It seems to me that the solution is to build the turbine factories where they are going to use the turbines, thus removing the transportation features!
It never ceases to amaze me that ostensibly well-read scientists today can think about wind energy as the future given it was summarily dismissed in the past once something better, namely coal, then oil, came along. wind is great for a kite, and there is nothing like a gentle breeze on a summer day, but as a source of power...
In the UK many of the wind farms are in remote, rural upland areas with narrow roads and lanes. I'm on the border with Wales and there are Windfarms on top of the Welsh Mountains. There have been problems with roads being blocked by vehicles taking turbine blades up the mountains One blade per vehicle, three blades per turbine adds up to a lot of road congestion. Another problem we've had here is that they have had to upgrade the grid taking the electricity from the mountain to join up with the national grid west of Shrewsbury. There was a plan to place an electricity substation at the edge of the windfarm region in order to collect the electricity from the windfarms and transform it to 400kV before passing it on. So they selected a site for the substation but were unable to use it because the transformers were so heavy they would not be allowed to carry them across old stone bridges which were listed and could not be damaged or replaced.
Perhaps your idea of having turbine factories close to the windfarm sites might be better if the windfarms were close to areas where the electricity is needed say for example around Birmingham where the grid infrastructure is already exists.
Thanks, but in truth I was being sarcastic. In my mind I was thinking of how they should build them offshore since that would appeal to the climate crazies
I have hated the idea of commercial windmills since I first read about the number of birds they kill each year. but it was something else that never made sense to me. As Robert Bryce has been harping, energy density is the only thing that matters, and it fails this test dismally. I only want windmills built in front of Obama's waterfront, purely to ruin his view and the value of his home
Of course the obvious answer to ocean transport of wind turbine blades is to use wind driven ships. These would be very large sailing ships, but much more romantic than fossil fueled ships. As with everything wind powered, a favorable wind is required!
Like there's "Green Hydrogen" there could also be "Green Wind". only transported by sailing ship and electric truck or better yet horse / oxen drawn carriage.
The wind and solar industries may be approaching the end of their road because grids loaded with intermittent energy are vulnerable to nocturnal wind droughts, where they can be next to no wind and solar generation for several days and nights in close proximity. The United States has never had more installed generating capacity, but last year the total generation was slightly down because coal is still leaving the grid and generating capacity is increasingly dominated by intermittent providers.
Presumably everybody knew that there would be no solar generation at night, but wind droughts have been under the radar because the meteorologists never reported them and the industry forged on despite some low wind periods in parts of the country over the last 10 or 12 years.
Due to the phenomenon of wind droughts, wind and solar capacity is not real capacity and the system is only as good as the lowest point of delivery, like the lowest point of a fence or a dam or a flood levy.
Thank you Irina! Then someone has to transport the blades again at the end of their life - those that haven't fallen off - to somewhere out of the way but easily seen from space, to wait for recycling that mankind can afford.
The answer to transporting the batteries (and perhaps blades) is to sling them beneath Zeppelins filled with hydrogen generated from wind and solar power, and make a proper job of a fire hazard.
Unless one is considering nuclear, in which case they assign the CO2 emissions of a city burning from rogue nuclear weapons to the carbon footprint of commercial nuclear electricity generation, because one leads to the other somehow.
(Real Mark Z. Jacobson of Stanford paper for those who don't already know.)
My friend from South Georgia says “ it’s always something, it ain’t never nothin’ “ damn he’s right a lot 🤣🤠 Jerry Jeff Walker penned and sang a song about wizzing in the wind….. what a visionary man 👊
I suppose they could stick them upright and use them as sails to power the ships - that would reduce emissions from ships’ engines.
Another factor: larger blades mean bigger stresses on the support and foundation for the turbine. That means they will require much more massive, concrete-filled foundations = more C02 emissions.
Bigger turbine blades to produce ever more electricity is counter-intuitive considering the ones we have already produce too much to use.
A better idea - just quit wind and solar thus eliminating the need for batteries. Just because the technology exists does not mean it’s fit for the grid - put it at the end user site - oh, that’s too expensive!!
We're having a heat wave here in New England. Today is the third 33 C plus day (93 for Fahrenheit fans), with two more days like this to come. Most days I check the ISO website (that's the New England grid) to see the power projections and what the mix of power is. Yesterday was the first time I saw that ISO was estimating they had no, zero, spare power.
We've spent billions on wind power here. The beautiful New England coast is scarred with hundreds of these things. The fisheries have been degraded by this, and the windmills are a major hazard to whale populations we once claimed we were trying to save. A lot of early land windmill installations are now abandoned, with no budget anywhere to remove these eyesore hazards. Many towns like mine have had big campaigns to push home rooftop solar. Solar and wind today are producing less than 3% of our power, less than garbage and wood burning. Natural gas seems to be back in vogue, since 65% of the ISO power is coming from that. It's usually less than 20%. Of course, in the winter that would be a big problem, since our Massachusetts Governor had blocked the expansion of any new gas pipelines.
One wonders how long this farce will go on, pouring billions into "alternatives," the only effect of which seems to be to raise rates.
It's not surprising that turbine blades catch the wind. That's what they were designed for.
There was a thing in the news recently that they were cutting down balsa trees in order to provide wood for the core of the blades. Do they still use that even for the very large blades?
It is apparent that at least some (perhaps all) of the lengthy blades are produced in Mexico, since I see those "triplets" of transport trucks (along with their requisite pilot cars with the "wide load" signs in front of and behind each of them) - and when I am close to the border in Santa Teresa NM I see what must be a bonded warehouse with a dozen or more blades awaiting transport - and I am rather amazed that those 100+ foot long trucks are able to stay on the road when the winds hit 40+ MPH sustained winds with gusts over 65MPH (which is not uncommon in the 'windy season' here in the southwest desert).
It is rather a thing of ballet-like beauty to watch those rigs make their way up into the mountaintop areas where the farms are being set up - hairpin turns and all - naturally blocking traffic for a while in Mountainaire and similar places ...
Of course, few ever mention the hundreds of large birds killed by these monstrosities - since they are, naturally, positioned in the main wind stream channels - as I understand it to kill a bald eagle in the US was a federal crime until the wonderful Mr Obama signed a law immunizing windmill operators from such trivialities...go, Barry!
With all the obvious downsides of those machines and given the dubious nature of the claims they are worth it, it is a wonder that more people are not fighting them tooth and nail. But then again, there are flat Earthers who will endlessly try to convince sane people we live on a disk with an ice wall perimeter (that's what Antarctica is, you see) and just realize that in essence, people are stupid.
Robert Bryce keeps a register of worldwide rejections of wind and solar farms and data centres, due often to local protests. The list is now quite long.
And how do you dispose of these giant blades when they become damaged or wear out? They're made of fiberglass, expensive to recycle. Take a look at the blade graveyard in Casper, Wyoming.
Also when they replace wind turbines with bigger turbines they remove the towers and turbines but leave the old concrete bases in the ground and build new ones. The concrete bases are enormous. There seems to be no obligation to "make good" when a wind farm is retired. In addition, there is a growing realisation that decommissioning and removal of off-shore windfarms is a much bigger and far more expensive job than expected. That's a big pollution job on it's own.
It seems to me that the solution is to build the turbine factories where they are going to use the turbines, thus removing the transportation features!
It never ceases to amaze me that ostensibly well-read scientists today can think about wind energy as the future given it was summarily dismissed in the past once something better, namely coal, then oil, came along. wind is great for a kite, and there is nothing like a gentle breeze on a summer day, but as a source of power...
In the UK many of the wind farms are in remote, rural upland areas with narrow roads and lanes. I'm on the border with Wales and there are Windfarms on top of the Welsh Mountains. There have been problems with roads being blocked by vehicles taking turbine blades up the mountains One blade per vehicle, three blades per turbine adds up to a lot of road congestion. Another problem we've had here is that they have had to upgrade the grid taking the electricity from the mountain to join up with the national grid west of Shrewsbury. There was a plan to place an electricity substation at the edge of the windfarm region in order to collect the electricity from the windfarms and transform it to 400kV before passing it on. So they selected a site for the substation but were unable to use it because the transformers were so heavy they would not be allowed to carry them across old stone bridges which were listed and could not be damaged or replaced.
Perhaps your idea of having turbine factories close to the windfarm sites might be better if the windfarms were close to areas where the electricity is needed say for example around Birmingham where the grid infrastructure is already exists.
Thanks, but in truth I was being sarcastic. In my mind I was thinking of how they should build them offshore since that would appeal to the climate crazies
Yes, I did get that. The problem is that the whole thing is kind of beyond sarcasm.
lol. So true
Ah, be honest. We're all thinking (and saying) that they shouldn't build them at all.
I have hated the idea of commercial windmills since I first read about the number of birds they kill each year. but it was something else that never made sense to me. As Robert Bryce has been harping, energy density is the only thing that matters, and it fails this test dismally. I only want windmills built in front of Obama's waterfront, purely to ruin his view and the value of his home
Of course the obvious answer to ocean transport of wind turbine blades is to use wind driven ships. These would be very large sailing ships, but much more romantic than fossil fueled ships. As with everything wind powered, a favorable wind is required!
You're onto something.
Like there's "Green Hydrogen" there could also be "Green Wind". only transported by sailing ship and electric truck or better yet horse / oxen drawn carriage.
And the transport ships and sails should be made entirely out of recycled plastic scooped up out of the ocean.
Just scoop up the plastic and make the blades on the way to the destination. Perhaps the blades could be used as sails too?
How hard can this be? All you need is a little imagination… and even that can be outsourced to ChatGPT!
The wind and solar industries may be approaching the end of their road because grids loaded with intermittent energy are vulnerable to nocturnal wind droughts, where they can be next to no wind and solar generation for several days and nights in close proximity. The United States has never had more installed generating capacity, but last year the total generation was slightly down because coal is still leaving the grid and generating capacity is increasingly dominated by intermittent providers.
Presumably everybody knew that there would be no solar generation at night, but wind droughts have been under the radar because the meteorologists never reported them and the industry forged on despite some low wind periods in parts of the country over the last 10 or 12 years.
Due to the phenomenon of wind droughts, wind and solar capacity is not real capacity and the system is only as good as the lowest point of delivery, like the lowest point of a fence or a dam or a flood levy.
https://rafechampion.substack.com/p/wind-and-solar-aint-capacity
https://rafechampion.substack.com/p/the-legless-green-energy-transition
Thank you Irina! Then someone has to transport the blades again at the end of their life - those that haven't fallen off - to somewhere out of the way but easily seen from space, to wait for recycling that mankind can afford.
The answer to transporting the batteries (and perhaps blades) is to sling them beneath Zeppelins filled with hydrogen generated from wind and solar power, and make a proper job of a fire hazard.
The carbon footprint of wind energy keeps growing, but has anyone noticed?
Of course they haven't.
Carbon footprints are imaginary only existing in the realm of rhetoric and print journalism.
Unless one is considering nuclear, in which case they assign the CO2 emissions of a city burning from rogue nuclear weapons to the carbon footprint of commercial nuclear electricity generation, because one leads to the other somehow.
(Real Mark Z. Jacobson of Stanford paper for those who don't already know.)
My friend from South Georgia says “ it’s always something, it ain’t never nothin’ “ damn he’s right a lot 🤣🤠 Jerry Jeff Walker penned and sang a song about wizzing in the wind….. what a visionary man 👊
"Wizzing in the Wind" I'm sure Bob Dylan did one like that.
I suppose they could stick them upright and use them as sails to power the ships - that would reduce emissions from ships’ engines.
Another factor: larger blades mean bigger stresses on the support and foundation for the turbine. That means they will require much more massive, concrete-filled foundations = more C02 emissions.
Bigger turbine blades to produce ever more electricity is counter-intuitive considering the ones we have already produce too much to use.
Funny lot, the Net Zeroids.
A better idea - just quit wind and solar thus eliminating the need for batteries. Just because the technology exists does not mean it’s fit for the grid - put it at the end user site - oh, that’s too expensive!!
Jeff, it sounds good. But what are we going to do with all the subsidies and feed-in tariffs if we don't have wind to spend them on?
We're having a heat wave here in New England. Today is the third 33 C plus day (93 for Fahrenheit fans), with two more days like this to come. Most days I check the ISO website (that's the New England grid) to see the power projections and what the mix of power is. Yesterday was the first time I saw that ISO was estimating they had no, zero, spare power.
We've spent billions on wind power here. The beautiful New England coast is scarred with hundreds of these things. The fisheries have been degraded by this, and the windmills are a major hazard to whale populations we once claimed we were trying to save. A lot of early land windmill installations are now abandoned, with no budget anywhere to remove these eyesore hazards. Many towns like mine have had big campaigns to push home rooftop solar. Solar and wind today are producing less than 3% of our power, less than garbage and wood burning. Natural gas seems to be back in vogue, since 65% of the ISO power is coming from that. It's usually less than 20%. Of course, in the winter that would be a big problem, since our Massachusetts Governor had blocked the expansion of any new gas pipelines.
One wonders how long this farce will go on, pouring billions into "alternatives," the only effect of which seems to be to raise rates.
It's not surprising that turbine blades catch the wind. That's what they were designed for.
There was a thing in the news recently that they were cutting down balsa trees in order to provide wood for the core of the blades. Do they still use that even for the very large blades?
I do love your writing style.
It is apparent that at least some (perhaps all) of the lengthy blades are produced in Mexico, since I see those "triplets" of transport trucks (along with their requisite pilot cars with the "wide load" signs in front of and behind each of them) - and when I am close to the border in Santa Teresa NM I see what must be a bonded warehouse with a dozen or more blades awaiting transport - and I am rather amazed that those 100+ foot long trucks are able to stay on the road when the winds hit 40+ MPH sustained winds with gusts over 65MPH (which is not uncommon in the 'windy season' here in the southwest desert).
It is rather a thing of ballet-like beauty to watch those rigs make their way up into the mountaintop areas where the farms are being set up - hairpin turns and all - naturally blocking traffic for a while in Mountainaire and similar places ...
Of course, few ever mention the hundreds of large birds killed by these monstrosities - since they are, naturally, positioned in the main wind stream channels - as I understand it to kill a bald eagle in the US was a federal crime until the wonderful Mr Obama signed a law immunizing windmill operators from such trivialities...go, Barry!
With all the obvious downsides of those machines and given the dubious nature of the claims they are worth it, it is a wonder that more people are not fighting them tooth and nail. But then again, there are flat Earthers who will endlessly try to convince sane people we live on a disk with an ice wall perimeter (that's what Antarctica is, you see) and just realize that in essence, people are stupid.
Robert Bryce keeps a register of worldwide rejections of wind and solar farms and data centres, due often to local protests. The list is now quite long.
https://robertbryce.substack.com/p/the-garroting-of-big-wind?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=630873&post_id=201690254&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=false&r=2k8m2j&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email
thank you for that - most interesting (and uplifting!)
Speaking of wind turbine blades, I found this yesterday.
https://x.com/i/status/2064380556398244148
And how do you dispose of these giant blades when they become damaged or wear out? They're made of fiberglass, expensive to recycle. Take a look at the blade graveyard in Casper, Wyoming.
Also when they replace wind turbines with bigger turbines they remove the towers and turbines but leave the old concrete bases in the ground and build new ones. The concrete bases are enormous. There seems to be no obligation to "make good" when a wind farm is retired. In addition, there is a growing realisation that decommissioning and removal of off-shore windfarms is a much bigger and far more expensive job than expected. That's a big pollution job on it's own.
100 years from now, our descendants will look at our turbine and panel graveyards and ask, what the hell were they doing?
I certainly hope so.