Windfarms and other green-energy tech

[gaggle64]

Ok, just to prise it out of the HWYD thread: Windfarms. They've been out and about causing arguments again. Some think they're a nescerry piece of green energy technology, while others reckon they're an impractical eyesore.
What do you think?

Personally, I think they are a nescerry piece, but only a piece, of the green energy puzzle. Obviously they're never going to produce all the energy we need by themselves, but it'd still be foolish not to use them where possible (and resonable, I might add). I'd like to see more examples of other green energy tech being researched and built. Wave generators, for example.

[Strider]

I quite like windfarms. When on the way to Cornwall they're sort of like a "Hey look we're here" kind of thing, so thats why i like them. I would welcome them anywhere i lived.

[Slaggis]

I've heard that maintenance of Windfarms is phenominally expensive. So even though they are greener they need a small fortune for funding.

(quoting Jamba from the other thread)

Actually, once built they are relatively cheap to maintain.

I'm with Gaggle. They obvuusly aren't the only solution to climate change, but they are one that needs more development. If practical (i.e caring about what they're going to destroy where they're built, not whether some person thinks they look unnatractive) then they should be built where possible. A little sacrifice now will go a long way in the future.

And before someone says it, no I wouldn't give a rats arse if they built them where I live (there's actually plans to build them on the moors here at some point), I'm all for it.

They've agreed to plans to build 347 wind generators in the Thames Estury (it's just not used for ships etc anymore, so why not?). I think it's a great idea, and personally think they can look quite nice.
http://image.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2006/12/18/windfarm10b.jpg

[Jamba]

I think that automobile fumes and the general transport problem needs to be addressed first. I think that efficient hybrid cars should be subsidised (not just taxed less) to encourage people to buy them.

I want:
http://fuelzilla.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/02/toyota-prius-2009-0307.jpg

On top of this, if people actually used public transport and the companies running that service weren't a bunch of arses then the service could get cheaper and a better alternative for people to use.


Actually, once built they are relatively cheap to maintain.


Source please.

My information comes directly from a man who has been working for DEFRA for years and is currently involved in Fishing and most things to do with the sea that are controlled by DEFRA in this country. I had a discussion with him about them and he told me (and yes he probably is only referring to the sea farms) that they were unreasonably expensive to maintain.

[Slaggis]

My information comes directly from a man who has been working for DEFRA for years and is currently involved in Fishing and most things to do with the sea that are controlled by DEFRA in this country. I had a discussion with him about them and he told me (and yes he probably is only referring to the sea farms) that they were unreasonably expensive to maintain.

Yup, I was refering to land wind farms, the ones out at see can be pretty exspensive to maintain. But when there's enough built, it should even out the cost of maintain with the amount of energy being produced (I would have thought?)

I agree with you about the big thing to sort out at the moment should be transport issues etc. With masses of cars etc, public transport needs sorting out to people will use it more often. At the moment, it's just not reliable enough.

Oh and a source would be The National Energy Foundation website - and then all my geography teachers :p)

[Jamba]

Yup, I was refering to land wind farms, the ones out at see can be pretty exspensive to maintain. But when there's enough built, it should even out the cost of maintain with the amount of energy being produced (I would have thought?)

Nope, he said to me specifically that they cost more money to maintain than the money that they produce from the sale of the electricity. I was like you, I assumed that they would fund themselves but the truth with the sea farms is that the more you make, the greater the deficit.

Only silver lining is that at least we'll be green :indeed:

[Slaggis]

Nope, he said to me specifically that they cost more money to maintain than the money that they produce from the sale of the electricity. I was like you, I assumed that they would fund themselves but the truth with the sea farms is that the more you make, the greater the deficit.

Only silver lining is that at least we'll be green :indeed:

Thats pretty interesting, I had no idea. But then, if thats the case then there's a big problem. Out at sea = expensive and in land = relatively inexpensive but people moan when they're near them.

[The fish]

An area roughly the size of Chad, if covered in solar panels, produces 5 million Watts, if I remember an article I read in New Scientist correctly.

And they say there's no way some of those Saharan and Sub-Saharan African countries can get lots of money!

It's just a shame the only people with the technology to move such massive amounts of energy are the oil companies... :nono:

Pipe the energy up into Europe. The electrolysis (sp?) of water splits it into hydrogen and oxygen, which can be easily pressurised and stored. Removing the single petrol/diesel tank in a car and replacing it with a pair of tanks, and removing the external air intake, allows you to use hydrogen and oxygen in a regular internal combustion engine. Some relatively simple engineering can make a much more efficient H/O engine, but it's a start, eh?

The oxygen tank, instead of an external air intake, is used to prevent the creation of Nitrogen Oxide/Dioxide, which aren't very nice, to say the least.

Gotta love the AS Chemistry open book paper on fuels I did last year...

[MoogleViper]

If everybody had a propellor connected to a generator on their roof then the climate change problem wouldn't be anywhere near as big.

As for transport I think that it should be nationalised but not completely. Have the nationalised companies to keep fares down but have the private companies to ensure efficency.

[Jordan]

Yes, they're great when they're done for the right reasons.

Building 20 or so smaller ones here and there don't massivly impact on the enviroment... outside of killing a few birds. Its all about building the right size and amount to suit the enviroment within they are built.

[Jamba]

Pipe the energy up into Europe. The electrolysis (sp?) of water splits it into hydrogen and oxygen, which can be easily pressurised and stored. Removing the single petrol/diesel tank in a car and replacing it with a pair of tanks, and removing the external air intake, allows you to use hydrogen and oxygen in a regular internal combustion engine. Some relatively simple engineering can make a much more efficient H/O engine, but it's a start, eh?

Oh of course! All the engineers who have been working on the hydrogen engine for the past 30 years or so can now go home and have a cup of tea because Fish has made it make sense now! We can build the cars tomorrow! :indeed:

You know if you graduate to reading the A2 chemistry book and start finding out about real energy exchange and the facilities required for some of these processes then you will find that creating hydrogen fuel is amazingly expensive energetically and finnacially.

[Jordan]

Yeah, Jamba is actually right... if a little condesending ;).

Most things you learn at GCSE and A level in terms of Science are just old bs and doesn't take alot of factors into account.

[Twozzok]

Haha, yeah. I remember our GCSE science teachers told us to basically forget what we learnt there and take it all with a pinch of salt for A level.

[MoogleViper]

Haha, yeah. I remember our GCSE science teachers told us to basically forget what we learnt there and take it all with a pinch of salt for A level.

That used to really piss me off. I would question something that I had learned about elsewhere and would get, "Yeah you're right but for GCSE it's this." What's the point of that?

[Jamba]

I remember that chat as well.

First day of AS-Chem: "Everything in GCSE chemistry is lies". And there was me finally coming to the understanding of why I hated my chem teacher at GCSE. He used to belittle me in front of the class for trying to understand what was really going on. He was a cock.

Frankly Chemistry is taught backwards in this country. They should start on the subatomic level and then work out. Otherwise you left trying to build a house without knowing what a brick does. :s

[The fish]

You know if you graduate to reading the A2 chemistry book and start finding out about real energy exchange and the facilities required for some of these processes then you will find that creating hydrogen fuel is amazingly expensive energetically and finnacially.

Um, the chemistry teacher who taught me this has a MSc in chemistry and worked in fuel and energy systems' research for the MoD for a dozen or so years. And before you ask, he's legit, I've even held his old security pass. And no, he's not meant to still have it. :heh:

Yes, I'll agree I simplified it, but it's most definitly do-able...

[rokhed00]

Wind farms rock, they look amazing, see them everywhere when I go on holiday and they make for a more exciting skyline.

[Jamba]

Yes, I'll agree I simplified it, but it's most definitly do-able...

The theory is sound, sure. In practice it is pretty much a no-no at the moment. The hydrogen being a potential bomb (much more so than car full of fuel) is the biggest problem I think. Then there's the fact that hydrogen is is not produced in any kind of capacity to be cheap. And even if that were the case, it would be incredibly expensive, especially when you compare it to fossil fuels.

The only production hydrogen powered vehicles that I know about are a set of buses that were built and distributed amongst big cities (all in Europe I think). London got 1. I think that the production run was of 10 buses.

[Cube]

The power stations that wind farms are supposed to be replacing still need to be kept running.

[uəʌəsʎɐɾ]

I say we tear everything down - all the buildings, all the roads, all the train lines, all the factories, then do a big ol' Sim City and rearrange everything strategically and logically, so that we don't have large concentrations of people in cities and large masses of open, pretty useless space. Dilute everything into everything else so that roads can take the cars efficiently, that we don't have to commute, and so on, and so on.

*carries on dreaming*

[Eenuh]

I think those wind mills are cool, they look awesome. We have three in our city and you can see them from a great distance; just look so nice, especially against a dark sky with the sun hitting them (like it was today). =3

Some of the buses in our city already run on alternative fuels. Not sure if they're all hydrogen (know there's some of those), but there's also some that have that bio fuel stuff (sorry don't know what it's called). =P
Plus buses are free to ride in this city, yay!

If I one day end up having the money to build my own house, I'd like it to have solar panels on the roof and pretty much have everything it needs to be as energy efficient as possible. And a hybrid car, if I ever learn to drive. X3

[Letty]

Theres a small windfarm here already, and a waste to energy plant which takes all Lerwick's household waste and burns it to heat the homes there.

Plus who cares about what a field looks like if its saving resources?

[Shorty]

I think there must be a better design for them. I don't really care about them as an 'eyesore' and believe that they're doing the best for the planet, but I'm sure they could look/work better.

[Noodleman]

Always amuses me when you get some middle aged house wife utterly raging on the news because they want to build a wind turbine 5 miles away from her house because it will ruin the scenic view she has. Its like well would you rather have a wind turbine or a great big power station blocking you view. My mum lives near 2 great big ones they look pretty awesome personaly. Pretty sure they generate enough electricity to power the nearby town as well.

http://www.sd-commission.org.uk/communitiessummit/show_case_study.php/00090.html
oh it appears to be 75% of the town still pretty awesome though.

[RoadKill]

Hybrids like the Prius are terrible for the environment, much, much moreso than almost any modern diesel - the batteries are basically chemical hazards and will eventually wear out, causing a huge problem.

Also, recently I read an article showing a BMW 5-series (520d) actually getting 2 mpg better thana Toyota Prius over a 500 mile journey, including 100 mile extra in town, to favour the Prius' in town performance.

If anyone here thinks the Prius is anything other than a statement, they're an idiot, and the stupid fucking subsidies people get on cars like this, and free travel in the London Congestion Zone - well, that gets my back up like nothing else, and sends out the wrong message. Don't do what's green, do what's popular, and perceived to be green!

That aside, I think that there are some relevant things to learn out of the hybrid model, even if it's only that we should look at how trains have been running for years: serial diesel-electric powertrains, with a small diesel engine running at optimum rpm to geneate electricity for the motors, but I haven't seen one of these yet, even if it does prove to be a good idea.

Wind farms? Sure, they're cool, I don't mind them. I think Hydroelectricity is a more viable source, due to the sheer pressure and power falling water can deliver. I also think nuclear power is badass, and I'm glad there is research going ahead into fusion

[Jamba]

Hybrids like the Prius are terrible for the environment, much, much moreso than almost any modern diesel - the batteries are basically chemical hazards and will eventually wear out, causing a huge problem.

Also, recently I read an article showing a BMW 5-series (520d) actually getting 2 mpg better thana Toyota Prius over a 500 mile journey, including 100 mile extra in town, to favour the Prius' in town performance.

If anyone here thinks the Prius is anything other than a statement, they're an idiot, and the stupid fucking subsidies people get on cars like this, and free travel in the London Congestion Zone - well, that gets my back up like nothing else, and sends out the wrong message. Don't do what's green, do what's popular, and perceived to be green!

That aside, I think that there are some relevant things to learn out of the hybrid model, even if it's only that we should look at how trains have been running for years: serial diesel-electric powertrains, with a small diesel engine running at optimum rpm to geneate electricity for the motors, but I haven't seen one of these yet, even if it does prove to be a good idea.


Oh come one, the battery disposal arguement is rubbish. To get rid of fossil fuels we would need to start using batteries like this and there are facilities to dispose of batteries in place.

Also the comments about the Prius are coloured. Sure it isn't as good as it's all cracked up to be but I don't see many other cars using regenerative breaking, so the technology is relatively new. Nothing is perfect at this stage. Also that article is still biased. Sure they do 100miles in town but what about the other 400miles? The Prius comparatively has to lug it's battery around so it is going to be less efficient on open road driving because it won't get the opportunity to use the battery so much, let alone recharge it because very little breaking will happen. Sure, it is a car that has a specific niche in which it should be used (ie in town) but that doesn't mean its completely crap.