Both links have very specific information about windmill life and generator life. You have proven your ignorance once again.
We are talking about windmills, not large plant generators which are very different. You are only linking to stupid unrelated things because you know you have been proven wrong. Not only wrong but ignorant. What a wast of time, you are simply a troll.
p>As far as proximity or someone being smart enough to do it... it doesn't sound like rocket science and I wouldn't bet against it. A laptop with a $10 RTL2832U/R820T2 dongle is enough to mess with 900MHz signals, so if someone comes up with a script then it's a good bet that a bored dipshit would find it funny to fire it up somewhere.
Funny that type of thing never seems to happen in the real world. Its not like there aren't a lot of opportunities to pull off similar life threatening hacks already, be it cars, medical devices, medical devices. etc. Or even non life threatening ones. Yet I keep hearing this talk like there are these stereotypical bored computer geeks are roving the streets with hacking gear looking to pull off this type of thing.
Considering the proximty and time required for a successful hack, the hacker would stand a high risk of being caught and charged with murder or attempted murder.
I'm not sure that's true. I don't see anything in the article saying that it takes very long to carry out, and 25 feet is well within the range of "sitting nearby at a coffee shop."
Additionally,
it is believed these attacks could be performed from one to two kilometers away, if not substantially further, using sufficient elevation and off-the-shelf radio transmission gear available to ham radio hobbyists.
Both those situations present a pretty good risk of getting caught. Only so many people in those areas at a given time would have the knowledge of the victim and the capability.
Pretty much anything is hackable if you can get your hands on it. Considering the proximty and time required for a successful hack, the hacker would stand a high risk of being caught and charged with murder or attempted murder. So if one is smart enough to do it they're probably smart enough to not even try.
Who said put them on top of sidewalks? Actually, in some place covered sidewalks would make a lot more sense, be much much much much cheaper, and keep the walkway clear. Best of all, we can do that now and not hope we have a viable solution in 30 years.
Good luck melting snow and ice at night, when buildup is greatest and then they won't generate much the next day since they are already covered. In fact, since they likely have an insulation gap from ground freezing will be worse than a normal sidewalk. Its just stupid.
Uhhg. A windmill is a pretty simple thing. Blades turn a shaft, which directly or indirectly through gears turns a generator which produces electricity.
The generator does not last forever, something that is obvious to anyone with mechanical background, and I even showed you links that refer to limited generator life in windmills. I'm not sure what you are up to, you are either ignorant beyond reproach, or just circling to try to cover you stupid contention that generators don't need replacement. Either way, you've pretty destroyed any credibility you may have had by refusal to accept facts presented to you.
Maybe you are just trolling, but I now have another conversation I can point to to show how ignorant you can be.
I'll take the evil that will not be given a pass on anything vs the evil that will be given a free pass. Only one candidate will bind both sides of congress working together to stop them, and that could be a good thing for us all.
Yea, sidewalks and other pedestrian areas seem to make a ton more sense..
NO!, None of those make any sense at all. We figured out a long time ago solar panels work better on top of things rather than under them. Preferably where they can be properly tilted and not obstructed.
Please stop being stupid. Generators take a lot of stress and wear and must be replace or get completely refurbished, which is practically the same thing. Saying they last forever is blatant ignorance.
Even the wind industry experts talk about it, here is a nice easy chart to read that shows generator life is about 11 years. This was published this year, and is from the wind industry itself.
If that is not enough, here is another from experts who support wind energy. It only takes me minutes to find and show you what should be obvious to anyone with any engineering sense;
Of course they weren't for the generators. That is EXACTLY what I was talking about, and why your initial response was misleading. The generators never last nearly that long. The most expensive part of the windmill is the generator. The blades can be very expensive and can be costly to deliver and install.
No, they don't always 'lose blades' (although many do), but the blades fail and need to be replaced. The failures are most often not allowed to become catastrophic. When inspections reveal cracks in blades beyond spec, they must be replaced. This is a common occurrence.
Solar power is completely viable almost anywhere, not just in equatorial regions and deserts. Germany makes a huge amount of power with it, and their climate is not sunny at all (look at their latitude on a globe).
Solar capacity factor in Germany is on average only about 10%. Where they really struggle is in winter months, when their power usage is actually higher, but solar is almost non-existent on many days. "viable" is a subjective term, but I wouldn't agree it makes a lot of sense in Germany. Wind is much more productive for them.
This is an area where I think autonomous vehicle actually may have the biggest impact. My fly vs drive cutoff is usually about 5 hours of driving. Below that driving wins the time vs convenience battle. If I have a car that can drive me, I''l significantly increase that time, probably to 8 hours, or even more. I could have the car drive overnight while I sleep, then no need to take a flight then rent a car, work around flight schedules, etc.
In short, fully autonomous vehicles could cut into business travel flight as well as personal flights, but it could put more cars on the road at any given time and increase road congestion. It also may breed a new type of vehicle... the sleeper car, where you have a full bed or two (or more). That might actually result in some bigger vehicles on the road.
Labor to install a traditional roof is dirt cheap. A few guys can knock out a pretty big roof in a day. Whatever Tesla is selling is going to require some underpayment or other prep as well. The labor to install the solar roof will likley be a fair amount more expensive per hour and will take a lot longer. I think if you do a regular roof and traditional solar panels, you'll come out significantly less expensive.
Modern ceramic materials in fuel pebbles are much more resistant to abrasive dusting, and simple filtering limits the amount of airborne dust that could migrate outside containment. High pressures are not required in gas reactors, they can operate near atmospheric pressure. strontium and cesium movement never were significant issues, just overblown scare tactics and they are minimized with the minimization of dusting and the use of triso particle embedment. If desired, exterior filtered enclosures can provide further containment of the dust in unlikely events, but in reality there is little danger posed by the small amount that could migrate even in a massive rupture, which really won't happen since the vessel isn't significantly pressurized. Its just a scare tactic by those that spread FUD.
Pebble movement and average mix that controls localized heating is easily rectified by increasing pebble count in a larger vessel, while new pebble design allows for much large heating ranges to be perfectly safe.
Yes, there was an experimental reactor in Germany over 40 years ago. Much was learned from it and much has been developed since. Personally I prefer a prismatic over a pebble bed design because it significantly reduces dusting, but dusting is quite manageable either way.
I'll stop using Germany as an example if you agree they are not a good example, but it seems renewable lobby like to point to Germany as the prime example. Please let me know, but I suppose you want it both ways, and just want to ignore issues when it is convenient. Meanwhile, look at the power charts for Germany and see just how intermittent solar really is.
Slashdot Mirror
Only you forgot most public areas have video cameras. You'd be surprise how quickly a suspect list can be narrowed down.
Both links have very specific information about windmill life and generator life. You have proven your ignorance once again.
We are talking about windmills, not large plant generators which are very different. You are only linking to stupid unrelated things because you know you have been proven wrong. Not only wrong but ignorant. What a wast of time, you are simply a troll.
If people are dying because of hacked devices, we'd be hearing about it.
^and why is it always done in coffee shops?
p>As far as proximity or someone being smart enough to do it... it doesn't sound like rocket science and I wouldn't bet against it. A laptop with a $10 RTL2832U/R820T2 dongle is enough to mess with 900MHz signals, so if someone comes up with a script then it's a good bet that a bored dipshit would find it funny to fire it up somewhere.
Funny that type of thing never seems to happen in the real world. Its not like there aren't a lot of opportunities to pull off similar life threatening hacks already, be it cars, medical devices, medical devices. etc. Or even non life threatening ones. Yet I keep hearing this talk like there are these stereotypical bored computer geeks are roving the streets with hacking gear looking to pull off this type of thing.
Considering the proximty and time required for a successful hack, the hacker would stand a high risk of being caught and charged with murder or attempted murder.
I'm not sure that's true. I don't see anything in the article saying that it takes very long to carry out, and 25 feet is well within the range of "sitting nearby at a coffee shop."
Additionally,
it is believed these attacks could be performed from one to two kilometers away, if not substantially further, using sufficient elevation and off-the-shelf radio transmission gear available to ham radio hobbyists.
Both those situations present a pretty good risk of getting caught. Only so many people in those areas at a given time would have the knowledge of the victim and the capability.
Pretty much anything is hackable if you can get your hands on it. Considering the proximty and time required for a successful hack, the hacker would stand a high risk of being caught and charged with murder or attempted murder. So if one is smart enough to do it they're probably smart enough to not even try.
Who said put them on top of sidewalks? Actually, in some place covered sidewalks would make a lot more sense, be much much much much cheaper, and keep the walkway clear. Best of all, we can do that now and not hope we have a viable solution in 30 years.
Good luck melting snow and ice at night, when buildup is greatest and then they won't generate much the next day since they are already covered. In fact, since they likely have an insulation gap from ground freezing will be worse than a normal sidewalk. Its just stupid.
Uhhg. A windmill is a pretty simple thing. Blades turn a shaft, which directly or indirectly through gears turns a generator which produces electricity.
The generator does not last forever, something that is obvious to anyone with mechanical background, and I even showed you links that refer to limited generator life in windmills. I'm not sure what you are up to, you are either ignorant beyond reproach, or just circling to try to cover you stupid contention that generators don't need replacement. Either way, you've pretty destroyed any credibility you may have had by refusal to accept facts presented to you.
Maybe you are just trolling, but I now have another conversation I can point to to show how ignorant you can be.
I'll take the evil that will not be given a pass on anything vs the evil that will be given a free pass. Only one candidate will bind both sides of congress working together to stop them, and that could be a good thing for us all.
It's a lot of power, way more than the panels themselves can generate.
Particularly at night when the most snow/ice buildup occurs.
Yea, sidewalks and other pedestrian areas seem to make a ton more sense. .
NO!, None of those make any sense at all. We figured out a long time ago solar panels work better on top of things rather than under them. Preferably where they can be properly tilted and not obstructed.
150 Square Feet of roadway for a cool $1 Million and nearly half of them don't work yet? Sounds like a pretty expensive road to me.
So, what exactly is the point of this little experiment anyway?
But this section of road can power a large hair dryer (when the sun is shining). So its really worth it.
Please stop being stupid. Generators take a lot of stress and wear and must be replace or get completely refurbished, which is practically the same thing. Saying they last forever is blatant ignorance.
Even the wind industry experts talk about it, here is a nice easy chart to read that shows generator life is about 11 years. This was published this year, and is from the wind industry itself.
http://www.windpowerengineerin...
If that is not enough, here is another from experts who support wind energy. It only takes me minutes to find and show you what should be obvious to anyone with any engineering sense;
http://www.ref.org.uk/press-re...
The 55 years were for pumps not generators,
Of course they weren't for the generators. That is EXACTLY what I was talking about, and why your initial response was misleading. The generators never last nearly that long. The most expensive part of the windmill is the generator. The blades can be very expensive and can be costly to deliver and install.
No, they don't always 'lose blades' (although many do), but the blades fail and need to be replaced. The failures are most often not allowed to become catastrophic. When inspections reveal cracks in blades beyond spec, they must be replaced. This is a common occurrence.
Warranty doesn't mean the generator won't be replaced....Facepalm. Link to the 55 year warranty on the generator...please
Blades fail all the time... double facepalm.
Storms have wreaked havoc on many a windmill, that factors into their average lifespan as well.
Solar doesn't always generate much during the day either...
Solar power is completely viable almost anywhere, not just in equatorial regions and deserts. Germany makes a huge amount of power with it, and their climate is not sunny at all (look at their latitude on a globe).
Solar capacity factor in Germany is on average only about 10%. Where they really struggle is in winter months, when their power usage is actually higher, but solar is almost non-existent on many days. "viable" is a subjective term, but I wouldn't agree it makes a lot of sense in Germany. Wind is much more productive for them.
This is an area where I think autonomous vehicle actually may have the biggest impact. My fly vs drive cutoff is usually about 5 hours of driving. Below that driving wins the time vs convenience battle. If I have a car that can drive me, I''l significantly increase that time, probably to 8 hours, or even more. I could have the car drive overnight while I sleep, then no need to take a flight then rent a car, work around flight schedules, etc.
In short, fully autonomous vehicles could cut into business travel flight as well as personal flights, but it could put more cars on the road at any given time and increase road congestion. It also may breed a new type of vehicle... the sleeper car, where you have a full bed or two (or more). That might actually result in some bigger vehicles on the road.
Labor to install a traditional roof is dirt cheap. A few guys can knock out a pretty big roof in a day. Whatever Tesla is selling is going to require some underpayment or other prep as well. The labor to install the solar roof will likley be a fair amount more expensive per hour and will take a lot longer. I think if you do a regular roof and traditional solar panels, you'll come out significantly less expensive.
Modern ceramic materials in fuel pebbles are much more resistant to abrasive dusting, and simple filtering limits the amount of airborne dust that could migrate outside containment. High pressures are not required in gas reactors, they can operate near atmospheric pressure. strontium and cesium movement never were significant issues, just overblown scare tactics and they are minimized with the minimization of dusting and the use of triso particle embedment. If desired, exterior filtered enclosures can provide further containment of the dust in unlikely events, but in reality there is little danger posed by the small amount that could migrate even in a massive rupture, which really won't happen since the vessel isn't significantly pressurized. Its just a scare tactic by those that spread FUD.
Pebble movement and average mix that controls localized heating is easily rectified by increasing pebble count in a larger vessel, while new pebble design allows for much large heating ranges to be perfectly safe.
Yes, there was an experimental reactor in Germany over 40 years ago. Much was learned from it and much has been developed since. Personally I prefer a prismatic over a pebble bed design because it significantly reduces dusting, but dusting is quite manageable either way.
Actually, my error, I thought I was linking to a different table that included debt and overhead in its definition.
Here is one that is clear, which shows leveled cost including all those factors plus more. (if link gives you trouble, google 'ier_lcoe_2015.pdf')
https://www.google.com/url?sa=...
As I said, existing nuclear and coal are pretty comparable. P19 shows coal, P20 shows nuclear both spanning the 60 to 100 &/mwh range.
Insurance and decommissioning and cost of debt are included in O&M costs.
Don't confuse being sued with being charged with a crime.
I'll stop using Germany as an example if you agree they are not a good example, but it seems renewable lobby like to point to Germany as the prime example. Please let me know, but I suppose you want it both ways, and just want to ignore issues when it is convenient. Meanwhile, look at the power charts for Germany and see just how intermittent solar really is.