|
RAB
09-02-2005 16:00:46
|
|
Re: Just think what would happen....nothing a lot in reply to buickanddeere, 09-02-2005 14:04:12
|
|
|
B&D
That 24% figure is probably close to the design output.
All wind turbines will only manage about a quarter to a third of their maximum output over a year period.
There is unfortunately no other meaningful way of rating a wind turbine other than quoting max output.
For example, if some dummy put a mega-turbine where there was no wind at all, the output would be zilch. Offshore, where the windspeeds are generally more consistent (and higher) will lead to the higher end of the output over the yearly cycle.
About the same overall efficiency as the best photovoltaics, which are at most around 15% efficient at converting the solar energy which reaches them, as you say aren"t worth a jot in the hours of darkness, and also cost a great deal more per kilowatt installed.
Any reduction in fossil fuel use must be a good thing - and just think of the thermal efficiency of a coal fired generator at about 40% for a base load, and much lower for variable loads, ain"t that good either.
Whatever equation you use, the wind turbine will win over any "conventional" generator on energy input costs to electrical output, as the wind energy cost is effectively zero.
200 years ago in the UK there were windmills/watermills all over the countryside - and they were big buildings in those days, so lots and lots of smaller generators might be the answer to our problem of large "unsightly" turbines (although I think they are not too much of a problem as long as there are not too many in one area).
You have to realise there are a lot more people on this earth now, than even a couple hundred years ago, and that is one part of the problem also. Not suggesting 50% are done away with or whatever, but a great deal of those people are energy wasters.
I am an avid advocate of using less fossil fuels and I am very strongly in favour of using increasing amounts of sustainable or renewable energy along with using all energy more efficiently or more frugally as necessary. Time is running out on fossil fuel supplies - even if we have only used half of that available, we need to remember it has been "in the locker" for the last 200 million years or so and there is no more "in the production pipeline" for the foreseeable future. Furthermore, fossil fuel energy is really only solar energy which has been chemically stored for that length of time but all that locked up carbon has allowed the earth to function, as it has been doing, for the previous umpteen million years. Until now when humans are releasing all the stored energy, and possibly more importantly, all that carbon dioxide into our previously static atmosphere, all in a very short timespan. 200 years is after all only one millionth of the time fossil fuels have been locked away, yet some think it is their right to use whatever they like and to ignore the possible effects of what humans are doing to the planet, our only residential home at this time!
If 25 000 wind turbines would mean a 50% cut in therm electricity generation, that would be a great achievement.
Off soap box for tonite.
Regards, RAB
|
|
|
