In article ,
says...

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.

Yes, it sure could, but again, I've been quite near the new types and
never heard a sound. The prevailing wind was quite calm, but it was
louder in my ears than anything coming from the mill.

In article ,
says...

"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.

20% isn't a meaningful amount??

In article ,
says...

"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.

Again, you are thinking about old technology. New solar panels are not
anything like the old.

http://www.technologyreview.com/spec...port.aspx?id=7

http://www.ubergizmo.com/2012/08/new...s-electricity-
and-hydrogen/

http://www.treehugger.com/clean-tech...is-98-plastic-
and-catches-a-record-breaking-96-of-incident-light.html

On Fri, 07 Sep 2012 11:03:19 -0700, Califbill wrote:


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%.

Well, it's just a report from the DOE, but they are talking of 20% of all
our energy needs.

http://www.20percentwind.org/20p.aspx?page=Report

"iBoaterer" wrote in message
...

In article ,
says...

"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.

Again, you are thinking about old technology. New solar panels are not
anything like the old.

http://www.technologyreview.com/spec...port.aspx?id=7

http://www.ubergizmo.com/2012/08/new...s-electricity-
and-hydrogen/

http://www.treehugger.com/clean-tech...is-98-plastic-
and-catches-a-record-breaking-96-of-incident-light.html

--------------------------------------
The problem is the surface coatings deteriorate and cut down the efficiency.

"thunder" wrote in message ...

On Fri, 07 Sep 2012 11:03:19 -0700, Califbill wrote:


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%.

Well, it's just a report from the DOE, but they are talking of 20% of all
our energy needs.

http://www.20percentwind.org/20p.aspx?page=Report


-----------------------------------------
Did you read the report? It lays out a scenario to possibly be 20% by 2030,
but do not state it is feasible.

"
As summarized at the end of this chapter, the analysis provides an overview
of some potential impacts of these two scenarios by 2030. This report does
not compare the Wind Scenario to other energy portfolio options, nor does it
outline an action plan.
To successfully address energy security and environmental issues, the nation
needs to pursue a portfolio of energy options. None of these options by
itself can fully address these issues; there is no “silver bullet.� This
technical report examines one potential scenario in which wind power serves
as a significant element in the portfolio. However, the 20% Wind Scenario is
not a prediction of the future. Instead, it paints a picture of what a
particular 20% Wind Scenario could mean for the nation.
"

On Fri, 07 Sep 2012 17:17:50 -0700, Califbill wrote:


Did you read the report? It lays out a scenario to possibly be 20% by
2030,
but do not state it is feasible.

"
As summarized at the end of this chapter, the analysis provides an
overview of some potential impacts of these two scenarios by 2030. This
report does not compare the Wind Scenario to other energy portfolio
options, nor does it outline an action plan.
To successfully address energy security and environmental issues, the
nation needs to pursue a portfolio of energy options. None of these
options by itself can fully address these issues; there is no “silver
bullet.� This technical report examines one potential scenario in which
wind power serves as a significant element in the portfolio. However,
the 20% Wind Scenario is not a prediction of the future. Instead, it
paints a picture of what a particular 20% Wind Scenario could mean for
the nation.
"

No, I haven't read the report yet. I was reading a wiki when I
mistakenly thought that is was a plan, not just a report. Still, if we
could get to 20% that would be a good thing. There is a plan for 350 MV
off shore here in NJ, but it has been kicking around for several years
with out much movement to my knowledge.

On Wed, 05 Sep 2012 17:52:06 -0400, JustWait
wrote:

On 9/5/2012 3:43 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 5 Sep 2012 14:22:29 -0400, iBoaterer wrote:

In article , says...

On 9/5/2012 1:06 PM, Wayne.B wrote:
On Tue, 04 Sep 2012 17:13:52 -0400, JustWait
wrote:

Well, there is one up by one of our practice tracks. I have seen it a
dozen times, only once was it actually running and that day, it was
annoying as hell with the noise.. and it's nearly a half mile maybe a
mile as the crow flies to the mill from the track. Like I said though,
most times, it's not moving even though there is windy up there all the
time.

===

How big was it?

The small, fast turning wind generators like you see on cruising
boats, roof tops and small towers can make an annoying whirring noise.
The big wind farms however use very large towers with slow turning
blades over 100 ft long. They are almost silent in my experience.


http://tuesdaysintempleton.com/2010/...-templeton-ma/

Yes, I know the rave reviews don't complain about the noise, but I
remember it made a thump, thump, thump as it ran that day. Again, I have
only seen it run once, not really sure if it's doing anything for the
town according to the reviews...

You're insane. Either that or FOX told you they were loud.

http://www.gereports.com/how-loud-is-a-wind-turbine/


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JD0v9_zV2uk

http://www.smallwindtips.com/2009/12...urbine-really/

Hmmm GE says wind turbines don't make noise. That is like the UMW
talking about clean coal.

If you live in the big city and are used to noise, they are not bad
but there is a noise. I am sure it is something you can ignore if they
are paying you enough to put the turbines there.


Most of the comments I have seen are skeptical as to any return at all
from the Mill in Templeton Mass... Like I said, it's u sually locked down
and stationary whenever I am there for weekends..

I am from Iowa, the number one windmill state on a per capita basis,
[third in numbers, after CA and TX]. I have listened to them and
standing almost under them , you hear a not very loud whoosh as each
blade goes by. Comparable to one foot waves breaking on the shore. I
like the sound of wind, and windmills, when present, just blend in
with the hiss of the wind in the leaves or waves on the beach, afater
a while you don't even notice if there is else competing for
attention. Just got back from the family lakeshore place where I can
see half a dozen windmills, visually and on radar. The first two,
rather small, ones in the state are in Spirit Lake at the high school,
which is selling juice at a net profit.

On 9/7/2012 2:03 PM, Califbill wrote:
"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%.


And it surpassed nuclear? Right, but we can't build or modify the plants
cause of pollution. At the same time the Chinese are killing the earth
much worse producing solar panels... The 20% the progressives state, is
really a lie... very cherry picked.

On 9/7/2012 8:17 PM, Califbill wrote:
"thunder" wrote in message ...

On Fri, 07 Sep 2012 11:03:19 -0700, Califbill wrote:


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%.

Well, it's just a report from the DOE, but they are talking of 20% of all
our energy needs.

http://www.20percentwind.org/20p.aspx?page=Report


-----------------------------------------
Did you read the report? It lays out a scenario to possibly be 20% by
2030, but do not state it is feasible.

"
As summarized at the end of this chapter, the analysis provides an
overview of some potential impacts of these two scenarios by 2030. This
report does not compare the Wind Scenario to other energy portfolio
options, nor does it outline an action plan.
To successfully address energy security and environmental issues, the
nation needs to pursue a portfolio of energy options. None of these
options by itself can fully address these issues; there is no “silver
bullet.� This technical report examines one potential scenario in which
wind power serves as a significant element in the portfolio. However,
the 20% Wind Scenario is not a prediction of the future. Instead, it
paints a picture of what a particular 20% Wind Scenario could mean for
the nation.
"


Why do these guys lie about stuff like this here.. Do they really expect
that all they have to do is read the DNC fax and hope nobody does their
homework? Just drives me nuts...