The disintegration of the turbine blade and resultant pollution that forced the closure of Nantucket’s beaches should scuttle the offshore wind scam. But it’s only the tip of Big Wind’s problems.
At an Offshore Wind (Is Great) symposium last week in Southampton, NY, several promoters including representatives from Vineyard Wind stated that their turbines were rated to only a Category 3 hurricane. But, they explained, don't worry, Category 4 or 5 hurricanes are once every 100 year storms plus or minus. That one in 1938 was amazing so I'm hoping it's going to be 100 plus. But then I worry because the experts tell me Climate Change means more fierce storms more often, so I bought a couple of boxes of can goods, you know, just in case.
Anyway, that South Fork Wind Farm is going to power 70,000 homes per all the press releases. Except that would be at, uh full capacity. Per the DoE, the average capacity factor is around 35%, so I guess that means about 25,000 homes really. It's all so very confusing. Thank heavens we have experts to explain it all.
Small nuclear power plants are superior in almost every way. If the Left would put its muscle and money behind nuclear, we could actually get somewhere. Read "Power to Save the World" by Gwyneth Cravens -- Ms Cravens started out to prove nuclear was bad, but she ended up saying it is the very best solution for America and the world.
Hi, Rhonda -- it's been a long time since I read it, but I think it is very relevant because it is thorough, careful, and shows that some on the Left *can* be convinced by facts and rational argument -- not just emotion & slogans. 8^)
No in contrary, Germany has a law that pushes up numbers of wind turbines onshore from now 30.000 to 120.000, no matter what to do when there is too much or too little wind
Keep on exposing the hypocrisy connected with this industry please. People can only keep their eyes closed to the dangers for so long, until it hits them square in the face!! 👍👍
We’re essentially Beta Testing this stuff on a massive scale. Not good.
Additionally, on a full cycle basis, accounting for ALL energy inputs, what’s the EROEI of this stuff. I suspect an honest assessment would find its <<1.
See: "Energy intensities, EROIs (energy returned on invested), and energy payback times of electricity generating power plants." D. Weißbach, G. Ruprecht, A. Huke, K. Czerski, S. Gottlieb, and A. Hussein; Energy Volume 52, 1 April 2013, Pages 210-221. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0360544213000492
Abstract
The energy returned on invested, EROI, has been evaluated for typical power plants representing wind energy, photovoltaics, solar thermal, hydro, natural gas, biogas, coal and nuclear power. The strict exergy concept with no “primary energy weighting”, updated material databases, and updated technical procedures make it possible to directly compare the overall efficiency of those power plants on a uniform mathematical and physical basis. Pump storage systems, needed for solar and wind energy, have been included in the EROI so that the efficiency can be compared with an “unbuffered” scenario. The results show that nuclear, hydro, coal, and natural gas power systems (in this order) are one order of magnitude more effective than photovoltaics and wind power.
Highlights
Nuclear, “renewable” and fossil energy are comparable on a uniform physical basis. Energy storage is considered for the calculation, reducing the ERoEI remarkably. All power systems generate more energy than they consume. Photovoltaics, biomass and wind (buffered) are below the economical threshold.
Unless Trump gets elected, which is not likely, there is no way to stop any Renewable Energy. Biden in his Ex. Order of 13990 promised to create "well paying jobs for Union Workers". (Unions are Big contributors to the Democrat Party).
Instead of complaining, women need to demand that the Nuclear Reg. Commission be abolished so we can get the Generation IV heat generators manufactured & installed to replace All the Fossil Fuel fired power plants.
Small locally located power plants will allow people in their State or Community to have LOCAL control, thus eliminating the billions of $$$ wasted on Interstate Transmission lines, hundreds of worthless bureaucrats and dozens of programs for Special Interest Groups.
One version, the Liquid Sodium cooled unit has been operationally proven for a total of 74 YEARS !
DON'T BE A FOOL ! There are many making Billions and are scaring people by calling Generation IV reactors "nuclear". They want to keep the $$$ flowing to their projects.
NOTE: the nuclear plants we have today were never designed/intended to be used on land by Civilians ! They were designed to be used by the U.S. Navy in ships, like a submarine.
For questions, more info, contact me at indust.consult@rcn dot com.
Reminds me of the famous “galloping bridge” failure of the Tacoma Narrows Bridge. As the towers get taller and the blades get longer the wind turbines have scary resonant vibration modes. Add to that the pounding surf vibration coming up through the foundation and it is pretty easy to see what might happen. Simple addition of mode damping weights to the blades might help, though efficiency might suffer. How efficient is a “blade liberation”?
While designing the Brooklyn Bridge, Washington Roebling was asked "How do you know how strong to make it?" He replied "I calculate what I can and then make it six times stronger."
Torsional flutter should have been designed for, and would not explain early failures. Torsional resonance on the other hand is often overlooked by CAD systems in design. To defeat the modes in torsion requires deeper knowledge and care to include features like hydraulic slip joints(aka viscous damper) similar to that used in power train design. Otherwise resonance in torsion will quickly lead to failure, since most materials are weakest in shear.
Geothermal is only economical in a few places in the world such as Iceland where there are abundant heat flows from the Earth's mantle. Here's a German article that discusses an extremely expensive scheme in Bavaria for an experimental 8.2 MW geothermal generator in Geretsried: Electricity could be produced for the first time in 2024, July 21, 2022, 8:00 p.m
"Geothermal is only economical in a few places in the world..."
Traditional geothermal, yes. I lived in Iceland for a year and visited their plant by the Blue Lagoon.
We are now speaking of advanced geothermal (Eavor, Fervo, several others) made possible only in the last decade through advances in drilling and other associated tasks developed for the fossil fuel industry. Your post makes it clear you've made no effort to educate yourself on the difference.
Geretsried: This is their FIRST commercial plant, and fully expected to be more expensive. All new technologies require experience to bring costs down. The first plant is primarily for industrial and residential heating; any electricity generated is simply a bonus.
Hey Bryce, you still cashing those checks from the Manhattan Institute and its fossil fuel benefactors? You are a shameless shill for those who are making this planet hotter and hotter (while also lining your pockets). You grandchildren will hate you. You fool no one.
You are clueless, the planet has been getting hotter (and cooler) since the beginning billions of years ago. Man has no technology to control the weather either way.
And you have the science to back that up ? When did the 7 ice ages happen and all the little mini ice ages happen . What chemical reactions happened that where the same or different then what’s happening now ?
The one thing you do have is subjective not objective facts from the Koch brothers .
NOAA and the IPPC are really working for communist Muslims with space lasers that really make things hot is what I bet I will hear next .
Go to any college or university with a climatology department and explain to them what you know that they don’t .
But before you do please please with a cherry on top . Tell me when you go . I’ll spend my whole SSI check just to watch and see what happens.
Republican Mayors all over Florida who definitely will vote for Trump believe in human caused climate change, why? their towns have to live with it every single day . Let me hear what ya got to say to them .
Tell the Russians living in Siberia what you know that they don’t . Or the Canadians or Eskimo’s or people working at our military bases in cold regions all over the world .
Tell the Pakistanis , India’s and Chinese who fight over water in wars because their glaciers are melting and so their rivers can’t provide water what you seem to know that they do not .
One of the least discussed part of the entire wind power debate is that offshore wind power is the most expensive way to generate electricity. Its more expensive than hydro, solar, geothermal, natural gas or land based wind. Its even considerably more expensive than nuclear! Couple that with the environmental damage... why is ANYONE pushing this boondoggle?
PJM grid rates wind at 21% - so South Fork would only power 14,700 homes. Wind companies are bad actors.
Can't add anything to a great write-up ...
except the coincidence of my nickname is 'Breaking wind' & I was born on July 22.
At an Offshore Wind (Is Great) symposium last week in Southampton, NY, several promoters including representatives from Vineyard Wind stated that their turbines were rated to only a Category 3 hurricane. But, they explained, don't worry, Category 4 or 5 hurricanes are once every 100 year storms plus or minus. That one in 1938 was amazing so I'm hoping it's going to be 100 plus. But then I worry because the experts tell me Climate Change means more fierce storms more often, so I bought a couple of boxes of can goods, you know, just in case.
Anyway, that South Fork Wind Farm is going to power 70,000 homes per all the press releases. Except that would be at, uh full capacity. Per the DoE, the average capacity factor is around 35%, so I guess that means about 25,000 homes really. It's all so very confusing. Thank heavens we have experts to explain it all.
Small nuclear power plants are superior in almost every way. If the Left would put its muscle and money behind nuclear, we could actually get somewhere. Read "Power to Save the World" by Gwyneth Cravens -- Ms Cravens started out to prove nuclear was bad, but she ended up saying it is the very best solution for America and the world.
I agree!
Thanks for the book reference. But wow, that book was published 16 years ago. Think it is still a good background for a newbie?
Hi, Rhonda -- it's been a long time since I read it, but I think it is very relevant because it is thorough, careful, and shows that some on the Left *can* be convinced by facts and rational argument -- not just emotion & slogans. 8^)
The debris from this disaster reached Aquidneck Island yesterday which is home to Portsmouth, Middletown and Newport RI.
There are ads on the NYC Ferry, for offshore wind, and an NY State URL for more info.
Didn’t Germany decide wind wasn’t feasible after a 30 year try? I thought they were backing off wind and solar? Is this true? Is anyone here watching?
No in contrary, Germany has a law that pushes up numbers of wind turbines onshore from now 30.000 to 120.000, no matter what to do when there is too much or too little wind
Well, Germany has ALSO had to backtrack on killing off their "carbon" energy production, since the wind has not delivered it's "promised magic".
The last year or two, I recall they were burning coal, & allowing some places to burn wood.
Keep on exposing the hypocrisy connected with this industry please. People can only keep their eyes closed to the dangers for so long, until it hits them square in the face!! 👍👍
We all want migrants and renewable energy.....just not here.
This is a very good 2022 investigative report of a large windfarm in the Columbia Gorge, near where I live.
Many good photos of just what, exactly, the mechanics of these wind turbines are.
https://projects.oregonlive.com/wind-farms/
Migrating birds are not even mentioned.
We’re essentially Beta Testing this stuff on a massive scale. Not good.
Additionally, on a full cycle basis, accounting for ALL energy inputs, what’s the EROEI of this stuff. I suspect an honest assessment would find its <<1.
See: "Energy intensities, EROIs (energy returned on invested), and energy payback times of electricity generating power plants." D. Weißbach, G. Ruprecht, A. Huke, K. Czerski, S. Gottlieb, and A. Hussein; Energy Volume 52, 1 April 2013, Pages 210-221. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0360544213000492
Abstract
The energy returned on invested, EROI, has been evaluated for typical power plants representing wind energy, photovoltaics, solar thermal, hydro, natural gas, biogas, coal and nuclear power. The strict exergy concept with no “primary energy weighting”, updated material databases, and updated technical procedures make it possible to directly compare the overall efficiency of those power plants on a uniform mathematical and physical basis. Pump storage systems, needed for solar and wind energy, have been included in the EROI so that the efficiency can be compared with an “unbuffered” scenario. The results show that nuclear, hydro, coal, and natural gas power systems (in this order) are one order of magnitude more effective than photovoltaics and wind power.
Highlights
Nuclear, “renewable” and fossil energy are comparable on a uniform physical basis. Energy storage is considered for the calculation, reducing the ERoEI remarkably. All power systems generate more energy than they consume. Photovoltaics, biomass and wind (buffered) are below the economical threshold.
Unless Trump gets elected, which is not likely, there is no way to stop any Renewable Energy. Biden in his Ex. Order of 13990 promised to create "well paying jobs for Union Workers". (Unions are Big contributors to the Democrat Party).
Instead of complaining, women need to demand that the Nuclear Reg. Commission be abolished so we can get the Generation IV heat generators manufactured & installed to replace All the Fossil Fuel fired power plants.
Small locally located power plants will allow people in their State or Community to have LOCAL control, thus eliminating the billions of $$$ wasted on Interstate Transmission lines, hundreds of worthless bureaucrats and dozens of programs for Special Interest Groups.
One version, the Liquid Sodium cooled unit has been operationally proven for a total of 74 YEARS !
DON'T BE A FOOL ! There are many making Billions and are scaring people by calling Generation IV reactors "nuclear". They want to keep the $$$ flowing to their projects.
NOTE: the nuclear plants we have today were never designed/intended to be used on land by Civilians ! They were designed to be used by the U.S. Navy in ships, like a submarine.
For questions, more info, contact me at indust.consult@rcn dot com.
Reminds me of the famous “galloping bridge” failure of the Tacoma Narrows Bridge. As the towers get taller and the blades get longer the wind turbines have scary resonant vibration modes. Add to that the pounding surf vibration coming up through the foundation and it is pretty easy to see what might happen. Simple addition of mode damping weights to the blades might help, though efficiency might suffer. How efficient is a “blade liberation”?
While designing the Brooklyn Bridge, Washington Roebling was asked "How do you know how strong to make it?" He replied "I calculate what I can and then make it six times stronger."
The size of that bridge wasn’t why it failed. This was torsional flutter. https://wsdot.wa.gov/tnbhistory/bridges-failure.htm
But I get why you saw the comparison - a very large failure.
Torsional flutter should have been designed for, and would not explain early failures. Torsional resonance on the other hand is often overlooked by CAD systems in design. To defeat the modes in torsion requires deeper knowledge and care to include features like hydraulic slip joints(aka viscous damper) similar to that used in power train design. Otherwise resonance in torsion will quickly lead to failure, since most materials are weakest in shear.
What could possibly go wrong?
We need to focus on developing advanced geothermal. No above-ground muss and fuss.
Geothermal is only economical in a few places in the world such as Iceland where there are abundant heat flows from the Earth's mantle. Here's a German article that discusses an extremely expensive scheme in Bavaria for an experimental 8.2 MW geothermal generator in Geretsried: Electricity could be produced for the first time in 2024, July 21, 2022, 8:00 p.m
By: Doris Schmid https://www.merkur.de/lokales/wolfratshausen/geretsried-ort46843/geothermie-in-geretsried-2024-zum-ersten-mal-strom-moeglich-91680655.html
"Geothermal is only economical in a few places in the world..."
Traditional geothermal, yes. I lived in Iceland for a year and visited their plant by the Blue Lagoon.
We are now speaking of advanced geothermal (Eavor, Fervo, several others) made possible only in the last decade through advances in drilling and other associated tasks developed for the fossil fuel industry. Your post makes it clear you've made no effort to educate yourself on the difference.
Geretsried: This is their FIRST commercial plant, and fully expected to be more expensive. All new technologies require experience to bring costs down. The first plant is primarily for industrial and residential heating; any electricity generated is simply a bonus.
Maybe you should read up on it before posting.
Hey Bryce, you still cashing those checks from the Manhattan Institute and its fossil fuel benefactors? You are a shameless shill for those who are making this planet hotter and hotter (while also lining your pockets). You grandchildren will hate you. You fool no one.
If Covid didn’t open your eyes to the Climate Scam then…….
You are clueless, the planet has been getting hotter (and cooler) since the beginning billions of years ago. Man has no technology to control the weather either way.
And you have the science to back that up ? When did the 7 ice ages happen and all the little mini ice ages happen . What chemical reactions happened that where the same or different then what’s happening now ?
The one thing you do have is subjective not objective facts from the Koch brothers .
NOAA and the IPPC are really working for communist Muslims with space lasers that really make things hot is what I bet I will hear next .
Go to any college or university with a climatology department and explain to them what you know that they don’t .
But before you do please please with a cherry on top . Tell me when you go . I’ll spend my whole SSI check just to watch and see what happens.
Republican Mayors all over Florida who definitely will vote for Trump believe in human caused climate change, why? their towns have to live with it every single day . Let me hear what ya got to say to them .
Tell the Russians living in Siberia what you know that they don’t . Or the Canadians or Eskimo’s or people working at our military bases in cold regions all over the world .
Tell the Pakistanis , India’s and Chinese who fight over water in wars because their glaciers are melting and so their rivers can’t provide water what you seem to know that they do not .
One of the least discussed part of the entire wind power debate is that offshore wind power is the most expensive way to generate electricity. Its more expensive than hydro, solar, geothermal, natural gas or land based wind. Its even considerably more expensive than nuclear! Couple that with the environmental damage... why is ANYONE pushing this boondoggle?
The subsidy-seekers are driving this absurdity. Here's a quote from Warren Buffett: https://tinyurl.com/Buffett-Wind-Scam