wind blows up and down. (Think wind blowing across a grassy field). I need help with engineering to make any more progress though.
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.
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…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As someone who is working with global powerplant data I can say that the US is the global leader. It is not perfect, but it is miles ahead of 170 other countries.
Bollocks. The UK has a live feed of the makeup of the power plants that is updated on this website every 15 minutes. http://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk/
* in fucking Lotus 1-2-3, of all things
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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…
I also find them an eyesore, audibly irritating[1], and the documented bird deaths are awful[2]. But, I'll take them over coal any day. [1] http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.... [2] http://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/how-many-birds-do-w...
Stop quoting this bullshit "fact." It is a meme made up by conservative think tanks to discredit wind farms. As other posters have already pointed out, other human-related factors such as domestic cats, buildings and towers, and most importantly pollution and loss of habitat are far more significant dangers to birds. If you actually care about birds, take your cats to the vet and put them down (this will also help save the oceans: a large part of fish in cat food comes from massive and illegal trawling in South-east Asia often done with slave labor), and donate any rural/suburban property you own to a land trust, to be given back to natural habitat.
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?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Humans have shown time and time again we cannot be trusted to consistently do things right, so the likely outcomes of some realistic percentage of 'terrible planning', as you put it, should be part of any comparison of power generation techniques. The analogy you make to solar ignores that the failure modes of nuclear are much worse than solar.
From the page I found, "more Americans have died from installing rooftop solar than have ever died from the construction or use of American nuclear power plants". On average, nuclear is safer. The likelihood of another Fukashima is even lower now that it's happened and been documented.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
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.
I do think that dams look awesome. But of course you shouldn't build them to make the landscape look nicer. Especially today, more dams should be built, both to ensure water supply and as the ideal support for wind and solar. Dams are the cheapest form of mass energy storage - many of them can even run "reverse" and store surplus energy by pumping water up into the dam.
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2016/11/dam-removal-nelso...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're forgetting the "It's different when it happens in Africa / India / China / South America" caveat to most arguments.
I'd normally agree with you, but the top Uranium producers are Canada, Kazakhstan, and Australia. Uranium mining is a first (and second) world problem.
Personally however, still support solar. Especially solar house tiles, they look good, pay for themselves after a few years and can be placed on every house.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I do think that dams look awesome. But of course you shouldn't build them to make the landscape look nicer. Especially today, more dams should be built, both to ensure water supply and as the ideal support for wind and solar. Dams are the cheapest form of mass energy storage - many of them can even run "reverse" and store surplus energy by pumping water up into the dam.
A lot of people, including me, think the exact opposite: we should be tearing down as many existing dams as possible. Dams are extremely damaging to river ecosystems and are a huge contributor to coastline erosion and exacerbate droughts. http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2016/11/dam-removal-nelso...
Here in Germany we traditionally have more water than we need, but recently the weather is more extreme. We get stronger rains in shorter times, leading to flooding and times with less than usual water. More dam capacity is the obvious solution to that.
Preferably, dams should not be built in the middle of a living river system, but higher up in the mountains, capturing the seasonal water. Also, where needed, small bypass rivers should be kept, allowing fish to migrate freely.