Forums

ForumsWorld Events, Politics, Religion, Etc.

Wind Power is supposedly "green"

Posted Jul 15, '14 at 9:33pm

Planemaster13

Planemaster13

25 posts

What do you think about Wind Power. What features do you like about it?If anything, I think wind power is a bad source of power and these are some of my thoughts.

1: You need to mine and refine some rather valuable and rare materials to make the actual turbines

2: They have a short lifespan (15-20 years)

3: Their lifespan shortens more if they are in the sea because of the water and salt erosion (10-15 years)

4: A wind turbine produces enough power to power one house so you need quite a few to power some large towns which means every 15-20 years you'd need replace a lot of turbines.

5: Each turbine costs 1-2$ Million plus making, mining and refining some of the materials will make it even more expensive on the other end.

6: You need to build roads to the turbines so you can get vehicles to maintain them.

7: There are days when no wind is present so basically there's no power... Some would say that you'd need energy storage. Has anyone given a thought on how a big battery to store the energy would take build and how much excess power there would be...

8: People say wind power keeps the environment clean. If that's true then why does it also erode the environment?

9: Not many people will get this but doesn't wind power take the power out of the wind? Just ponder on it for a few minutes...

So what are your opinions on wind power? Do you think it's good and do you have any opinions that counter my opinions and what other energies could we use?


last edited Jul 15 2014 09:34 pm by Planemaster13
 

Posted Jul 15, '14 at 10:20pm

Freakenstein

Freakenstein

8,117 posts

Moderator

Some of your points are correct, though I have issues with "taking the power out of the wind". All wind is is an unequal change in temperature and pressure. There's no "taking out" in anything here.

I'm a big fan of nuclear power and the fancy new idea of making every interstate and highway out of solar panels.

 

Posted Jul 15, '14 at 10:48pm

FishPreferred

FishPreferred

1,545 posts

1: If this were true at all, it would be the same of every electrical turbine in existence. Fortunately, glass and plastic are quite inexpensive and easy to obtain these days.

4: That would be a false dichotomy. Few people would advocate pure wind power as the sole source of energy.

6: Same as any other generator, except that maintenance is restricted to routine checkups, rather than round-the-clock supervision and manual operation.

8: Absolute nonsense. Wind does not erode the environment. Weathering erodes rocks and various other materials. This is not a detriment to the environment. It also isn't caused by the wind.

 

Posted Jul 16, '14 at 12:01am

Planemaster13

Planemaster13

25 posts

Freakenstein

Think on it for a while. The actual wind won't disappear, it is the power. It's isn't a bad thing anyway, it's just something to think about.

FishPreffered

Some good points but:

1: I'm not talking about glass, I'm talking about the materials used in the aspect of generating the power.

4: So what's the point? If you build turbines you still use power plants for non windy days and extra houses. Without wind power you still use power plants.

6: how many roads would you need to build to, say 30  wind generators...

8: How do you build a wind turbine, you can't just plop it down like a stick in some sand. You've got to dig out a place in the ground in the base then you've got put wires in the ground by digging up the ground (again) so you can transport the generated electricity to the desired location.

 

Posted Jul 16, '14 at 1:13am

FishPreferred

FishPreferred

1,545 posts

Think on it for a while. The actual wind won't disappear, it is the power. It's isn't a bad thing anyway, it's just something to think about.

Gas particles are too erratic for wind power to cycle back or carry over long distances. The power is also diminished far more by the broad side of a three-storey building, so this effect is doubly negligible.

1: I'm not talking about glass, I'm talking about the materials used in the aspect of generating the power.

That would be the generator, not the turbine, and guess what: If that were true of the generator, it would be the same of every industrial generator in existence.

4: So what's the point?

Um...

If you build turbines you still use power plants for non windy days and extra houses. Without wind power you still use power plants.

That is the point.

6: how many roads would you need to build to, say 30  wind generators...

Two, if the primary concern is efficiency. Otherwise, fewer.

8: How do you build a wind turbine, you can't just plop it down like a stick in some sand. You've got to dig out a place in the ground in the base then you've got put wires in the ground by digging up the ground (again) so you can transport the generated electricity to the desired location.

None of that has any clear relation to erosion, nor is it any more deleterious than any other generator aside from solar.

 

Posted Jul 16, '14 at 2:18am

Planemaster13

Planemaster13

25 posts

Gas particles are too erratic for wind power to cycle back or carry over long distances. The power is also diminished far more by the broad side of a three-storey building, so this effect is doubly negligible.

As I said before, this isn't a bad aspect in wind power, it's only a thing to think about.

That would be the generator, not the turbine, and guess what: If that were true of the generator, it would be the same of every industrial generator in existence

Very true, but due to the productive lifespan of the wind turbine, you'd need to replace LOTS of wind turbines every 15-20 years to do this when a power plant wouldn't have nearly as many generators replaced quickly. Read this

That is the point.

Could you clarify what you mean?

Two, if the primary concern is efficiency. Otherwise, fewer

How long would the roads be in a wind farm? the road has to reach each turbine.

None of that has any clear relation to erosion, nor is it any more deleterious than any other generator aside from solar

Again, a wind farm is bigger than any power plant. A power plant would take up less space than a field of wind turbines.


last edited Jul 16 2014 02:19 am by Planemaster13
 

Posted Jul 16, '14 at 3:30am

09philj

09philj

1,047 posts

To anyone who complains about wind turbines, I always say the same thing: Yes, they are inefficient, unreliable, and noisy, but you'd rather build them than more nuclear power stations wouldn't you?

 

Posted Jul 16, '14 at 4:56am

Planemaster13

Planemaster13

25 posts

Actually nuclear power is quite efficient. If you build it by the sea then the sea water can be used to cool the reactors. Nuclear waste can be stored in a safe way (read this) and a single power plant can power a large area.

Many people are fooled by this:
https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRsD-WELvqKlIkBjMED3kZRpi2-I4HheC7pO71eA9F4J6ILgTTX2A

Its just steam...


last edited Jul 16 2014 04:57 am by Planemaster13
 

Posted Jul 16, '14 at 11:45am

HahiHa

HahiHa

5,005 posts

Knight

To anyone who complains about wind turbines, I always say the same thing: Yes, they are inefficient, unreliable, and noisy, but you'd rather build them than more nuclear power stations wouldn't you?

They may be inefficient, unreliable, and noisy, but somehow Germany still manages to produce a big part of their energy in a green way using wind energy, among others. On the other side, I don't expect all countries to be capable of reproducing this success *runs away*

Actually nuclear power is quite efficient. If you build it by the sea then the sea water can be used to cool the reactors. Nuclear waste can be stored in a safe way (read this) and a single power plant can power a large area.

- Most nuclear plants in the continent are build at rivers for this same reason. Now imagine that there just happens to be a big drought which shrinks the river dramatically; is there enough water left to cool the radioactive material sufficiently? This scenario is probably more likely than many imagine. Probability increasing.

- Seashore plants? I give you ***ushima.

- Yes, nuclear can be stored in a safe way. It cannot be definitely disposed off, however, so we are left with temporary solutions, at least as long as the waste is increasing. And usually, the waste is not stored away safely, rather dumped somewhere in a grotto or buried under a few meters of earth and pollutes ground water.

 

Posted Jul 16, '14 at 1:43pm

FishPreferred

FishPreferred

1,545 posts

Read this

Wholly irrelevant. Neodymium is not a necessary generator component, nor, according to this source, is it even rare. It is all the more curious when you promote the nuclear industry, given their high demand for actinides and numerous other elements and compounds, many of which will not be useable for the next few million years or so.

Could you clarify what you mean?

Your argument in #4 (and, to a lesser extent, #7) is a false dichotomy, as it suggests that wind power cannot be used in conjunction with other sources, and uses this entirely false suggestion as a talking point against wind power in general.

How long would the roads be in a wind farm? the road has to reach each turbine.

That would depend on the terrain, but these things can be constructed a stone's throw apart without reducing their efficiency, so you could have a winding road meet all of them in ~750m. Wind farms often don't have roads going directly to each turbine tower, however.

Again, a wind farm is bigger than any power plant. A power plant would take up less space than a field of wind turbines.

No. That would require a smaller lot, most or all of which is occupied by immense concrete foundations. Wind farms can be built on actual farmland, with actual crops growing under them and only occupy the combined area of each tower's foundation. Therefore, they do not take up anywhere near as much space.

If you build it by the sea then the sea water can be used to cool the reactors.

Yes. It's also pumped directly into the spent fuel pool, where it comes into contact with the superheated fuel rods before being pumped out again. Clearly the chemical composition of the steam isn't the only concern here.

Nuclear waste can be stored in a safe way (read this)

Can ≠ Is

No company is going to spend the amount required to make waste entirely safe from the combined forces of erosional damage, tectonic plate shifting, and government zoning laws.


last edited Jul 16 2014 01:45 pm by FishPreferred
 
Reply to Wind Power is supposedly "green"

You must be logged in to post a reply!