Slashdot Mirror
Scientists Are Developing the World's Biggest Wind Turbine With 656-Ft. Long Blades (latimes.com)
An anonymous reader writes from an LATimes article: Efforts to increase wind power mean that turbine blades are getting bigger and bigger. But a new design in the works takes the idea to levels most people can barely imagine: Blades up to 656.2 feet long -- more than two football fields. Today's longest blades are 262.5 feet. The blades at Imperial County's Ocotillo wind farm, which sends electricity to San Diego, are 173.9 feet long. "We call it the extreme scale," Eric Loth, a University of Virginia professor of mechanical and aerospace engineering, said of the planned mega-blades. "There's nothing like it." The blades would look much different look from today's wind turbines. They wouldn't face the wind but would go downwind, aligning the blades to flow with the wind instead of fighting it. And instead of a single stiff blade, each blade would be broken into segments, allowing it to be more easily fabricated. In addition, the concept would allow the blades to "morph" -- spread out when the wind is blowing lightly to capture as much power as possible.
Back-converted units are funny.
But a turbine that big will steal all the wind power then make the Earth stop spinning while also propelling it further out into a wider orbit and we'll all freeze and die!
Yeah, it's called fusion and they're still working on it.
If history has taught me anything it's that looking silly is no hindrance to starting wars.
How can I believe you when you tell me what I don't want to hear?
Fusion is about 8 and a half minutes away.
You would build it from one blade to the other.
I think wind farms are beautiful.
A government is a body of people notably ungoverned - AC
What is 0.2 of a foot? A toe of course.
Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
Could we find a way to keep this wonderful planet surface beautiful? Dig down power cables, make generators inconspicuous. And leave airspace free to birds, manned and RC aircraft.
It is hard to make a coal-fired generating plant inconspicuous. They are typically a square mile or two of blackened earth. And the garbage they spew into the air. . . Do you really want them to 'make it inconspicuous', or would you rather be able to see you major source of particulates, heavy metals, radioactive particulates (yes, on average, more than nuclear)?
In California, the wind-farms are primarily in the desert – usually in a pass between a couple of mountains. That is, they are far away, and no one ever sees them unless they drive through the desert to Vegas or whatever. Even then, it's just briefly.
Power-lines are often buried already. It's the legacy ones that remain—Replacement costs money. Those 4 kV trunk lines? They are cut through forests and such, and are kept above ground for maintenance and security purposes.
And as for birds. . . Well then:
* Domesticated cats kill more birds than wind turbines.
* Air pollution from coal-fired power plants kills more birds than wind turbines.
* Power-lines, especially those away from cities, and on moonless nights, kill far more birds than do wind turbines. Why is this issue of bird being brought up about a century too late?
* Once we stopped spraying DDT along the sides of roads, the wildlife came back. I see hawks in my urban neighborhood and along the interstates frequently now. In the 1970's, I never did.
* Oh, pigeon-poop buildup occasionally causes a short and explodes a transformer, sometimes killing some wildlife in the process.
* Last, skyscrapers kill tons of birds. Every morning at 5:00 am, every skyscraper has someone pick up the dead birds before people arrive for work. At night, they are dark. Or would you rather that they keep the lights on (using more electricity) 24/7?
The Sun has been using it for some years now...
Have you ever seen a big modern wind turbine? They spin at such low RPM that it takes multiple seconds per rotation. It makes as much sound as a stationary object of the same size, and kills birds at the same rate. Also, they are never built anywhere near people's "yards" because real estate that could be used for habitation is expensive, and buildings interfere with the wind. They're off shore, or otherwise in the middle of nowhere with no obstruction. Aesthetically, they are rather prettier than a coal power plant.
This article has a diagram of the proposed design:
http://www.sandiegouniontribun...