Wind Turbine ********. Just opened the mail and seen the plan for three massive units

[TomSeller]

Agreed. However, around here the utilities are permitted to use the existing public road rights of way to run their phone, electricity and cable tv lines - thankfully! If they had to purchase those rights of way, we couldn't afford the service. So, government does provide a subsidy of sorts to these utilities. Then again, that right of way is being paid for by the consumers (taxpayers) either way!

I'd call them public more than private in your area given all that.

 

[KiwiBro]

Wind Energy and Examining Cost | The Energy Collective

Read the entire article....

Thank you for this. I've blown all the time I had today just reading the first page of comments from some very educated proponents of both sides of the fence. Fascinating. Have bookmarked and will continue reading.

 

[Cat_Driver]

Why It's The End Of The Line For Wind Power - Forbes

Just think, in South Carolina, power company Scana and its partners are investing about $11 billion to construct two 1,100 mw nuclear reactors on roughly 1,000 acres. To get the same amount of electricity out of wind (remember that turbines operate at an average of less than 50% capacity because of wind’s intermittancy) and you’d need more than 1,700 turbines stretched across 200,000 acres, for an upfront investment of $8.8 billion. The nukes might cost more upfront, but they last longer, they provide reliable base load power and they emit zero carbon.

 

[breadtrk]

For the anti Nuke crowd..... did you realize that if you had all the waste from every plant ever built to deal with, you only need a hole 1/2 the size of Manhattan Island? It is a risk vs reward vs cost per watt deal.

You are grown men and all have internet connected computers. Take off the rose colored glasses and propose a better, more efficient, more cost effective solution than nuclear power to reduce emissions and consumption of resources.

 

[MossRoad]

Thank you for this. I've blown all the time I had today just reading the first page of comments from some very educated proponents of both sides of the fence. Fascinating. Have bookmarked and will continue reading.

Yeah, that one's a long read.... I went googly-eyed! :confused2:

 

[MossRoad]

Why It's The End Of The Line For Wind Power - Forbes

Just think, in South Carolina, power company Scana and its partners are investing about $11 billion to construct two 1,100 mw nuclear reactors on roughly 1,000 acres. To get the same amount of electricity out of wind (remember that turbines operate at an average of less than 50% capacity because of wind痴 intermittancy) and you壇 need more than 1,700 turbines stretched across 200,000 acres, for an upfront investment of $8.8 billion. The nukes might cost more upfront, but they last longer, they provide reliable base load power and they emit zero carbon.

And you don't need moonlight to take a walk at night if you live near one... :laughing:

 

[dave1949]

Wind Energy and Examining Cost | The Energy Collective

That is not a very useful analysis when it ignores the reasons (costs) of why alternative energy such as wind and solar is being pursued to begin with.

As a survey of where improvements are needed it has some value but no surprises.

 

[LAFarm]

The roads were going to be there even if there was no electricity.

Thank goodness for our public roads!

 

[techman]

Creamer:

All of the studies show about 4%/1000 Km. A far cry from 4-6%/100 miles

If you have any real facts to back up your assertions, please post

 

[techman]

There was a short analysis published yesterday showing that a Tesla 10KW battery, fully utilized (2 KW/5 hours per day) for its life of 10 years would deliver electricity at $ 0.66/KWH, not including the solar panel and inverter costs.

Paul