On Thu, 06 Sep 2012 20:00:11 -0700, Califbill wrote:


Maybe not most of the power plants, but plans are for 20% by 2030.
South Dakota is already producing 20% of their needs with wind energy.
Iowa is right on their tail.
-----------------------------
Lots of wind, open land and little population or manufacturing. Easy to
supply 20%. Do not know the percentage anymore but in the 1970's 50% of
the people lived within 500 miles of NYC. So how do you supply that
dense population? Where are the consistant winds?

It seems to me, 20% is a pretty good chunk. Renewables, have already
surpassed nuclear in providing US energy, although hydro is the largest
chunk of that. As for strictly wind, it seems to me, offshore is the
only chance for that here in the NE. This map shows the potential.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
File:United_States_Wind_Resources_and_Transmission _Lines_map.jpg

On Thu, 06 Sep 2012 21:16:50 -0400, gfretwell wrote:

On Fri, 7 Sep 2012 00:15:58 +0000 (UTC), thunder
wrote:

Maybe not most of the power plants, but plans are for 20% by 2030.
South Dakota is already producing 20% of their needs with wind energy.
Iowa is right on their tail.

The Onan on Wayne's boat would provide 20% of South Dakota's energy
needs. The problem is really the population centers on the coasts where
real estate is at a premium.

And the coasts have very good potential for wind, albeit offshore.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
File:United_States_Wind_Resources_and_Transmission _Lines_map.jpg

In article ,
says...

wrote in message ...

On Thu, 06 Sep 2012 15:01:48 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

From a strategic standpoint it is very important that we figure out
how to make ourselves independent of middle eastern energy sources.
They don't like us very much and it's only a matter of time before the
entire region becomes unstable and unreliable.

Et Tu Brute?

The fact is we get a very small percentage of our oil from the middle
east and electricity comes from gas or coal if it is "fossil fuel".

Windmills (solar etc) have very little to do with the middle east
situation.
If you want to worry about that, look at our Israel policy.


--------------------
Yes we are on the learning curve, but it will be near impossible to really
get enough reliable energy via wind or solar to replace most of the power
plants. Especially with the growth in energy consumption.

I don't know of anybody who is advocated planting enough windmills to
completely replace all existing coal, oil, and nuclear plants.

In article , says...

On 9/6/2012 7:56 PM, Califbill wrote:
wrote in message ...

On Thu, 06 Sep 2012 15:01:48 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

From a strategic standpoint it is very important that we figure out
how to make ourselves independent of middle eastern energy sources.
They don't like us very much and it's only a matter of time before the
entire region becomes unstable and unreliable.

Et Tu Brute?

The fact is we get a very small percentage of our oil from the middle
east and electricity comes from gas or coal if it is "fossil fuel".

Windmills (solar etc) have very little to do with the middle east
situation.
If you want to worry about that, look at our Israel policy.


--------------------
Yes we are on the learning curve, but it will be near impossible to
really get enough reliable energy via wind or solar to replace most of
the power plants. Especially with the growth in energy consumption.


Solar especially is not gonna' cut it till they come up with a whole
'nuther angle...

Well, you think that because you're stupid.

In article ,
says...

On Thu, 06 Sep 2012 13:09:24 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Thu, 06 Sep 2012 12:23:06 -0400, wrote:

The thing I noticed at the ones we saw in Canada and North Dakota was
more of a thump than a loud noise. You feel it more than hear it.

===

What causes the "thump" ?

The displaced air. It is a low frequency pressure wave. You really
feel it as much as hear it. I suppose a lot has to do with the pitch
of the blades because it seems to come and go. We stopped outside
Minot SD and watched the two they have there for longer than my wife
was happy about but it was really a nice day, cool with a nice breeze.
We walked around them a while and I shot some pictures. That was one
of the places that I saw one being feathered and restarted a few
times. It really looked like they were using it to balance the grid.

The air would be displaced at a constant, round pattern, though.

In article ,
says...

On Fri, 7 Sep 2012 06:34:13 +0000 (UTC), thunder
wrote:

On Thu, 06 Sep 2012 21:16:50 -0400, gfretwell wrote:

On Fri, 7 Sep 2012 00:15:58 +0000 (UTC), thunder
wrote:

Maybe not most of the power plants, but plans are for 20% by 2030.
South Dakota is already producing 20% of their needs with wind energy.
Iowa is right on their tail.

The Onan on Wayne's boat would provide 20% of South Dakota's energy
needs. The problem is really the population centers on the coasts where
real estate is at a premium.

And the coasts have very good potential for wind, albeit offshore.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
File:United_States_Wind_Resources_and_Transmissio n_Lines_map.jpg

Offshore in salt water becomes a maintenance nightmare. That is what
the dutch found out. They don't have hurricanes either.

The mid Atlantic coast of the US has really just been lucky. If they
had a Cat 2 or 3 skirt the coast, most of your windmills would be
fishing reefs.

Salt life would be a major maintenance problem for sure. But one could
easily be designed to withstand hurricane force winds. There just isn't
enough surface area to worry about that much.

On Fri, 7 Sep 2012 08:46:03 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:

The air would be displaced at a constant, round pattern, though.

===

You'd think so but the blades may spin off tip vortices, or somehow
interact with the supporting pole in some asymmetric way.

"thunder" wrote in message ...

On Thu, 06 Sep 2012 20:00:11 -0700, Califbill wrote:


Maybe not most of the power plants, but plans are for 20% by 2030.
South Dakota is already producing 20% of their needs with wind energy.
Iowa is right on their tail.
-----------------------------
Lots of wind, open land and little population or manufacturing. Easy to
supply 20%. Do not know the percentage anymore but in the 1970's 50% of
the people lived within 500 miles of NYC. So how do you supply that
dense population? Where are the consistant winds?

It seems to me, 20% is a pretty good chunk. Renewables, have already
surpassed nuclear in providing US energy, although hydro is the largest
chunk of that. As for strictly wind, it seems to me, offshore is the
only chance for that here in the NE. This map shows the potential.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/
File:United_States_Wind_Resources_and_Transmission _Lines_map.jpg


--------------------------------
20% is only for a very sparsely populated area with lots of wind and small
energy needs for the total area. The coastal area where most of the people
live, just do not have enough land and wind to supply 20%.

"iBoaterer" wrote in message
...

In article ,
says...

wrote in message ...

On Thu, 06 Sep 2012 15:01:48 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

From a strategic standpoint it is very important that we figure out
how to make ourselves independent of middle eastern energy sources.
They don't like us very much and it's only a matter of time before the
entire region becomes unstable and unreliable.

Et Tu Brute?

The fact is we get a very small percentage of our oil from the middle
east and electricity comes from gas or coal if it is "fossil fuel".

Windmills (solar etc) have very little to do with the middle east
situation.
If you want to worry about that, look at our Israel policy.


--------------------
Yes we are on the learning curve, but it will be near impossible to really
get enough reliable energy via wind or solar to replace most of the power
plants. Especially with the growth in energy consumption.

I don't know of anybody who is advocated planting enough windmills to
completely replace all existing coal, oil, and nuclear plants.


------------------------
Who said anything about replacing all the other power plants. We are
stating that it is dang near impossible to supply a meaning amount of the
total power requirements via wind.

"iBoaterer" wrote in message
...

In article , says...

On 9/6/2012 7:56 PM, Califbill wrote:
wrote in message ...

On Thu, 06 Sep 2012 15:01:48 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

From a strategic standpoint it is very important that we figure out
how to make ourselves independent of middle eastern energy sources.
They don't like us very much and it's only a matter of time before the
entire region becomes unstable and unreliable.

Et Tu Brute?

The fact is we get a very small percentage of our oil from the middle
east and electricity comes from gas or coal if it is "fossil fuel".

Windmills (solar etc) have very little to do with the middle east
situation.
If you want to worry about that, look at our Israel policy.


--------------------
Yes we are on the learning curve, but it will be near impossible to
really get enough reliable energy via wind or solar to replace most of
the power plants. Especially with the growth in energy consumption.


Solar especially is not gonna' cut it till they come up with a whole
'nuther angle...

Well, you think that because you're stupid.

-------------------------------------------
You show some stupidity also. Until we do come up with another angle on
solar it is not really viable. Most solar panels deteriorate fairly
rapidly. Especially the surface of the covering.