Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

First Wind Powered Federal Building

Posted by Hemos on from the woosh-woosh-blow dept.

Roached writes "I ran across an article in our local paper about the United States' first wind powered federal building. It mentions that although the facility will have a slightly higher cost per Kilowatt Hour, they will have the long term benefit of pollution free energy at a stable price."

29 comments

  1. This is eminently sensible... by castlan · · Score: 2, Funny

    ... if you believe that the government is lead by a bunch of windbags. Sure, the abundance of hot air should lead to economies of scale leading to lower energy cost, but they are called high-priced politicians for a reason.

    And I'll bet this really burns up some fossil-fuel backed government officials.

    1. Re:This is eminently sensible... by Gravital.net · · Score: 1

      if you believe that the government is lead by a bunch of windbags

      Why do you think it's a WIND POWERED building?

      --
      Gravital.net email - Web+SSL/IMAP+SSL/POP3 25MB Quota, Only $3/month
    2. Re:This is eminently sensible... by n9hmg · · Score: 2
      For some reason, they've taken the story down,
      Not Found The requested object does not exist on this server. The link you followed is either outdated, inaccurate, or the server has been instructed not to let you have it.
      and got it back off archive.org
      Blocked Site Error.

      Per the request of the site owner,
      http://www.pressconnects.com/today/topstor ies/stories/to081302s10796.shtml
      is no longer available in the Wayback Machine. Try another request or click here to see if the page is available, live, on the Web.
      http://www.pressconnects.com/today/topstories/st ories/to081302s10796.shtml
      See the FAQs for more info and help, or contact us.
      Did it have construction details or something?
  2. First? Nah! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Congress has been powered by giant windbags for years!

    1. Re:First? Nah! by Spock+the+Baptist · · Score: 1

      Correct! And that makes D.C. the first windpowered city in the country...

      --
      "Oh drat these computers, they're so naughty and so complex, I could pinch them." --Marvin the Martian
  3. This is such a joke... by tswinzig · · Score: 2

    And these buildings are STILL only getting 0 mpg!

    --

    "And like that ... he's gone."
  4. intersting article by 216pi · · Score: 3, Informative

    there is a very intersting article from new scientist including pics about wind powered buildings..

    1. Re:intersting article by tiedyejeremy · · Score: 1

      enjoyed this article (and pictures) - thanks for posting

      --
      Anything you say will be held against you. ... "tits"
  5. broken URL by Inominate · · Score: 3, Informative
    New URL, what kind of horrid site design is this where links change that often?


    http://www.pressconnects.com/tuesday/news/stories/ ne081302s10797.shtml

  6. Increased Cost by PeekabooCaribou · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I think a slightly higher price tag is worth it. It's important to be environmentally-conscious, and it's probably hella cheaper to build alternative energy sources now that it would be to clean up our mess in the future.

    --
    "I'll say it again for the logic-impaired." -- Larry Wall.
  7. They're hiding something! by The_Guv'na · · Score: 1

    I wanna know what power company they think is about to do an Enron.

    Ali

    --
    Ph33r m3!!!
  8. Kilowatts vs. Kilowatt-hours by DavidYaw · · Score: 2, Informative
    The building now uses 500,000 kilowatts of energy per year.

    ...customers must purchase a minimum of... 200 kilowatts of power...

    Am I the only one that got really annoyed by their interchanging of kilowatt and kilowatt-hour? (For the non-electrical types: kilowatt is a measure of flow, not of total energy. Saying that a building uses 500,000 kilowatts per year is like saying that your car gets 20 miles per gallon per day. )

    1. Re:Kilowatts vs. Kilowatt-hours by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      The building now uses 500,000 kilowatts of energy per year.

      killowatt is a measure of flow, hence the per year. (i.e. 500,000 killowatt-day = 57 killowatt-hour)

      Unless I am mistaken about what a killowatt hour is I believe there is nothing wrong the that statment.

    2. Re:Kilowatts vs. Kilowatt-hours by shrikel · · Score: 1
      Well, a kilowatt-hour is 1 kilowatt for one hour. Not one kilowatt per hour. So the number of kilowatts per year makes no sense. Now if it meant 500,000 kilowatt-years, that would be a LOT of energy -- 4.3 billion kilowatt-hours! (no more need for nuclear reactors, eh?)

      If it's just 500,000 kwhs per year, that's 57 kilowatt-hours constantly for a whole year. That's 8 orders of magnitude off. ;-)

      --
      Any sufficiently simple magic can be passed off as mere advanced technology.
    3. Re:Kilowatts vs. Kilowatt-hours by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      watt = joules per sec
      kilowatt per year = joules per sec per sec

      doesn't make sense, unless you are counting the rate of change of power ;)

  9. What ever happened to fact checking? by onomatomania · · Score: 1

    The building now uses 500,000 kilowatts of energy per year.

    Dear Jennifer L. Ivan:

    A kilowatt is not a unit of energy, it is a unit of power. It's like saying "The distance from New York to Boston is 50 MPH." You probably meant to say 500,000 kilowatt-hours.

    I'm sure it's a common mistake and ordinarily I wouldn't have said anything. But the newspaper business is about all about conveying facts accurately, so I expect a higher level of editing and checking.

  10. Better than the internet! by Karma+Farmer · · Score: 1
    From the article:
    Before the Clinton administration, wind power was too expensive, Alderfer said. But since then, technological improvements to the fans made it economically feasible.
    Interesting. So, are we measuring time in terms of Presidential Adminstrations now? Or was Clinton somehow responsible for the improvements in technology?

    I think improving wind power is even better than inventing the internet.
    1. Re:Better than the internet! by Mt._Honkey · · Score: 2
      So, are we measuring time in terms of Presidential Adminstrations now?
      Yes. Time is measured by the executive branch (didn't you notice how much time slowed down in the long FDR years?). Physical laws and geologic facts are dictated by the legislative branch (as is evidenced by their energy policy of "burn lots of oil, and only oil, and we'll be fine for at least the next 50 Presidents).

      Morals and Religion are governed by the Judicial branch, but they're much lower-profile, so most Americans don't even know about them.
      --

      Don't Bogart the fish sticks
  11. It's about time... by Dannon · · Score: 2

    ...the Feds started making use of wind-power.

    After all, I understand they've got a continual excess of hot air moving around D.C.

    --
    Good judgment comes from experience.
    Experience comes from bad judgment.
  12. It moved when it went off "top stories" by Spamalamadingdong · · Score: 1
    Doing a search for "wind powered building" pulled up this URL:

    http://www.pressconnects.com/tuesday/news/stories/ ne081302s10797.shtml

    --
    Scientists restrict study to entire physical universe; creationist
    1. Re:It moved when it went off "top stories" by n9hmg · · Score: 1

      Doing a search
      What a good idea. I'd meant to do that several times, but got redirected enough that I finally lost the idea. DOH!
      Now that I can see the article, though, I'm no longer impressed. They didn't add to the supply of wind power. They just bought the silly feel-good voluntarily paying more for power so they can say they're running on wind. I was picturing one of those venturi buildings - big turbine or maybe vertical circling airfoils in the center, with grid tap for low wind days. This is not news. It's not technology - it's social masturbation.

  13. I bet costs weren't reduced elsewhere by Spamalamadingdong · · Score: 2
    Unfortunately, this looks like something that came out of the PR department rather than the engineering department. Spending $10,000 per year for power from a wind farm is one thing, but spending the same amount on the most-efficient available HVAC hardware might save money. Finding a way to day-light the building could eliminate electricity altogether for that purpose. Using ice-storage in the air-conditioning system would allow purchase of off-peak power, save a pile of dough and reduce the load on the overworked lines and transformers when they're being hit the hardest.

    Unfortunately, none of that is quite as amenable to sexy sound bites as "wind-powered building".

    --
    Scientists restrict study to entire physical universe; creationist
    1. Re:I bet costs weren't reduced elsewhere by Martin+Blank · · Score: 2

      Unfortunately, this looks like something that came out of the PR department rather than the engineering department.

      I agree. I found particularly distasteful the following paragraph:

      "Before the Clinton administration, wind power was too expensive, Alderfer said. But since then, technological improvements to the fans made it economically feasible."

      I took this to mean that technological improvements in the last few years have made this possible. How Clinton figures into this is unclear, and I tend to think that it was either used as a chronological point of reference or else someone wanted to make him look good. Take your pick depending on your view. Either way, it's still poor journalistic practice.

      --
      You can never go home again... but I guess you can shop there.
  14. Thats not a wind powered building...This is! by starlbirth · · Score: 1

    Interesting article and photo about a prototype of a building that actually generates its own wind power. link

  15. Anybody who has ever frequented... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    the Oracle campus in Redwood Shores knows that not all wind tunnels are intentionally designed. Wind turbines between the towers would do well, even when big Lar is off yachting.

  16. Chicago by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Did anyone else think of "the windy city"?

    recompile.org

    1. Re:Chicago by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      NO!

      --The crazy AC--

  17. Wind powered federal building??? by alanshot · · Score: 1

    Seems if they could put collectors IN the building, they would have enough energy from the politicians' hot air to power the rest of the city!

  18. Great! by krypt0n0mic0n · · Score: 1

    ...now if they could switch to hot air power, that would be something!

    --
    http://page33.port5.com -- Spread the paranoia.