[Ludi]

The only problem I see with wind power is the big turbines kill many birds and bats if not sited carefully enough. This is'nt just a "tree hugging" issue, because birds and bats are very important for insect control. More studies are being done to see if the numbers killed are significant. As far as I know, small turbines such as for personal or small community use don't pose any special hazard to wildlife. I'm very much in favor of local power generation, so I'd rather see more small turbines, though I agree, large wind farms should continue to be built as long as they don't adversely affect wildlife populations.

[katkinkate]

I have to add my 2c to this topic.

Humans have the technology now to provide all there energy needs with alternative energy sources if enough investment, resources and political will was invested to build the infrastructure needed.

I think it highly unlikely we'll manage it however, because it flies in the face of the plans of the established powers for this worlds resources.

[MD]

I go back and forth almost daily on the technology vs. doomology question. There are some very powerful forces colliding here, who the hell knows what the wreckage will look like.

[EnergySpin]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')hat's incredible. The EROI is about 30 or so

[MD]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('EnergySpin', '
')I think that both these statements:
"Man thinks, Nature acts" (act = wind blows)
"You are soaking in it" (it = wind/solar)
are correct.
The historians of the future will likely summarize our situation as:
"These people were killed by paper!"

[EnergySpin]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'm')arkets towards rational decision making have failed with regard to energy

[EnergySpin]

More data on EROEIs of various energy sources.
The following is from the American Wind Association website, calculating the payback times for various forms of energy (renewable+non-renewable). The data on Wind Power predate the 2004-2005 ones's I posted yesterday.
These are data from the 90s, confirming the huge advantages of wind power compared to anything else we have for electricity generation. To calculate the EROEIs for the various wind turbines, divide 240 (20 yr life) or 360 (30 yr life) by the payback time in months.
No for the billion $ question. If one were to allocate a fixed amount of materials (i.e. steel, concrete, grid wires, electronics) to construction of energy plants, I think the winner (i.e max GWh/aggregate material input) would be wind with a huge margin.
If anyone is aware of a study where such a constrained maximization exercise was performed please send a link

[MD]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('EnergySpin', 'I')f anyone is aware of a study where such a constrained maximization exercise was performed please send a link

[EnergySpin]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'f')ixed amount of materials (i.e. steel, concrete, grid wires, electronics) to construction of energy plants, I think the winner (i.e max GWh/aggregate material input) would be wind with a huge margin.
If anyone is aware of a study where such a constrained maximization exercise was performed please send a link

[Ludi]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('EnergySpin', ' ')then the inescapable conclusion that ENERGY=MONEY is reached and therefore it makes absolutely no sense to even discuss the cost of substituting wind or solar in our lifes

[EnergySpin]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I')'m a little confused by this statement. Do you mean we should be implementing these technologies in spite of their cost? Do you mean as a society, or as individuals?

[cube]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Ludi', 'T')he only problem I see with wind power is the big turbines kill many birds and bats if not sited carefully enough.
.............

[EnergySpin]

And the global wind potential from AWEA found here
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '.')...
According to the U.S. Department of Energy, the world's winds could theoretically supply the equivalent of 5,800 quadrillion BTUs (quads) of energy each year--more than 15 times current world energy demand. (A quad is equal to about 172 million barrels of oil or 45 million tons of coal.)
.

[Ludi]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('EnergySpin', '
')How much pleasure would you derive from 5 million dollars in a world with no electricity, oil, gas,computers, CDs, TVs?

[The_Toecutter]

Local energy production = less transmission losses, more competition, less waste, less profit, less cost

Centralized energy production = more transmission losses, less competition, more waste, more profit, more cost

The status quo is toward centralized and with it more corporate and/or government control of energy. Decentralized brings control of energy to many small entreprenuers and individual people.

[cube]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('The_Toecutter', 'L')ocal energy production = less transmission losses, more competition, less waste, less profit, less cost
.......

[The_Toecutter]

But the beauty of wind turbines is that as production ramps up, costs come down to a level where your common person can afford them. It would bring the very real possibility that you could see at least one independent energy producer on every city block, but more likely maybe one every 3 or 4 miles.

Sure, small turbines are more costly per kWh than big turbines, but the difference is not very profound, and with much shorter distances for that power to travel, being in terms city blocks instead of miles, most of those transmission losses are eliminated almost evening out the generating cost by saving $.005/kWh or so.

The big power plants often have a legal monopoly established for the area they cover, and that $.04 kWh of coal is often charged to the consumer for $.08-.10. Competition eliminates this stranglehold since so many people can get involved with generating electricity with inexpensive methods of generating it. Having choices in which one energy producer could charge $.055/kWh and profit because generating each kWh only costs $.045 to break even means that the other companies may not get any sales unless they too lower their prices. The big companies would either have to adapt and shrink or die, which would mean using less coal and more wind.

As for independently owned coffee shops, it depends where you live. I know of at least four in my city and there are probably more, but that by no means indicates that is the norm, either.

Distribution could easily be regulated with today's computer technology. As I type this, there are literally thousands of people nationwide producing small amounts of excess power from their solar panels and selling it back to the grid. This is the future the current utility industry fears.

[Ludi]

I agree with Toecutter. I was actually talking about the private or small community ownership of wind turbines, not corporate ownership. A group of people living near each other could pool their resources for a turbine.

[cube]

If hypothetically windmills could produce power at the same cost as a conventional power plant the system would most likely be set up like what we have right now.

The electrical grid was designed for centralized power production. It would be cheaper to make use of the existing configuration rather then try to string new electrical cable every 3 or 4 miles to a local wind farm....which I doubt any city government would be enthusiastic about such a plan. People don't like to look out their windows and see windmills or electrical lines.

If windmills do get put to mainstream use you're going to see something like 100 x 10MW windfarms == 1 GW. Basically centralized energy production. The only difference is instead of centralized coal plants owned by big corporations it's going to be centralized windfarms owned by big corporations.

Yes there may be a several decentralized alternative power plants out there. But a decentralized system will never become the primary source of power. The likelyhood of that happening would be like reverting back to decentralized farming or decentralized factory production. Ever since coal was put to practical use in steam engines the name of the game has been centralization. Cheap energy makes centralization not only possible but more economical.

The ONLY way we will revert back to a decentralized system is if we lose our supply of cheap high energy dense fuels. errr actually I guess that could happen.

[The_Toecutter]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'T')he ONLY way we will revert back to a decentralized system is if we lose our supply of cheap high energy dense fuels. errr actually I guess that could happen.