Slashdot Mirror
Offshore Windpower To Potentially Exceed US Demand
SpuriousLogic writes to mention that a new Interior Department report suggests that wind turbines off US coastlines could supply enough electricity to meet, or exceed, the nation's current demand. While a good portion of this is easily accessible through shallow water sites, the majority of strong wind resources appear to be in deep water which represents a significant technological hurdle. "Salazar told attendees at the 25x'25 Summit in Virginia, a gathering of agriculture and energy representatives exploring ways to cut carbon dioxide emissions, that "we are only beginning to tap the potential" of offshore renewable energy. The report is a step in the Obama administration's mission to chart a course for offshore energy development, an issue that gained urgency last year amid high oil prices and chants of 'Drill, baby, drill' at the Republican National Convention."
I'm sure there are laws about international waters, but does the closest state own the rights to waters offshore?
Yep, they're called Territorial Waters. And a country's Exclusive Economic Zone ends 200 nautical miles from shore (with some exceptions).
... and that's when the C.H.U.D.'s came at me.
No.
A decent weather system churns terawatts around.
We'll only tap surface winds and they're a very small fraction of total wind energy.
thegodmovie.com - watch it
We don't need to send power from the coast to Kansas. Coastal areas are heavily populated and so the power will not need to travel very far to be used effectively. Kansas is a windy place, they will have their own land-based turbines.
These wind farms would not be in international waters. They would be on the continental shelf which are by definition national waters. We already patrol and scan these areas for evil dooers.
Electrical cables for wind farms would be more distributed and harder to disrupt than the current system of power plants.
We have the best government that money can buy.
Considering how uncommon it is for anything serious to go wrong in a nuclear power plant, I don't see how this is a hard choice.
Every undersea fiber cable has repeater boxes built into the cable every X miles to regenerate the signal. They are powered by electrical cables embedded in the line. Every undersea fiber cut also technically cuts a power line. Not to mention, the technology is pretty darn easy. You should have a GFCI outlet near your sinks and in your bathroom. They keep you from dying when you drop the blow dryer in the tub...
What are we going to do tonight Brain?
Salt water is.
Does it seem premature to declare this the savior of our energy troubles before you have even put up a single test/prototype site? What are the technical hurdles?
A company called SWAY has all of the details worked out, they just need funding for a prototype.
One of our competitors trademarked the term "hypothesis". From now on, we will call them "boneheaded ideas".
Despite the objection of Kennedy the Cape Cod wind farm is moving forward.
Its happening as you write. Just got back from a new field in Oregon. Coast farms are nothing new, and Texas is under construction. By the way, there's job growth in this sector. I think your argument is getting blown away daily.
Nobody in the industry takes a cavelier attitude towards bird and bat kills. The Altamont Wind Project and it's well-documented bird problems probably set this industry back 10 years. It was an example of a very poorly sited facility. From Wikipedia:
This idea that we in the industry discount bird and bat issues is false. The American Wind Energy Association, the leading trade association for wind developers, has sponsored a number of studies of the issue. This 132 page report from 2004 is just one resource discussing recent research: www.awea.org/pubs/documents/WEBBProceedings9.14.04%5BFinal%5D.pdf . This report from the American Academy of Science's presents a similarly scientific look at bird and bat fatalities: http://books.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=11935&page=1. The Bats and Wind Energy Cooperative (http://www.batsandwind.org/default.asp) has fascinating video of bats encountering turbines:http://www.bu.edu/cecb/wind/video/, and has detailed discussions of proper siting and operation of facilities.
The better operations come in two ways -- (1) shut down the turbines during local migratory and breeding seasons; and (2) shut the turbines down at night when bat activity is at a maximum and power prices are at a minimum. By combining these two operating parameters, the bird and bat kills can be reduced to an acceptable level, while revenues to the wind mills decrease only slightly. This is particularly true since electricity demand is at its lowest during the spring and fall -- when animals are most likely to come into contact with the turbines. It's common for fossil units to shut down during this period for maintenance too, because the revenues do not justify the costs.
As usual, things are rarely as simple as we would wish. Generating power is not environmentally friendly. It just isn't. It's all about minimizing the bad parts.