Slashdot Mirror
Oil Billionaire Building World's Largest Wind Farm
gadzook33 writes "CNN is reporting that oil billionaire T. Boone Pickens is planning to invest billions of dollars in what will probably be the world's largest wind farm. It will eventually generate 4 gigawatts, enough to power 1.3 million homes. The first 600 GE wind turbines are scheduled for delivery in 2010. Pickens says that each turbine will generate about $20,000 in income annually for the landowner who hosts it."
In other news... Oil companies erect large billboards to block naturally generated windpower in an effort to negate the power generated.
In all seriousness, I really hope this works out, as any effort to lessen our carbon footprint is a good move in the right direction.
Hi, I Boris. Hear fix bear, yes?
Will land owners have to spend the $20,000 per year of income on repairs?
Hell, sign me up for 5! I'll give up work, and just tend to these all day. Sure, it'll be cramped on my .20 acre plot, but hey!
Well, an apartment actually.. And I can also provide wind!
That's only 3.3 time machines worth of power.
For the big oil companies to realize the need for other types of energy, as oil is finite. Maybe next they can start on the long road to getting nuke plants approved.
when oil billionaires are getting out of the business then there might be something to this thing called peak oil.
Will there be a point on the blades where the linear velocity is 88 miles per hour?
If the angular velocity is fast enough and the blades are long enough, then yes, otherwise the flux capacitors won't work right.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
just playing devils advocate as from a environmental point of view how could this be a bad thing. First off the US needs to do something like Germany and give economic incentives, ie a fixed price on energy. This way your not competing dollar for dollar with oil and coal.
This is a capitalist country after all, nothing happens unless there is a profit to be made. My only other concern is the amount of land that these wind farms gobble up. With the growth in population especially in energy craving areas like southern california land is at a premium, which makes dedicating hundreds of acres to a wind farm also cost prohibitive. Considering no only likes high tension lines running through their neighborhood it is reasonable to think that systems like wind and solar will have to think seriously about competing with local land needs.
just a thought
What happened to my milkshake?
I wonder how much land this takes up? It's a great deal for farmers, who, if willing to sacrifice a little bit of farmable land, could make some serious extra cash. How many windmills can you get on a 1000 acre plot? 10,000 acre plot? Seems like a good deal.
Please don't bring up "what about the birds?" in regards to wind turbines. Just don't. Sure, some may fly into one and die. Some won't. It's called survival of the fittest. Eventually, evolution will program birds so they will know "wind turbine ahead = death". The ones that don't pick up on it will be dead, and thus not to worry about.
You see, if air pollution from oil/coal/whatever happens, that affects the birds too, dumb and smart.
Please DO NOT build your wind farm in the United States of America.
Let them eat OIL.
Cordially,
Kilgore Trout, ACTIVIST
P.S.: For more information about your addiction to oil, please read The Oil Drum
And this is why the guy is a billionaire.
FWIW, these two projects (the wind farm and the water system) are really the same
Slashdot needs to interview Natalie Portman.
I have a feeling this is just nameplate generation, something the story doesn't tell you. Figure actual capacity is about a third of this because of wind variability.
Dog is my co-pilot.
Yet another man with so much money that he's gone insane.
His money would be much more well spent, and given long term value, if he spent it on a nuclear power plant.
"eventually generate 4 gigawatts"
Four whole gigawatts! Man, that must be like, almost 1/4 what a typical nuclear plant generates for 10 times the price and environmental impact! What a deal! Maybe for his next project he can invest billions in a solar farm of 50 square miles to generate a 500 kilowatts!! I love green technology. It goes so well with the moldy green brains that push to advance it in the face of cleaner more efficient technology that's existed for over 50 years.
I wonder how this genius became a billionaire. No, don't tell me, let me guess... stock trader or corporate raider? Maybe a lawyer or politician?
If a 1000 MW plant produces 1000 MW 7/24 for a year, it would produce a little under 9 GWHr of energy. This is at least the second article I have read on this project, and I can't find out what percentage of the 9 GWHr is expected to be produced each year.
But they will never be 100% reliable. Like any other machine, all will break, sooner or later, and they all can fail in catastrophic ways. Airplanes, cars, trains, TVs, bycicles... all fail, even simple things like pulleys.
If they would catch fire all days, it would be a problem, and you can be sure they would be redesigned or not used at all. So please stop making a big issue from a sub 1% thing.
I live close to the Waymart Wind Farm. Just a few notes:
I totally support wind energy and think the turbines have done good for the community.
They make noise. Even at 1/2 mile away, low whooshing sounds are clearly audible, especially at 4AM.
They are HUGE. Pictures don't do it justice. By the time your next to one, it's an awesome site.
The community here gets jobs and money from them. The government pays 1.8 cents per kilowatt hour for wind energy, netting the community here $150,000 a year. Also Florida Power and Electric pays about 12 employees here to service them. I've known a few that have worked on the turbines, they have some amazing pictures of being on top.
They significantly interfere with off-air television. I work for the cable company, and we had to build a giant antenna in another site because our first giant antenna was to close to the windmills. Local houses have trouble getting off-air signals, digital HD included.
They are a tourist attraction. The first few years they existed here, many people tried to sneak onto the private land to snap pictures etc..
I read a great article in Fast Company magazine the other day about this same thing. The article there is much more candid if you ask me, here's the online version:
http://www.fastcompany.com/magazine/126/a-mighty-wind.html
Interesting to note that I'll RTFA if it comes to my door in paper format but I would care less about this online.
Reviewing just the first hour of video games.
He is probably running out of oil.. Must be it.. Need to invest in something else..
I know not all places are good for wind turbines, but wouldn't it be better to put them closer to where the energy is needed instead of having one big farm? Distribution would be cheaper and more efficient. Maintenance might not be easier to organize, but you have to have maintenance for your distribution lines anyway.
is typically not prime agricultural land. THerefore farmers will often not be giving up their best lands for this anyway.
Engineering is the art of compromise.
I can't help but wonder how much of an affect we will have on climate change once we start sapping energy from the wind currents on a massive scale.
Can someone offer some specifics here? By my figuring, he's planning on eventually having 2,400 of these turbines. The 2,400 turbines are supposed to supply 1.3 million homes. Assuming an average of $200 per home per month that puts a single turbine's earnings at $1.3 million per year and they are paying $20,000 in "royalies" (what I would call a land lease). It seems like he is looking forward to a massive profit.
Can a single turbine really produce $1.3 million worth of electricity per year?
you've never heard of spontaneous combustion of human beings?
now you know the cause....
every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
Wind Turbines can be rather loud as well, especially at night.
It only takes one man to change the Wisdom of the Crowd to Tyranny of the Masses.
If we accept that the actions of human beings can impact the climate, and we accept the first law of thermodynamics, what impact will wind farms have on the environment? Imagine if every home and factory in the U.S. were powered by wind farms. How much energy would these farms be pulling out of the wind? How would that impact weather patterns? Something I've always wondered about. As we jump off fossil fuels and move on to other sources of energy I sure hope someone thinks ahead this time.
Be Safe! Sleep with a Marine. Semper Fi!
How many homes exactly ARE there in the United States? I always see "can power x number of homes", but it doesn't tell me out of how many.
{{citation needed}}
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.
I've got some bad news - the US government really shouldn't be finding new ways to give out money. They've gotten so good at it that they're printing more every day just to stay afloat. Wonder why oil is so expensive? It's because it is priced in dollars, and dollars are worth far less today than they were 8 years ago. Sure, it's gone up in value relative to more stable currencies, but about half of the runup is just the devaluation of the dollar.
Right now regulatory pressures are balancing part of the equation, and any US based endeavors are partially insulated from the weak dollar. Now is the time to get these things up and running, if ever. Many things were tried in the 70s, but they just weren't good enough to be sustainable when oil dropped back down to $20/bbl. While we may or may not see prices fall on oil, now is the time to make these thing profitable for the long haul. (Back in the 70s, oil prices were never going to go back down either, btw).
Is it just my observation, or are there way too many stupid people in the world?
This could definitely have an adverse impact on the environment by changing wind patterns thus inducing climate change causing the melting of glacial ice, flooding and making Florida disappear. I recommend we resume the consumption of hydro carbons until more research has been done.
Apparently the combination of tall buildings, glass, and bright light is pretty deadly for birds. The bright lights on the tall buildings (like those over 40 stories) can really confuse the birds when they are migrating. The birds are used to using visual cues from the stars and moon to navigate, and according to the article can end up crashing into the building at night since they are attracted by the light, or get confused into circling the building until they are exhausted. Then in the morning, when they try to leave the city, the glass of the building reflects the sky and the birds fly into the glass.
Most of the birds are small songbirds, which are easily swept up by custodial staff, and it happens at many buildings, so it's not so noticeable for pedestrians, but it's a big enough problem that the buildings (according to the article) have started dimming their lights to avoid killing more birds.
So if you want to argue against windmills on the bird issue, then you should be prepared to argue against skyscrapers as well.
That's very true, and a real problem with wind. You get maybe 25-30% of nameplate capacity on average, and that's in a good wind area. Hydroelectric plants have similar numbers, but it's seasonal and there's some predictability. Solar plants have trouble hitting 25%, but at least you know when you're going to get power, and that peak output coincides with peak air conditioning load.
Nuclear plants run above 80%. So can gas turbines, but the fuel costs get you if you run them that hard, so they're mostly used for peaking. Coal plants are a bit lower; more maintenance. Oil-fired plants work OK, but are now too expensive to operate much.
The big problem now is that there is not enough grid to take this wind generated power East to Fort Worth, Dallas, and Houston. Or West or North.
Only on a geek board would someone actually do the math.
/. has already done the math in their head.
Congratulations, sir, you are one step away from being a slashdotter of the highest order.
A True and Noble Slashdotter of the Highest Order would know that anyone worthy to read
I live in Stillwater near some of his turbines. These things are HUGE. One oversised load simi can only cary 1 blade. To bad that most of the power will go to Boone Pickens State(aka. Oklahoma State University). Boone usually ends up either giving money to the school of funding a project that his wife tells him too. Wich isn't really a bad thing, she usually has good ideas.
Something that is overlooked in nearly all of the "Green" innovations is the complete life cycle of the device. Some others have touched on maintenance as a factor, or the affect on the turbine's direct surroundings. What we've failed to consider is the energy expended to manufacture and assemble the enormous composite blades, the gearboxes, and the columns. We must also factor in energy used transporting the building materials and completed components to the installation site. Once the turbines have been installed, they require maintenance, and likely will require replacement gearboxes on occasion. Finally, when they have faithfully served for their design life, we will expend still more energy to demolish the turbines and recycle the materials where possible.
I'm thinking of 600 or more of these wind turbines being built, and the amount of energy that will be consumed in their manufacture. Do they even pay for themselves over their lifetime of use?
The largest nuclear power plant in the united states is Palo Verde which provides a maximum of 3.8GW.
The largest plant in the world is the
Kashiwazaki-Kariwa nuclear power plant in Japan which has a peak theoretical output of 8.2GW, but is currently offline because of damage caused by an earthquake.
So 4GW of power would be significant.
We have the best government that money can buy.
In the newspaper, recently, farmers in Western Ohio are being paid about that much annually so companies can take a piece of their land and put a windmill there. There's also a giant windmill in the middle of Downtown Cleveland...
This is a signature. Bow to me.
Or it could be just one last ego-polishing exercise. It seems to be a rather common trend that when some billionaire get near the end of their time down here, they get in a mood to blow the majority of it on such a project that says "look at how great I am!" It's not even a new phenomenon, that's how we got the Nobel prize after all.
Exactly what motivates it, I wouldn't know. Maybe it's an attempt at a last deal with (or against) the devil. You know, one last big grab for saint points, to somehow balance whatever else they have on their conscience. Maybe some just want to be remembered, so they have to attach their name to _something_. Some probably are just sociopathic enough to rather spend the money fast on something that gets them personally attention, than leave it to some heirs they never really cared about. Or whatever. Whatever the reasons, it happens.
So now look at T. Boone Pickens. He's 80. Whether oil has peaked or not, it's not like he'll actually live until he sees the bad part of it. In the short run, the oil prices going up, just means profits going up for the middlemen. It's not like there's a real alternative to using oil yet, consumption is still going up, and (assuming a similar profit margin) selling a tank gas at higher price just means more profit. Profits in the oil business may peak, maybe even soon-ish, but it's not like he's going to go broke before he dies.
No, that's not the motivation. He's pretty much the usual trolling for attention at the end. He's good to attach his name to something which to a very large number of people says, "OMG, he's a saint!"
What were the real choices? Charity? Always a choice, but it's not like he can compete with Gates or Warren Buffett. The latter alone announced giving $31 billion to charity. (In 5% increments each year. At the age of 75. Seeing a pattern yet?) Pickens doesn't even _have_ that much total. So while he'd whitewash his name a lot, it would still be lost in the honourable mentions. He'd probably just manage to edge out the over 2 billion pledged by Barron Hilton. (At age 80, pleadges 97% of his fortune to charity. Hmm.)
And even Hilton's donation only made headlines because he's essentially shafting the well known Paris Hilton out of the inheritance. If the gal hadn't been so well known, even if largely for the wrong reasons, you would have barely heard about it, in a footnote.
Enter the carbon cultists. Hmm, noone has done horribly much for those lately. There's a lot more publicity to be gained by doing something spectacular for those, than from going the charity route.
A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
If only we had windmills that could pull excessive CO2 and other Greenhouse gases out of the air quickly and energy efficiently.
--
make install -not war
Only four gigawatts? That's pretty slim pickens for a system that size.
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
Just out of curiosity, does anyone know if the DOE has generated a 'National Renewable Resources map'? Something that tells people where solar farms/wind farms/wave farms etc would most effectively be placed? Wouldn't the next logical step be incentives to build these systems in those locations? I know here in Michigan it's cloudy for 8 months of the year, so solar is out and wind is in (actually coal is in, thats the problem). And as far as 'the grid' is concerned, wouldn't it make sense to start plopping a 'wind turbine' on each new power transmission 'pole' (those huge ones that are giant steel structures carrying like 12+ cables). It seems you could directly feed the grid if an efficient transformer could be made.
this is only a cost of $770 per house!!
Can this be!?!?!?! That a $1000 per house investment gets a zero carbon wind power!
If this is so, then what the heck are they waiting for, this should have been done ages ago.
I am always doing that which I can not do, in order that I may learn how to do it. - Pablo Picasso
Ummm...
GP was clearly thinking about transportation. Cars, in particular, I'd bet. That's why we need easy ways to store and transmit energy.
Do the Japanese have cars that run on energy stored in superconducting loops? I can pretty safely say that the answer there is no.
Also, I'm sure that Japan imports oil. But if it consumes less than the US, perhaps it's because they live in pedestrian-friendly cities with mass transit (smart) and we live in sprawling strip-mall-and-highway wastelands?
In reading a few threads it is pretty obvious most posters have never seen a modern wind farm. SO here are some things that cut across threads:
1) Land area. What will the impact be on farmable land? Probably far less than strip mining or oil and gas. Strip mines in my part of the world are huge. And while they are operating the land can not be used and they require a huge support infrastructure. I have also seen heavily developed oil and gas fields. These too have enormous impacts on agriculture and wildlife due to the large amount of infrastructure they need (roads, compressor stations, pipelines, electrical plants etc.). Since most wind farms are far above ground they are often far less intrusive.
2) Related to the above, environmental impacts. Instead of beating a dead horse, see the point above.
3) Why can't wind power make it without huge subsidies? Why can't the free market solve the problem? Because it is not a free market. You have the Bush/Cheney energy "plan" shoveling subsidies to oil and gas companies, this distorts the market. But even if you removed the subsidies you wouldn't have a free market since a large chunk of the world's oil supply is controlled by a corrupt cartel called OPEC. When one group can manipulate supply and demand like OPEC can, free market principles cannot operate at all. It is a horrible situation, but the only way to level the the playing field for alternative energy sources is via subsidies.
Anyway, HTH.
putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
He says: "the wind power is - you know, it's clean, it's renewable. It's - you know, it's everything you want"
guys, wind farms contribute to desertification, by decreasing the power of the wind that would otherwise spread humidity further.
and they are ugly
my 2c.
i think that fellow might be referring more to the supercapacitors, not superconductors.
still not mass producable enough while being energy dense enough as far as I've read. If this was the case in Japan, i'm sure someone with enough jingo power would have updated the wikipedia entry.
In case i made an ass of u and me; As for superconductors, theoretical superconductor "flywheels" for current have been suggested but i'm not finding anything mentioning work outside of labs with low-temp superconductors.
Ice Cream has no bones.
* Hawaii, because including shipping is cheaper than coal
* Alaska, because it is cheap due to shipping differential
* Florida & Mississippi to a lesser extent
* Virginia on up the Atlantic Coast all the way to Maine generated between 5% and 36%+ of their electricity from oil at least one year within the past ten. Why? I'm not entirely sure, but I do know that the numbers are coming down because new/larger coal plants, nuclear capacity expansions, and a small amount of increased biomass and wind energy have displaced oil.
Still, none of that is Texas, which is about 37% coal in 2007 (39% in 1999), 13% nuclear in 2007 (10% nuclear in 1999), and 4% renewable (1% in 1999), the remainder of which is natural gas. What will wind replace? My bet is some coal but even more natural gas. That's OK -- replacing any coal is a good deal at this point.
Support a few technologists in Washington.
That's enough to power 3 time flux capacitors!
m
I want a few in MY backyard!
The far left and many environmentalists will fight this tooth and nail.
First, it is proposed by a capitalist, hence it "must" be evil. There is far to much conspiracy thinking in those camps.
Second, it is proposed by an oil billionaire.
Now for the saner reasons. (Unfortunately I have talked with several people that will completely distrust it based on the first two points).
The first sane problem is that he is likely going to use the typical pinwheel windmill. Those things slice through birds at 200 mph, since the birds don't know to avoid them. GE should just buy out that company that uses a impeller style windmill that looks turned on its side. These appear solid to birds so they avoid them. Secondly, they don't spin faster than the wind.
The next big big problem is that these things are going to get trashed by tornadoes in that area and the flying blade pieces will likely kill some people. We are talking tornado alley here.
Next big problem is that they can't handle high wind speed and will often be switched off and the blades locked in place. Again, GE needs to buy that impeller design lock, stock, and barrel. They can handle twice the windspeed and only need locked down at above 100 mph wind.
Next, people will complain about all the electric fields, and there will be some health study, that will result in some class action lawsuit.
The only good thing going for it is that you have a billionaire with enough money to make it happen even with the lawsuits.
Graphite?
Really? After taking into account the cooling systems and safety shut offs and the mechanisms and processes for installing and removing fuel rods?
Forgive me, but I think you're just making shit up.
Have we passed the oil peak? Lets be real people, when an oil billionaire starts building wind farms theres something they're not telling us.
interesting that he refuses to put it on his ranch because they are too UGLY.
. . . for a nuclear plant, and a coal plant, and for gas a oil fueled plant.
Take into account the full effects of the pipelines and/or rail cars required to bring the fuel to the site, and to dispose of ashes or depleted fuel rods.
Include full costs for the health and environmental effects of uranium mining.
Include a complete report on how the waste heat from nuclear plant will effect the river that cools it.
Note the adverse political consequences that oil money has on the politics of the supplying nations.
Oh, wait, I forgot! Existing power plants are totally exempt from this sort of analysis, because they're made of cupcakes and sunshine.
. . . right wing trolls who are deeply offended by anything vaguely new and unfamiliar.
Really. Just scroll up the page.
There were several examples of blades (I would guess the blades were ~70ft long, each, three blades per turbine) sheared off due to excessive winds. Splintered fiberglass across the desert. Never got to see one go in person, though. That would have been cool.
I thought they were immensely cool, from a geek standpoint. Obviously modern technology juxtaposed with the harsh, ageless desert. Pictures of Guadalupe National Park available at the park center had the windmills photoshopped out. I found this a bit odd, but people's aesthetics differ. [shrug]
You know what the kicker was? I was there to perform geologic mapping for the development of oil reservoir models. Turns out the geology of the place is some of the finest examples of an exhumed turbidite (underwater landslide) complex in the world, and these turbidites make mighty fine oil...
sig sig sig siggy sig
...how much 1.21 gigawatts is! :D
Buanzo Consulting - 15 Years of GNU/Linux experience, for you.
lube up our asses...
Meanwhile, gas is around $4.59 in some palaces... umm, places in the US...
Previously: "Linux... Toward the Sunrise..." Now: "Linux... Toward the-- No, now, part of Every Sunrise"
Prove this. I love your FUD without anything to back this up. Shit posters like you are why people don't read the comments. At least provide examples for people to discuss; what you posted did nothing for the discussion. This is a prime example of thread shitting. Good job.
moox. for a new generation.
I couldn't find them in english, only in Dutch. The only english article I can find with some more Googling is http://www.nowap.co.uk/docs/windnoise.pdf
PS: next time, you might want to be a little more decent in your comments. I'm sorry you are frustrated, but there is no reason to take that out on me or anyone else here.
It only takes one man to change the Wisdom of the Crowd to Tyranny of the Masses.
if one butterfly's wings flapping can change the earths weather I wonder what harvesting 3.8 GW of power from the wind will do.
still it's not a bad way to suppliment our supply. wind is cheap to setup and run and does produce a large amount of power. it also makes very good us of land as they typically farm cattle etc under the turbines.
If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
The guy made a 3GW reactor in a cave, out of scrap parts!
I mod down anyone who says "I will be modded down for this", regardless of the rest of their comment
You can pretty much REPLACE YOUR CAR with a longtail.
I would recommend getting on it NOW, so by the time everyone else is begging for one, you'll already have one and will be "a senior statesman" for your local group for your years of experience.
RS
Shoes for Industry. Shoes for the Dead.
And you are an ignorant twit. When you learn the difference between profit and profit margin you can come back. Of course energy companies make large profits, the deal in really large volume. But their profit margins are either in line with similarly capitalized operations or a little below.
Learn...
The value of a stock depends on many things, the most important of which are these:
1. The value of the assets under the control of the corporation. I.e. the breakup value.
2. The cash flow of the business.
3. The profit margin, i.e. the basic rate of return on the invested money. Even though most profits are reinvested, retained or used to buy back stock because of the tax implications of dividends, investors still win because those other activities tend to increase the stock price.
4. Intangibles such as good will.
Remember that a corporation isn't a job program, it doesn't exist to serve the public, it exists to serve the shareholders. If the shareholders aren't happy they sell their shares, replace the board, sell off the corporation, etc.
Now lets have a quick pop quiz to see if you have actually learned anything.
Q1. If an energy company were to forsake profits to make Democrats happy, i.e. lower profits than similar investments, can you tell me what would happen to it's stock price?
Q2. Would the reaction be economically 'correct'?
Q3. Bonus Question. Search out the actual costs associated with a gallon of gas and determine what rank oil company profits come in at when you rank the following costs in their correct order:
1. Crude oil
2. Refining
3. Taxes (amortized corporate taxes + gas taxes)
4. Distribution
5. Dealer markup
6. Oil Company profit
7. Advertising
8. Exploration
9. Research and Development
Democrat delenda est
"Capitalism isn't 'evil' - it simply puts money above everything."
... it wouldn't have happened."
This is like spouting "Money is the root of all evil" without bothering to ask what the root of money is. Pure stupidity on your part. Money is simply productivity in paper form. I work and get pieces of paper that say I have been productive, and exchange those pieces of paper for others' productivity.
"The point is - if it wasn't for
And you have shown that... how? Maybe whatever you are calling "progress" wouldn't have happened as fast as it has by government manipulation, but with capitalism at least you are not violating everyone's rights in the process.
There is a correct economic incentive, and it is called "Carbon Tax".
Or to put it another way, there is a quantifiable social cost to allowing a private entity to pollute atmosphere with another ton of CO2, and we're all effectively subsidising fossil fuels by turning the blind eye. Conveniently, since the root problem (fossil carbon) only comes from a few sources in each nation, it will be very efficient to collect the tax at the point where the fossil fuel it is mined or imported. The market is free to adjust properly (investing more in the most effective alternatives, or continuing unabated when the utility is worth the expense). Problem solved.
Except that the real problem is apparently politics. So instead expect an emissions trading scheme that is so complicated that you need a degree just to figure out (without comparing lobbyist dollars) which industries really benefit (hint: if you had already exhaustively maximised your efficiency back in the 90s, you'll have to buy credits from someone who hadn't, regardless of the true ratio of utility and social cost.. just like corn subsidies.)
We'll make a complex, non-regulated, non-transparent system where anyone who puts up a windmill will have to pay someone in another country to cut down a tree, thus preserving the net amount of wind in the system. Hollywood and Al Gore will love it, and they'll rush to make themselves "wind neutral" -- which in Al Gore's case will be great, since he can actually sell a whole bunch of wind offsets.
A portion of all wind offsets sales will be reserved to defend the patent lawsuit from the Catholic Church, who will complain they got to this indulgences idea a few centuries before anyone else did.
Help poke pirates in the eyepatch, arr.
And I would like to do it myself. $12,000 will buy you a backyard windmill capable of powering an average sized home. Add a shed full of batteries for the times when the wind isn't blowing and you'll be set. Maybe throw some solar panels on the roof for good measure. Now get me one of those Tesla sedans that are supposed to be coming soon, and charge it from my windmill. Problems solved.
This is just silly.
(1) Roll up your clothes in your backpack as if you're travelling (don't fold). Less/no wrinkles.
(2) Keep your dress shoes at work under your desk, bring fresh socks.
(3) Keep a small towel at work for your shower.
There's no excuse in clothing not to cycle to work. If you have to wear a suit, you might have a point, but a polo shirt and pants don't suffer in a backpack.
In fact, they are being pushed by the Rockefellers to split the company into old and new, but the current CEO is fighting that.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
yea this is great and all, but screw the big energy companies, you see they don't care for or against the environment, its about money and personal survival. - same reason why most people want to save the environment.
Self-sufficient homes, cares "pod" like situations truly is the best situation for mankind.
Boone Pickens is probably best known as a prominent peak oil nut that the doomers like to cite -- he's probably mentioned more than anyone else except for Matthew "Fuzzy Logic" Simmons. Perhaps his best claim to fame is repeatedly predicting wrong dates for peak oil and then shifting them back when they pass by without notice. Of course, his support of the Swift Boat Vets has to rank a close second.
As an aside, the farm that's currently being built is going to be starting out at 1GW. So is the London Array, whose largest investor is Shell. Ultimately, this one will get bigger, though.
"She was out of her depth in a shallow pool." -- Peggy Noonan on Sarah Palin
We have CNBC on at the office during the day (I'm a financial Planner) to see what the talking heads are going nuts about. They had Mister Pickens on, who said he had a solution to use natural gas to power everyone's car. He did not detail that solution at all. I call bullshit. This guy is up to something. While it may help the environment somewhat, I know he's got an angle he's working. Is he *really* giving the people what they want, or is he just another scumbag? Yes, I'm cynical, but I would like /.'er input so that I'm not ignorant too.
-
That'll be more than enough for me to power my time-traveling DeLorean, which only needs 1.21 gigawatts.....
Now I can use the plutonium for other fun projects!
Knowing Google's lust for data collection, the Soviet Union is still alive and well inside the psyche of Sergey Brin....
swords to plowshares or GTFO
However, there is a point in which you're going to need excuses. Arbitrary/speculative pricing does not seem to carry well outside of Wall Street. Doubly so if it implements something that resists reversal and is started by businesses. Thus the need for anti-gouging laws arises as a response. The only thing that will convince them is to just let them have their way. This includes closing loopholes as they appear.
Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
so, it will generate $20,000 for the landowner.
i wonder what the landowner will have to pay for the insurance on each turbine.
my guess would be $21,000.
-I only code in BASIC.-
The oil companies aren't arbitrarily charging $4 a gallon for gasoline
They're just incentivizing speculation while being disconnected from feeling the effects. It's easy to fill up your tank if your work involves products you sell but never touch or use.
that's what people are willing to pay
The practicality of the available choices drives willingness. When those are limited by the policies of business(which will try to avoid regulation), it is rational to develop an effective countermeasure. That means anti-gouging laws will pass at some time. That means there will be an investigation that will reject the rest of them just to get it out of the way. Like it or not, price controls will come back smarter, meaner, and more resistant to loopholes. Save for a believable, understandable and an empathetic explanation, that is what will happen at some point. Work honestly with them, not just with Schumpeter.
It would be better to remove regulation that is driving it up. Also, it is easier to make a case for free trade on energy than it is for produced goods. However, that means one must decouple trade of energy agreements from trade of goods/services agreements.
Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
Even in a country like India, which has really shoddy tax structure for things electrical and electronic, an electric scooter costs less than 800$. http://www.induselectrans.com/ I suspect with tax breaks, such a bike would cost only 500$ in the US, all inclusive! Of course you can't pedal some of the versions
My Aurora : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o91ZsGwJYyg
FB : https://www.facebook.com/TanveersPhotography
Where I live the climate is temperate only 8 month out of 12. 2 months it is so hot that you sweat just thinking of it, and 2 months it is cold, and sometimes downright "artic" like (I recorded during 3 days 3 years ago -35 Celsius, an albeit very low temp, but -14 Celsius is more to the norm every year), it is mountainous (15 km commute, which I think is roughly 9 to 10 miles). But for this, there is , get this, *GETTING A CHANGE WITH YOU* and *TAKING A DAMN SHOWER*. Most of the firm here around, there is a shower. And you have to be presentable at work, not when you come immediately within the second after you arrive.
But even if you did not have facilities to shower, if you live in the US, there are some months where the climate will be temperate or do-able with Bike. That would go already a long way toward consumming oil for a short 10 miles commute.
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
If wind farms actually do produce enough energy then I see politicians cashing in on it and forcing everyone to ear hats with propellers on top. But they could be a good thing as you would need to run to generate enough electricity to operate your computer that you are wearing built into your clothes. Running will keep you fit and a visor will enable you to operate your machine while running. A built in navigatiion system will stop you bumping into things. Fat people will obviously not run fast and become computer illiterate, but will compensate by having more clothing therefore bigger computers which will take over their lives. When it happens remember you read it here first.
It simply cannot be true. Just two weeks ago the plan for a huge german off-shore windfarm system collapsed after Shell announced they are quitting to spare money for traditional oil drilling. Now that oild prices are so high it makes no fiscal sense to invest in anything but deep drilling, oil shale conversion and the new positive pressure method for natural gas mining.
Companies and billionaires couldn't care less about the environment, they are putting money where maximum profit is. Wind power is only marinally profitable even with state subsidies.
Otherwise, the USA is a wrong place for wind turbines. You have those tornados that sent Alice to Wonderland and they fell windwheels like a chainsaw. Maybe its OK in California, where is the sun always shines, but the rest of CONUS is not calm enough for those huge windmills.
bird
... but in europe we have buses in villages with less than 8000 inhabitants that go every 15 minutes im both directions.
Excellent points, all. It's for this reason Christians are educated that it's all His money, and not Mine, that we can help people once we make some.
That's the soft, wonderful edge of capitalism: when there's abundance, the poor/disabled/unfortunate are funded. The two sides of capitalism permit us the desire to make new products/services and help the society at the same time. In Christian countries...even vaguely Christian countries, this makes for a LOT of coverage for folks that don't have a lot. Notice how many hospitals in your town have religious names; I've never seen an atheist hospital...
Yet another reason not to hate Christians, or capitalism, yet people do.
Wouldn't that be Congress?
Last night I played a blank tape at full volume. The mime next door went nuts.
maps.google.com - have fun.
It might be a little faster if you download Google Earth, but that corrupted my virus infected Windows installation.
Good for him, although it enforces the expression the rich get richer...
I knew wind and solar sources are the way to go for our future...
i just wished someone else would have stepped up (Mr.Gates ahumm)
If we keep our oil fiend overlords to now tell us that electricity is going up 10 cents
a kilowatt because demands elsewhere are going up, i will scream.
Did we not learn with the oil industry that we must not let someone like THEM
have the control. crap is all I can say....
The more things change, the more they stay the same.
"Do you suggest that the plant I work at move closer to me, or that the town I live in move closer to it?"
If REASONABLE PEOPLE seized control of our society, this would happen. Fortunately for YOU, there seems to be a shortage of REASON in the CONTROL SECTOR.
Where I live in California, Public transportation is about as accessible as the interstate highway for pedestrians. More of an illustration that one should use a car than an actual viable transportation method. When my car broke, my commute averaged six hours per day. But only when every connection went like clockwork. If I stayed a half-hour late at work, the ride home was about four-and-a-half hours. Or more. There are a couple of BART stations (Pittsburg, Daly City) that would be EXCELLENT LOCATIONS for wind turbines, BTW.
The cost of that cleanup, of course, will be borne by taxpayers, not industry.
Secretly, the windmills are going to drill for oil in people's yards.
I read TFA and was perplexed by the question of "ugliness" of the wind turbines. I've been by the wind farm in Weatherford, Oklahoma and I don't think the towers look ugly at all. I would be happy to have them on my land, especially if they were generating income. They are certainly better looking than oil grasshoppers and their associated storage tanks.
Proverbs 21:19
Loaded with giant propellers for wind turbines. It was the coolest freight train ever.
Let's see, that's enough to power 1.8099 DeLorian time machines!
I remember this argument in a solar power technology article here on slashdot. Yes the distribution of the power generation does make it a harder target but something about this sort of privately funded energy investment screams target, but then if you think about it, it is the more secure system! I really like it!
...on every turbine in a noble effort to save the boidies.
It's not even correlation. (What ARE they teaching in schools these days). Look at your list and you'll find that these are the wealthy nations, not the "socialist health care nations"
Individuals in wealthier societies are more able to spend resources on reducing things like infant mortality (sometimes via the above-mentioned heath care, sometimes via private insurance, sometimes via direct payments). In addition, people in these wealthier societies are more likely to be well nourished, knowledgeable about things like prenatal care, and in general healthier.
you're single and live in your parents' basement?
I go to the grocery store once a week to buy food for my family: myself, wife and two-year-old daughter. I buy about $180 worth of groceries, usually enough to completely fill a shopping cart, including the "under the cart" space. There's no way that amount of groceries is going to fit on a bike "cart"
If you weren't an impoverished hippie you'd have a water tower, rain catching system and distillation facility in your own back yard. Maybe if you get rid of the mari-juana crop and broken down volkswagen bus you'll have space for all those things. Also I'm researching air filtration systems and more resilient crops that can grow on my property, not that I believe in any of this human-induced global warming nonsense, but just to be safe. I've been considering stockpiling fuel for my SUV but there are some shelf life and safety issues, I may be forced to convert it to run on an alternative fuel such as liquefied coal, but I'm saving that as a last resort. It's your responsibility to secure your own resources dammit!
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel