Stormy, respectfully (always), bird kills are extremely overstated and exaggerated by NIMBYs and wind farm haters, who never fail to reference the oldest big wind farm erected in Altamont Pass in California before micrositing was discovered and implemented in the industry. Tragically, that site was built in the path of a major bird migration path, which of course no one realized at the time it was planned. The old, small original turbines are the ones on that site that kill birds, and there has been a major effort underway to "repower" as we call it in the industry the site, which means that we are decomissioning (removing) the offending small turbines and replacing them with fewer, larger turbines that are being microsited and that do not kill birds. I could get into the science of why large turbines don't kill birds, but take my word for it? If not, I will happily supply some documentation.
Z, I was just reading about this turbine a few days ago. As it was designed at Delft University of Technology in the Netherlands, that gives much credibility to the machine in my eyes just to begin with. However, I have some questions about its viability outside of an extremely humid environment or an offshore setting. In a dry environment like here, what I think would be troublesome with the design is the little mechanism that throws-off moisture toward the turbine. Both are stationary fixtures, and wind direction changes often.... so, that is a point of difficulty in the design unless there's something missing from the simplistic explanations and description provided in the article and video. Perhaps this will prove-out to be a viable design for offshore... I cannot think of other extremely humid environments that are also real windy. But then, I do not know exactly how much moisture this unit needs in order to be operational. Maybe it would work in a place like Kansas. God knows it's windy there, and parts of Kansas are very humid.
I didn't see any data on what windspeeds the unit cuts-in at or operates at most effectively, or how many kW or MW (I'm going to assume that the test unit is a kW size model) it produces. That's some information I would like to know. I tried to look it up on the Delft University of Technology website, but couldn't find any information on the study.
At any rate, I'd already bookmarked this as new technology to monitor. Good post.
Respectfully accept your much more learned experience.
I was just kinda joking........in a way.
We go to lots of expense on the beach for turtle friendly windows and while I balked at first, do understand as I always seem to have nests in my yard. One year I spent 2 days trying to gather up those little babies as they spotted the tennis lights by the Catholic Church. Most died and I hated it, but also refused to understand why we had to go to such lengths and the tennis court lights were allowed. (?)
No offense taken, and I do understand how these things get hyped!
riceme
Posts : 3098 Join date : 2012-12-02 Age : 52 Location : Fox, Alaska
Respectfully accept your much more learned experience.
I was just kinda joking........in a way.
We go to lots of expense on the beach for turtle friendly windows and while I balked at first, do understand as I always seem to have nests in my yard. One year I spent 2 days trying to gather up those little babies as they spotted the tennis lights by the Catholic Church. Most died and I hated it, but also refused to understand why we had to go to such lengths and the tennis court lights were allowed. (?)
No offense taken, and I do understand how these things get hyped!
Bless ya for trying to protect your little turtles, and I'm so sorry that I'm so sorry the lil babies died. I agree... It doesn't make sense to me either that the bright lights @Catholic Church would be allowed. :/
Out in the Mojave Desert we have the Mojave desert tortoises (protected) and when Granny could still see, she used to go out and help put up the little 1-ft high fences so that they couldn't get onto the roadways and get run over. She's a good egg, that Granny of mine!
Back to the NIMBY wind industry-haters, we found out that some of them planted eight dead golden eagles strategically under wind turbines on a local wind farm. God only knows where they found or how they came across the dead eagles, but my buddy (referenced below) will be able to figure it out, I believe. They are shameless and ruthless in their endeavor to discredit the industry. A very old friend of mine, an Ornithologist whom I worked with in the early '90s was the one who discovered and proved what they'd done. I need to touch bases with him to get the status of that situation. I don't believe there has been any media coverage of what they did because they're pursuing legal actions... although there is PLENTY of media coverage about how the wind turbines on that wind farm "killed golden eagles," OF COURSE.
Riceme, that is interesting about the planted dead Eagles. It does not surprise me. The nuts who want zero development do the same kinds of things. I think you know that I am in favor of preserving nature but I am also pro-landowner rights. Anyway, those anti-all-development nuts have been known to "plant" rare and endangered plants in areas to prevent any and all development.
Rice, I am with you wondering about the upkeep when water and salt air are combined. I am a huge supporter of wind energy and while I don't have your expertise in the field, I know enough to believe it will be more common and cost-effective over the next two decades.
No one is more concerned about the critters than I but the reality is that most of the traditional forms of energy are much more harmful to wildlife and ecosystems.
riceme
Posts : 3098 Join date : 2012-12-02 Age : 52 Location : Fox, Alaska
Riceme, that is interesting about the planted dead Eagles. It does not surprise me. The nuts who want zero development do the same kinds of things. I think you know that I am in favor of preserving nature but I am also pro-landowner rights. Anyway, those anti-all-development nuts have been known to "plant" rare and endangered plants in areas to prevent any and all development.
Oh yeah, and I am all in favor of preserving nature as well which is part of the reason that I became addicted to the wind industry in the first place. The science simply does not back up the nutjobs' pseudoscience, lies and deceptions, and like I said... pretty much every time they reference bird kills they concurrently reference Altamont Pass, which was unquestionably the worst and most tragic wind farm ever built. But they never refer to the fact that it was before we knew anything about micrositing (placing turbines in optimal positions and out of migratory bird patterns) nor the fact that the industry is doing everything it can to correct the issue by repowering and micrositing Altamont Pass. It's all a bunch of propaganda.
What really worries me is that we have a rather large population of Condors in the area (over thirty), which is a delicate and endangered species. I worry that should one (or more) of them die and the nutjobs should get ahold of them before anyone else, they'll plant them at one of our wind farms. It is a very real possibility.
riceme
Posts : 3098 Join date : 2012-12-02 Age : 52 Location : Fox, Alaska
Rice, I am with you wondering about the upkeep when water and salt air are combined. I am a huge supporter of wind energy and while I don't have your expertise in the field, I know enough to believe it will be more common and cost-effective over the next two decades.
No one is more concerned about the critters than I but the reality is that most of the traditional forms of energy are much more harmful to wildlife and ecosystems.
Regarding exposure to water & salt, we actually have what we call "packages" for extreme environments: Cold Weather Extreme, Extreme Hot Weather, and Marine Weather, each of which protects the turbine from the elements and in the case of the Marine package, it also protects the environment and sealife. However, that is a very astute observation that not many people without wind expertise ever consider.
You are very correct that wind will become more common, cost AND energy effective in the coming years. As turbines become larger (larger energy output) they require a smaller windfarm footprint to produce more energy. A limiting factor the industry struggles with is transportation of these ever-increasingly large turbines or their components, but there are a lot of smart folks troubleshooting those issues and breaking down the turbine into smaller and smaller components coming out of the factory to be assembled on-site prior to erection, in which case increasing cost becomes an issue. Sadly, one of the biggest hits to the industry that came out of sequestration was to R&D.
You are once again precisely correct that most traditional forms of energy are not only far more harmful to wildlife, but also kill more wildlife. Somewhere in my files I have a neat chart showing how large buildings, cats, vehicles, powerlines, and some other things kill many thousands of times more birds per year than wind turbines do. And again I will repeat that it is the old, small wind turbines that kill birds and most of those windfarms are being repowered... if they are not currently being repowered they will soon. It is extremely rare that a modern multi-megawatt turbine ever results in a bird kill.
riceme
Posts : 3098 Join date : 2012-12-02 Age : 52 Location : Fox, Alaska
SheSurfs: You will likely enjoy this. I've been in a marathon discussion about the whole NIMBY wind-hater issue for the past several days and one of my buddies just sent this to us all who are in on the discussion:
Riceme, forgive me if you've already addressed this on the forum, but what do you think of this--people claiming the turbines are affecting their health?
Riceme, forgive me if you've already addressed this on the forum, but what do you think of this--people claiming the turbines are affecting their health?
I have not addressed that issue on this forum, but it is utter and complete bullshit that comes only from people who:
1/ already hate wind turbines and did not want them around to begin with, 2/ became disenchanted with them after one (or several) were erected in their view and they decided they thought they were "ugly" because they impeded their view, or 3/ they did not like all the local activity during construction (which is admittedly a lot... and a lot of HUGE components and heavy equipment at that).
The people who make these claims are nothing but NIMBY wind-haters who try to validate their claims with more of that pseudoscience referenced above. I mean, think of all the terrible health side effects that come from Oil & Gas, Coal & Nuclear.... it's ridiculous.
If there were any substance to ANY of it, not only would half of my town have Wind Turbine Syndrome, but every single person who has ever worked at a windfarm would as well... And they don't. None of them do. I am a member of a wind forum on which we joke about it all the time... like calling in sick: "But boss, I gots me the Wind Turbine Syndrome somethin' AWFUL!!" lol.
Home 
I agree... It doesn't make sense to me either that the bright lights @Catholic Church would be allowed. :/
