SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the windmills-not-just-for-tilting-anymore dept.
Diane Cardwell reports at the NYT that once the next generation of larger, taller turbines in development hits the market, all 50 states could become wind energy producers and the bigger machines — reaching as high as 460 feet — could eventually make faster winds at higher altitudes an economical source of electricity. “We believe very much the central role of wind in meeting our climate challenges, and we’re very committed in this direction,” says Ernest Moniz, the secretary of energy. “It’s going to require being able to take advantage of a broader set of resources,” and it will give wind power a “bigger footprint,” onshore and off.
Energy officials and executives are pushing toward machinery that would reach 360 to 460 feet high. That would increase the wind development potential in an additional 700,000 square miles — more than a fifth of the United States — bringing the total area to 1.8 million square miles. The potential expansion would affect areas where wind farms already exist and bring areas into the market. The main regions where height would increase potential wind production include the Southeast, Northeast, states around the Ohio River valley and the Great Lakes, and parts of the interior West and Pacific Northwest. In all, the DOE report "Enabling Wind Power Nationwide" says, land-based and offshore wind could produce 16,150 gigawatts of electricity a year, more than 10 times the country’s consumption (PDF). Wind installations now account for 65 gigawatts, just under 5 percent of national demand. “We’ve proven out as an industry in Europe, with a fair number of turbines in Europe at 120 meters,” says Tom Kiernan. “By going to 100 or 110 meters, we can open up all 50 states."
(Score: 4, Insightful) by FatPhil on Thursday May 21 2015, @12:55PM
They are *lifting* water 2250' to the top (costing lots of energy, E = mgh), evaporating it (presumably mostly for free), and then reaping energy from the heavier moist air falling exactly the same height that the water was lifted, whilst at the same time fighting against the convective heating of the air by the sun shining on the tower. So the only posssible gain is that of the air also falling, not the water. They then somehow have to separate off the water for re-use. If that works as a viable source of energy, I'll get my local marzipan shop to make me a hat to eat.
If the guy says "There's nothing in this tower that is new, magic wizardry, unproven science or unproven devices right now - right down to the pumps, the turbines, the generators," - then where's the proof. Where're the 1/8th, 1/16th, 1/32nd and 1/64th-scale models *showing* that this is viable.
You've heard of vapourware, I'm pretty sure this is quite literally vapourtech.
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Thursday May 21 2015, @01:23PM
"... SUT demonstration ... in 2012, 7 metre stack and 100 square metre collector, ... 6.34 mW" i.e. 0.06 mW/m^2
"... collector area is expected to extract about 0.5 percent, or 5 W/m² of 1 kW/m², of the solar energy that falls upon it"
Even assuming a cloudy day at a temperate latitude, the 1 kW/m^2 only reduces to 200 W/m^2, So they expect 1 W/m^2 (which is *shit*), and got 0.00006 W/m^2. *More than 4 orders of magnitude difference*.
I've got this great new source of power, it's called bridge power, powered by london bridges. Wanna buy a licence?
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 1, Troll) by Jeremiah Cornelius on Thursday May 21 2015, @06:41PM
It's pronounced JIGAWATT like in "GIGANTIC" and "dot GIF".
You're betting on the pantomime horse...
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Reziac on Thursday May 21 2015, @02:05PM
I had the exact same thought. It's "free" energy only if you don't consider that the water has to be pumped upstairs first, and you're never going to get all of that back. And I'm wondering just who is going to pay for all that water in the desert, and how much will be lost in the process (sounds like possibly all of it). It's kinda like a perpetual motion machine... where you first have to roll the ball to the top of the mountain.
I'd think the whole thing could be done a lot more economically the other way around: suck hot air from the ground up the pipe, which will happen naturally and requires no pumping (nor wind) whatsoever; we already design self-cooling desert houses around this principle.
And there is no Alkibiades to come back and save us from ourselves.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Thursday May 21 2015, @02:15PM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_updraft_tower#History [wikipedia.org]
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 4, Touché) by FatPhil on Thursday May 21 2015, @02:58PM
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves