Slashdot Mirror
First US Offshore Wind Power Park In Delaware
Dekortage writes "Offshore wind power company Bluewater Wind has announced an agreement to build America's first offshore wind turbine park off the coast of Delaware. 'Each turbine [will sit on] a pole about 250 feet above the waterline... the units are to be constructed to withstand hurricane-force winds. From the shore, the park will be visible only on clear winter days, and the turbines will be nearly invisible during summer months when Rehoboth Beach fills with vacationers. Each blade on the three-blade rotor is to be 150 feet long.' The wind farm will power 50,000 homes in Delaware, using about half of its capacity."
$1280/home/year is only about $107/home/month - that's close to what my electric bill is now (although I live in Texas, not Delaware). Doesn't really sound like they have a long way to go, cost-wise.
You have an excellent point...
However, electricity has tripled in the last 20 years from 5.3 to 16~ish cents. Assuming in the next 20 years, it does the same... then 1,280 would be roughly $430 adjusted for inflation- which will be a huge bargain.
She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
For some reason people like to endlessly bitch that windmills are "eyesores", as if this in and of itself is reason not to use them. They don't look unsightly to me.
I've upped my standards, so up yours.
I've listened to a lot of conservative talk radio and the one apparent constant is the negative attitude toward wind power. I don't get it.
USA needs to be going full bore with wind power. So what if it only contributes a fraction of the power we need. Any additional source of power is good and worth it if the energy return is positive. Off-shore wind power strikes me as a great alternative to the concerns regarding land-based wind power. Concerns such as overcoming NIMBY resistance, ugly-ling up the landscape, discouraging tourism, etc.
So, what's the deal with the politiking? When you face a problem, you attack that problem on all flanks, which for this problem means investing in all forms of safe, eco-friendly energy. Sometimes that means legislating enticing incentives and direct funding by the government for solutions which cannot immediately generate profits, but would over time if initially invested.
F the politics.
Camping on quad since 1996.
That's just stupid. They're _windmills_. It would be a massive waste of money to guard them in particular over and above normal coast guard duties. The effort required to inflict any damage of real consequence is massively prohibitive. And trust me, industrial espionage? Not a problem here.
Yep, they're novel to see if you haven't before. But they're truly just really big steel towers with 3 giant blades at the top. They're building lots in Ontario these days, and there is nothing keeping anybody from getting reasonably close to them whatsoever...there's no point.
I do find it weird that they'd be building these out in the Ocean so that people can't see them. They're not unsightly, and the increased initial cost and access costs for maintenance seems counter productive. Ah well. It's a step in the right direction anyways.
No Comment.
"By your logic, we shouldn't get tax cuts for hybrid cars, or tax cuts and government rebates on solar cells in our homes, because in the end our tax dollars are paying for it..."
Don't know about the OP's logic, but by my logic you are absolutely correct. Why should you get to hold a fricken gun to my head (courtesy of the IRS) to pay for your Prius? If you want to buyt a Prius, or install solar cells on your roof, fine - and more power to you. But when you use the government to steal money from others to pay for it, well it is time for you to STFU and pay for the real costs of your toys.
You know the way everyone is supposed to pay for the real costs of using oil etc. - or does such blatant hypocrisy just not register?
You either believe in rational thought or you don't
The reason to offer rebates to prius buyers is simple. The market doesn't charge other car buyers for the pollution and other real or perceived negative effects of their choice vehicle. These negative effects are shared amongst the populace at large; the costs savings and benefits of a more polluting vehicle are enjoyed by one person alone yet everybody ends up somewhat worse off (by living with poorer air quality etc). So the government is taking a look at prius buyers and saying "Hey, your vehicle choice doesn't result is as many negatives so here is a credit."
Without such credits and rebates their would be no financial incentive not to pollute and generally create a mess of the environment as the market is unable to capture and charge you for these costs.