Re: who loses with wind power?

From: Brett Paatsch (paatschb@optusnet.com.au)
Date: Tue Jun 17 2003 - 01:35:34 MDT

  • Next message: Robert J. Bradbury: "Re: who loses with wind power?"

    MessageSpike wrote:

      <<The nation's leading environmental groups can barely control their enthusiasm. ''We're bullish on wind,'' says Kert Davies, research director of Greenpeace USA. ''Everybody has to ante up in the fight.'' ...
       
      Well, this is a new day. I and the director of Greenpeace agree on something.
       
      Robert had an objection that I kinda punted: that his detroit doesn't run
      on electricity. My notion is that a transition would be gradual enough
      that major pain would be averted.
       
      So now I ask, if the current low interest rates hold and wind power keeps
      going in at the current rate (they are building them like hell out here), we
      know who the winners are. But who loses?
       
      I want to ignore for the time being those who hold stock in the alternatives.
      Someone mentioned climate change downwind of the windmills. What is
      that? I haven't heard of anything like that, altho it stands to reason if we are
      extracting energy from the wind, the entropy of the wind must somehow
      increase. Anyone know?
       
      I lived in the southern taxifornia desert for several years. Some times of
      the year the wind howls thru there with such force and consistency, that
      death would be a sweet relief. Any change in that weather pattern as a
      result of windmills would have to be for the better.
       
      The bird people don't like the idea.
       
      I can see where pilots might not like the idea, since they would face
      additional danger should their engine quit over a vast wind farm.
       
      There have been claims that windmills are noisy. I often ride up to
      Altamont Pass near here and pull over on a breezy day. The windmills
      do make some noise, but not that much. If one is a km away, one
      cannot hear them.
       
      Some have said that a hilltop covered with windmills is unsightly, but
      I beg to differ. I find them very sightly. On a windy day when they are
      all spinning like hell, generating all that power and all that beautiful
      money, they are quite scenic.
       
      OK, so I know who wins, but who loses (besides the bird fans and pilots)
      if we start poking windmills into the ground like weeds?
       
      ----

      On the bird objection surely some sort of technological
      "scarecrow" could be produced. On the plane thing
      having either no fly zone or "service roads" (doubling as
      landing spots of last resort) for those who absolutely
      positively have to fly over a wind farm "because its there"
      might reduce the risk to planes.

      I guess the intuitive losers have to be the current suppliers
      of electricity with their investments in alternative generating
      plant and equipment. The final product electricity is a pretty
      basic commodity. Delivered onto a grid its pretty hard to
      buy green electricity at a higher price. So the main problem
      would seem to be the "cost of entry". The windmills would
      have to be more efficient costwise not cleaner. Unless a
      tax was placed on less clean production methods.

      Regards
      Brett



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Jun 17 2003 - 01:43:35 MDT