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

391–400 of 585 posts

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

#391

Post by hammock »

alphazard wrote: post #168
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…

Bringing up a map of wind power deployments tells the story; what you will see is a hot vertical strip in the center of the US. That is where it actually makes sense to deploy windmills, and people will continue to put them there even if subsidies end. It makes sense for the area, the amount of wind, the serviceability of the deployments, etc. Off shore has always been politically contentious because it's much more d…

> Bringing up a map of wind power deployments tells the story; what you will see is a hot vertical strip in the center of the US

Idk what you mean by that. I pulled up a map and saw dots all over the place. They are concentrated on the east coast because you can’t build fixed on west coast (has to be floating) but they are pretty much anywhere on the east coast.

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

#392

Post by hammock »

IndrekR wrote: post #150
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…

Taiwan strait is filled with offshore wind turbines from both sides. This is not an issue for PRC nor Taiwan.

Either it is not, or is a huge issue. Those windmills could be deployed on purpose

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

#393

Post by alphazard »

pbhjpbhj wrote: post #371
alphazard wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bringing up a map of wind power deployments tells the story; what you will see is a hot vertical strip in the center of the US. That is where it actually makes sense to deploy windmills, and people will continue to put them there even if subsidies end. It makes sense for the area, the amount of wind, the serviceability of the deployments, etc. Off shore has always been politically contentious because it's much more d…

Why do you say it's rent seeking? Offshore wind is efficient, turbine blades can safely be much larger giving 3x the output, turbine arrays have unobstructed space giving twice the capacity factor. It's more efficient than onshore. You appear to be starting from a premise that wind turbines don't generate profits?

> Why do you say it's rent seeking?

Because that's what economists call it when you get something for nothing, as is the case with any subsidy. I'm not going to argue this point; interested readers can look up how these energy projects are financed. Windmills that are privately funded, including debt and risk show you where it actually makes sense to put a windmill.

> Offshore wind is efficient, turbine blades can safely be much larger giving 3x the output, turbine arrays have unobstructed space giving twice the capacity factor. It's more efficient than onshore.

Not going to argue with any of this, although you left out maintenance costs, and larger blades means more value at risk. I'm not convinced that your efficiency calculation is measured in dollars and not windmill hours.

I would caution any engineer types reading from pressing their nose too close to the details of a particular energy technology. Instead, it's better to focus on the business plan or economic shadow that a particular energy project leaves. Dollars go in and energy comes out. A bunch of money has to go in up front, then trickles of money slowly over time, and occasionally spikes of money have to go in randomly. In exchange there is a modest, predictable flow of money out, which eventually is larger than all the in-flows in the bull case. The question to ask is: how much in and out of dollars and of Joules at each point in time? How does that compare to hamsters on wheels, people on bicycles, and lighting things on fire?

> You appear to be starting from a premise that wind turbines don't generate profits?

This was never a stated premise, and my post starts with the opposite sentiment.

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

#394

Post by janc_ »

Retric wrote: post #353
ViewTrick1002 wrote: post #325

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Paid off nuclear plants produce quite cheap electricity. The problem is that it takes 10-15 years of building and then 40 years of paying $180-220/MWh to get a paid off nuclear plant as per modern western construction costs.

In terms of pure operating costs ignoring everything else it can look good vs other sources that include all costs. However, ‘Paid off nuclear’ in terms of construction costs still needs to worry about decommissioning, and their maintenance costs keep increasing every year. Several power plants have looked at going offline for potentially years and spending billions at around year 40 to get to year ~60 as not being w…

And don't forget the cost of storing nuclear waste for the next 10000 years, which is never included in the "cost of nuclear".

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

#395

Post by hammock »

scoofy wrote: post #222
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…

The problem is that we have a Congress that cares more about in-group loyalty than they do about idiocy. Meanwhile, we even have Michael Burry pointing out the obvious: we're losing to China because we're not building up every bit of energy capacity that we can. But, sure, why not just ban windfarms in a location perfectly suited to them: https://x.com/michaeljburry/status/2002285483158569147

Why is whatever Michael Burry’s opinion is particularly notable?

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

#396

Post by UltraSane »

Forgeties79 wrote: post #269
ericmay wrote: post #186

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is room between under-regulation and over-regulation. Given that we are experiencing high costs and other barriers to construction, we can do at least two things: reduce red tape where it makes sense or where the risk is acceptable to help lower costs, or the US government can, through a variety of mechanisms ranging from basic research funding to direct subsidies, spend taxpayer money to try and alleviate cost…

With something as serious as a nuclear reactor, I am OK with over regulation.

Over regulation of nuclear energy in the US made it so expensive we didn't replace all fossil fuels with it.

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

#397

Post by einrealist »

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…

> So clearly this is politically motivated

The oil price is too low. Venezuela and now this, it is all part of selling fossil fuels.

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

#399

Post by [deleted] »

CamperBob2 wrote: post #202
bayindirh wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> overregulation. Americans love to remove regulation to make things cheaper (and to enable capitalistic monopolies, but that's a different matter), then cry when people die (or worse). Some things needs to be regulated, esp. if mistakes are costly to the planet and/or people on the said planet. So yes, nuclear should be regulated, and even overregulated to keep it safe. We have seen what Boeing has become when it's…

So yes, nuclear should be regulated, and even overregulated to keep it safe. Here's what overregulation of nuclear power has done for us over the past several decades: "We can't risk releasing radioactive pollution in an accident, so we'll build coal plants that spew it into the air during normal operation instead."

[deleted]

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

#400

Post by selimthegrim »

kevin_thibedeau wrote: post #82
lateforwork wrote: post #8

The Saudis have enormous influence over Trump through business deals. So does Qatar through the jet they gifted Trump, and the UAE through crypto deals. These oil rich countries are no fans of clean energy. Is it merely coincidence, then, that Trump is canceling wind and solar projects in the United States? Previously Trump also canceled the largest solar project in the United States. Known as Esmeralda 7, the projec…

> jet they gifted Trump The jet was gifted to the American people. There's no reason why he should be allowed to fly on it. It goes in the library with the rest of the state gifts.

Stop giving him ideas. He’s gonna put a hangar right next to the east wing ballroom and shove it in there like the Spruce Goose
Post reply on HN