25 Oct 13
1 edit
http://phys.org/news/2013-10-iea-ups-power-global-electricity.html
this happy prediction is made by the International Energy Agency and is partly based on the fact that the cost of wind power has been dropping and is predicted to continually drop.
In addition, the link says amongst other things:
“...
...Wind power currently generates 2.6% of the world's electricity.
…
...Turbines are higher, stronger and lighter, while masts and blades are growing faster than rated capacity. What's more, turbines are capturing lower-speed winds and producing more regular output. …
...”
It it just my imagination or does there seems to be a lot of good news of renewable energy recently?
25 Oct 13
Originally posted by humyWhen the scientific and engineering community get together, things get done.
http://phys.org/news/2013-10-iea-ups-power-global-electricity.html
this happy prediction is made by the International Energy Agency and is partly based on the fact that the cost of wind power has been dropping and is predicted to continually drop.
In addition, the link says amongst other things:
“...
...Wind power currently generates 2.6% of the world's e ...[text shortened]... t just my imagination or does there seems to be a lot of good news of renewable energy recently?
25 Oct 13
Originally posted by humyHydro power is producing nearly 20% now. If we had another 20% from wind it would be a huge impact on the use of coal for power. The other thing is that nuclear power may one day not even be a consideration.
http://phys.org/news/2013-10-iea-ups-power-global-electricity.html
this happy prediction is made by the International Energy Agency and is partly based on the fact that the cost of wind power has been dropping and is predicted to continually drop.
In addition, the link says amongst other things:
“...
...Wind power currently generates 2.6% of the world's e ...[text shortened]... t just my imagination or does there seems to be a lot of good news of renewable energy recently?
25 Oct 13
1 edit
Originally posted by joe beyser
Hydro power is producing nearly 20% now. If we had another 20% from wind it would be a huge impact on the use of coal for power. The other thing is that nuclear power may one day not even be a consideration.
The other thing is that nuclear power may one day not even be a consideration.
I think that is definitely the case. In the very long run, nuclear power can never compete with renewables. I am certain that there would be no nuclear on Earth 300 years from now.
However, I think having more nuclear power in the more medium run may be a very good idea to buy us more time until the renewables finally completely replace all fossil fuels and then, much less importantly, replace nuclear.
25 Oct 13
Originally posted by humywe may not have fission 300 years from now but fusion is a definite maybe and a lot cleaner than fission. You are right about fission being just a stop gap measure.The other thing is that nuclear power may one day not even be a consideration.
I think that is definitely the case. In the very long run, nuclear power can never compete with renewables. I am certain that there would be no nuclear on Earth 300 years from now.
However, I think having more nuclear power in the more medium run may be a very ...[text shortened]... es finally completely replace all fossil fuels and then, much less importantly, replace nuclear.
One thing to consider about wind power, there will be climate considerations to take into account when you start getting 20-30% of the entire planet's energy use from wind.
I think it will alter wind conditions where long time energy producers will find themselves getting less energy because the trade winds have permanently shifted or some such.
25 Oct 13
Originally posted by sonhouseI find it rather unlikely that it would have a significant impact on global air currents. Did you find any calculations to back this up? (fluid dynamics is not my field)
we may not have fission 300 years from now but fusion is a definite maybe and a lot cleaner than fission. You are right about fission being just a stop gap measure.
One thing to consider about wind power, there will be climate considerations to take into account when you start getting 20-30% of the entire planet's energy use from wind.
I think it wil ...[text shortened]... nd themselves getting less energy because the trade winds have permanently shifted or some such.
25 Oct 13
Originally posted by KazetNagorraI don't have any calculations specifically for that but note this:
I find it rather unlikely that it would have a significant impact on global air currents. Did you find any calculations to back this up? (fluid dynamics is not my field)
http://phys.org/news/2013-02-real-world-capacity-farms-large-scales.html
"...
Each wind turbine creates behind it a "wind shadow" in which the air has been slowed down by drag on the turbine's blades...
...
...as wind farms grow larger, they start to interact, and the regional-scale wind patterns matter more.
....
...Keith's research has shown that the generating capacity of very large wind power installations (larger than 100 square kilometers) may peak at between 0.5 and 1 watts per square meter. Previous estimates, which ignored the turbines' slowing effect on the wind, had put that figure at between 2 and 7 watts per square meter.
...
If we were to cover the entire Earth with wind farms, he notes, "the system could potentially generate enormous amounts of power, well in excess of 100 terawatts, but at that point my guess, based on our climate modeling, is that the effect of that on global winds, and therefore on climate, would be severe—perhaps bigger than the impact of doubling CO2
...
...
The whole earth receives about 100 000 TW of solar energy, using about 0.25% or 250 TW of it to move the air about.
..."
25 Oct 13
Originally posted by humyBut even the largest turbines are under hundred metres (I believe). Most of the worlds winds are kilometers above the earths surface.
Each wind turbine creates behind it a "wind shadow" in which the air has been slowed down by drag on the turbine's blades...
Here in Cape Town we have rows of mountains 1km high.
25 Oct 13
Originally posted by twhitehead
But even the largest turbines are under hundred metres (I believe). Most of the worlds winds are kilometers above the earths surface.
Here in Cape Town we have rows of mountains 1km high.
Most of the worlds winds are kilometers above the earths surface.
yes, and those winds will still blow. But the turbines don't only slow wind up to their own high but well above that hight due to the well-known phenomenon of wind turbines dragging the wind momentum well above them down to close to ground level. This effect would mean, if you had enough wind turbines world wide, the winds up to perhaps about 1km high could be severely slowed and that would have a drastic effects on world climate.
25 Oct 13
Originally posted by humyMaybe a positive effect? I believe many farmers plant wind breaks to slow down wind.
This effect would mean, if you had enough wind turbines world wide, the winds up to perhaps about 1km high could be severely slowed and that would have a drastic effects on world climate.
I suspect that deforestation and man made forests covers far more land and affects far more wind than wind turbines ever will.
Do you have any stats on the increase of wind speed over the Amazon due to deforestation?
26 Oct 13
Originally posted by KazetNagorraDoes extracting wind energy have a cooling effect on the atmosphere?
I find it rather unlikely that it would have a significant impact on global air currents. Did you find any calculations to back this up? (fluid dynamics is not my field)
26 Oct 13
2 edits
Originally posted by twhiteheadNow and then I'll read about somebody proposing a kite-like device having a turbine that sends electric current down the tether to the ground. I can't remember what sort of altitude they are considering for this.
But even the largest turbines are under hundred metres (I believe). Most of the worlds winds are kilometers above the earths surface.
Pie in the sky? 😕
26 Oct 13
Originally posted by Paul Dirac IIhttp://www.makanipower.com/home/
Now and then I'll read about somebody proposing a kite-like device having a turbine that sends electric current down the tether to the ground. I can't remember what sort of altitude they are considering for this.
Pie in the sky? 😕
They were bought by Google.
26 Oct 13
2 edits
Originally posted by twhiteheadSorry, don't have any stats on that. But I think you must be right about trees having much more effect (at least currently ) on the wind than wind turbines. I predict that will one day change.
Maybe a positive effect? I believe many farmers plant wind breaks to slow down wind.
I suspect that deforestation and man made forests covers far more land and affects far more wind than wind turbines ever will.
Do you have any stats on the increase of wind speed over the Amazon due to deforestation?
Maybe a positive effect?
Arr yes. Just because it changes something natural doesn't mean it is bad. I have predicted that wind turbine farms built over vast areas of sea and land in the far future would be carefully arranged to give a double purpose; both generate electricity and partially control climate esp to reduce wind speeds generated from storms and hurricanes to reduce the damage from them.
26 Oct 13
1 edit
Originally posted by joe beyserI don't think so. But it may indirectly reduce the rate of heat transfer from where the climate is hottest on Earth to where the climate is coldest on Earth. I have speculated that this could be used to help stop ice caps melting from global warming but obviously you would have to have one hell of a lot of wind turbines to have any measurable effect that way.
Does extracting wind energy have a cooling effect on the atmosphere?