Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

US blocks all offshore wind construction, says reason is classified

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 585 posts

Re: US blocks all offshore wind construction, says reason is classified

#271

Post by [deleted] »

fasterik wrote: post #250
gardncl wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed. I misunderstood your comment and got too hot-headed. Sorry about that. Yes, the 95% renewables is the number we should be shooting for not 100% as that causes battery backup price to explode. I have been pro-nuclear for a long time, to disappointing results naturally. So, with how well renewables are doing I've really just jumped on this train and seen nuclear as more of a distraction from the critical next 1…

I may have misinterpreted your original post as saying we should be going full renewables. I think we're basically in agreement about prices. We might just disagree about the percent of energy that should come from nuclear. I don't see nuclear as a distraction, I see it as a piece of the puzzle. We will always need a source of reliable, uninterrupted power. Whether that comes from natural gas, nuclear, geothermal, hy…

[deleted]

Re: US blocks all offshore wind construction, says reason is classified

#272

Post by ViewTrick1002 »

stefanfisk wrote: post #59
tony_cannistra wrote: post #21

I looked into this a little because I was curious. I guess the ostensible "national security" rationale (which clearly is not the only reason!) for this is that turbines severely degrade the utility of radar surveillance along the coastlines. This is particularly relevant for low-altitude incursions and drones. Now, other large governments (UK) have resolved this in several ways, including the deployment of additiona…

Here in Sweden a bunch of offshore wind farm project and even residential PV installations are blocked by the military for unspecified reasons that everyone assumes is that it blocks radar and other signal intelligence. Even though you can partially work around the issue with better onshore equipment or just placing the stuff on the other side of the interfering equipment it is still a step down from not having any i…

The best part is that Danish, German and Polish parks are planned mere kilometers away from the denied Swedish ones.

The military will need to figure out how deal with off-shore wind no matter what.

Re: US blocks all offshore wind construction, says reason is classified

#273

Post by rtkwe »

gregbot wrote: post #90
beembeem wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Result first (kill anything not carbon-based), find rationale later. Same applies to how this admin forced layoffs at the green energy (hydro + nuclear) behemoth BPA [1] (which was funded entirely by ratepayers, not the federal government) then claimed an energy emergency to keep open coal plants serving the same geographies, coal plants that were already uneconomical and planned for shut down (or re-tooling to gas i…

BPA is a federal agency. The Trump administration has been very supportive of zero carbon nuclear i believe they have promised $80 billion dollars to build new nuclear plants. Staff cuts dont mean they oppose using those energy sources.

Promises are cheap with this admin, don't count any money until it's actually being paid out. Used to be I'd say until it's in a bill but this administration claims the unilateral right to cut any funded program.

Re: US blocks all offshore wind construction, says reason is classified

#274

Post by platevoltage »

alecco wrote: post #107

Occam's Razor: offshore wind requires a lot of rare earths for their magnets and whatnot. US military-industrial complex needs the little remaining global supply not under China's export controls.

This could very well be the excuse they're using. The reality is almost certainly more petty than that given the great one's irrational hate of wind power.

Re: US blocks all offshore wind construction, says reason is classified

#275

Post by coryrc »

gardncl wrote: post #247
coryrc wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As usual, explain how you're going to power heat pumps in the Northern half of the country during a 3 week bomb cyclone. There are answers and they cost money. The only answer we're using is to build 1:1 natural gas capability for solar, which is roughly double the cost. That's a solution, but it needs to be accounted for when comparing options.

Alternative to natural gas? Wind, geothermal, or nuclear. Wind is already in the northern half of the country and operates well when winterized, unlike the ones in Texas that broke since they were not winterized during that freeze a while back. Natural gas and fossil fuels are not our only options, they are the easiest options.

Context is solar and pricing. You can't only build solar, because people will freeze to death. So you can't say "solar+batteries is only $X/W!!!” because you're ignoring that you must also have a rarely-used natural gas, or install a rarely-used long-distance transmission line, or install rarely-used storage capacity. Which is fine, but you're being dishonest about costs if you don't.

Re: US blocks all offshore wind construction, says reason is classified

#276

Post by jdlshore »

hopelite wrote: post #177
Moldoteck wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

china runs with everything. They are still expanding coal units for firming and they'll build a ton of new gas units too. But to ban deployment of wind turbines without any explanation is ... expected from current administration...

Being blind with bias is also expected. I don't like what is going on either, but please consider that if it was only about "damaging" as others have implied, it would not just be off shore wind turbines. I can assure you there are other reasons.

Okay, what are they?

Re: US blocks all offshore wind construction, says reason is classified

#278

Post by coryrc »

osn9363739 wrote: post #240
coryrc wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As usual, explain how you're going to power heat pumps in the Northern half of the country during a 3 week bomb cyclone. There are answers and they cost money. The only answer we're using is to build 1:1 natural gas capability for solar, which is roughly double the cost. That's a solution, but it needs to be accounted for when comparing options.

Couldn't this also be solved with transmission from other parts of the country? or is that what you're saying?

Yes, but you have to pay for a line you don't plan to use much, so its capital costs should be attributed to the generation method requiring it. Which is fine, but not including it is dishonest about the true costs.

Re: US blocks all offshore wind construction, says reason is classified

#279

Post by alhirzel »

Years ago, this very subject was an interview question at a national lab (at an undergrad level). The question was roughly:

> the ends of windmill blades look a lot like a jet on radar. If you were assigned to this project, what would your approach be to avoiding false positives?

This was in 2011/2012. I find it difficult to believe the problem is not solved.

Re: US blocks all offshore wind construction, says reason is classified

#280

Post by ViewTrick1002 »

Nextgrid wrote: post #209
cjs_ac wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

UK energy prices are set by the most expensive energy source in the mix that contributes to the National Grid, which happens to be gas.

Which also sets broken incentives where nobody (not even renewables) are actually incentivized to dethrone gas/etc as it would reduce their own profit margin.

But everyone are incentivized to build another wind farm, solar plant, battery etc to make profit on the current fossil gas based margins. Pushing the price lower for more hours.

Equilibrium is met when new production becomes too expensive vs. the existing profit potential.

All resource markets globally run on marginal price. The other option for electricity would be that everyone instead does their own research and predicts the clearing price leading to even higher waste and more volatility.

Post reply on HN