October 11, 2005 at 8:29 pm
If you read this stuff regularly, you'll know that I'm a fan of alternative power. I think the US dependence on oil and fossil fuels in general is a bad idea and moving to a variety of methods, and a more distributed generation network, is a great idea. So when I saw this Wired article on wind power, I had to stop and take a minute to write about it.
I live in Colorado, which has lots of open space and good wind, both of which are attractive for wind farms. However not everyone has the space available to build a farm. Apparently there are two projects in the US to build wind farms at sea, around 4-5 miles offshore, with 250 ft windmills. One is off Cape Cod, in Massachusetts, and one off Long Island in New York. The Cape Cod project could provide all the power that area needs, and I'd like to think it's a good idea.
However not everyone thinks so, with fisherman complaining as well as those that don't want their views spoiled. I do agree that some fishing could be upset and that's a tradeoff of some sort, but at 5 miles offshore, a 250 ft structure won't look like much. You probably wouldn't be able to even make out what it is without some sort of telescopic aid. In Virginia, or rather offshore, there is a lighthouse 7 miles offshore and you can't see it. And it's a two story structure, 100 ft or so off the water with space for a large helicopter to land.
Face it, one day we'll be without fossil fuels. I'm not sounding the doom and gloom, and it may not even come in my lifetime, but it's a limited resource and investigating other sources of power is a good idea. I'm very pro-nuclear, but I don't think that's the only answer. A mixture of sources, each taking advantage of what's in the local area, and generating power closer to the area that will use it, is what I'd advocate.
Face it, for a computer guy, power is pretty important.
Steve Jones
October 12, 2005 at 1:19 am
I personally don't agree with the "eyesore" argument about wind turbines. A 250ft structure 5 miles out to sea is a magnificent sight to behold in my opinion!
The fact is that there will always be people opposed to something new - its a shame that people can't see the bigger picture which is that renewable energy has to happen at some point. We can't go on burning stuff forever!
I have recently, for the first time, moved into my own property that has a roof and I'm currently looking into getting solar panels fitted up there.
-Jamie
Jamie Thomson
http://sqlblog.com/blogs/jamie_thomson
October 12, 2005 at 3:25 am
I recently visited Sellafield/Windscale in Cumbria, UK. There is an exhibition there that illustrates that if we all do a relatively minor thing, such as switch to low energy light bulbs then we save several gigawatts of power in the UK alone.
Normal bulb = 100 watts, equivalent low energy bulb = 20 watts.
23 million house in the UK all change 1 bulb, energy saved = 1,840 megawatts or 3 power stations. A small change done by a lot of people will have a huge affect.
The exhibition estimated that a total switch would save about 9 power stations.
Changing to low energy appliances would save 27 power stations.
We don't really have an energy crisis, what we have is a greed and slovenly behaviour crisis.
October 12, 2005 at 3:51 am
David,
I'm sold. I'll go out this weekend and buy those lightbulbs! I really will
-Jamie
Jamie Thomson
http://sqlblog.com/blogs/jamie_thomson
October 12, 2005 at 7:08 am
We've switched to mostly low-power lightbulbs. We have run into some cheap ones though so be careful. Some of the ones we got actually need to warm up before they get bright enough to be useful. In the winter this takes longer than in the summer too. I'll try to see what brand they were if they're labeled and post it here later.
Update: The bulbs we have that don't work so well are labeled "Lights of America" though I am willing to bet that they weren't made in the U.S.A.
[font="Tahoma"]Bryant E. Byrd, BSSE MCDBA MCAD[/font]
Business Intelligence Administrator
MSBI Administration Blog
October 12, 2005 at 7:47 am
I second the warning on the strange brand bulbs. I've had some of the branded ones for 8 years but some of the el cheapos lasted 6 months.
The more modern low energy bulbs are much smaller and faster to light up.
Flat panel monitors use a fraction of the power of the old CRT VDUs so if you are looking for a justification for an expensive Christmas present......
October 12, 2005 at 8:07 am
I've thought for years that we should be lining the highways with wind turbines. I'm thinking just 20-30 feet tall and they wouldn't even have to be the super-efficient ones.
As one who has had to stand by highways a time or two, you wouldn't believe the amount of wind there is.
I also think we should look at pebble-bed reactors.
----------------
Jim P.
A little bit of this and a little byte of that can cause bloatware.
October 12, 2005 at 8:11 am
The highway idea is interesting. And more, smaller turbines would make a huge difference.
In the US, there is a company working on a small 1Kw solar roof panel, hoping to drop dozens or hundreds of them on industrial roofs, severely cutting the power requirements, especially for lights, of many businesses. Payback is under 10 years, which is nice.
I've switched a few of our bulbs to flourescents. They're definitely not as bright and it still gets me that I have to wait a second or 2 for the lights to come on, but the power savings will add up. I think that most places should stop selling so many incandescents. Or provide tax breaks to low income people to allow them to buy them.
October 12, 2005 at 8:41 am
My other complaint is the cost of all the equipment is out of reach of a lot of people. I wish I could get off the grid, but I can't afford the upfront cost.
Another thought that I had is to use wind to produce hydrogen at home. Then run a generator off the hydrogen. I had a link to a site that was producing their own hydrogen back in 93. They were still using the grid though.
----------------
Jim P.
A little bit of this and a little byte of that can cause bloatware.
October 12, 2005 at 8:51 am
If you look at a yacht these usually have a small 14" turbine to power up the radio and GPS navigation equipment. If you put one on your roof then that would be enough to power up your fridge and all the things with a stand-by light.
I've often thought that buildings should have a 13th floor and that floor is given over solely to wind turbines. If every building had them then
a) Less power would need to be generated in the first place.
b) Buildings would have a small emergency supply. Just imagine, back-up generator, wind-turbine, UPS.
There is a special sort of turbine called a Darrius windmill. It looks like an egg whisk but doesn't require turning into the wind. Not sure why these haven't taken off...errrrrr no pun intended.
October 12, 2005 at 9:58 am
http://www.fieldlines.com/comments/2005/10/5/13449/7696/1 references that the design can be self destructing if done wrong with potentially fatal results. Essentially taking a vehicle alternator and mounting it vertically (shaft pointing up) and putting wings on it. In a 20MPH wind you are looking at about 1200 RPM.
Experimental wind projects........
----------------
Jim P.
A little bit of this and a little byte of that can cause bloatware.
October 13, 2005 at 8:16 am
There is some variety in performance (and I've seen slow warmup too), though for a while last year NJ state subsidized the bulbs so they were sold for about $1, I bought up a bunch.
Some people I know have been getting into LED lighting which seems to have some interesting potential (extremely long life, very high efficiency). I haven't used it to know how the color quality is.
...
-- FORTRAN manual for Xerox Computers --
October 13, 2005 at 8:54 am
I know that you can get LED bike lights. Scarily bright and run for ages on a small battery. compare that to Lead acid halogens which only last for 2 hours max.
OK bike lights aren't the same thing but the principle is the same.
October 13, 2005 at 9:16 am
Some cities here in Arkansas have started using LED stoplights. I can see them much better and the cities are finding much less maintenance and energy costs.
Michelle
October 13, 2005 at 9:21 am
I've seen those here in NE Tennessee and many other places in my meager travels. I just thought they were to improve visibility since they are not subject to the glare that a big, flat-surface light bulb has; I didn't even think about them saving energy. Makes you wonder why they weren't more popular ages ago.
[font="Tahoma"]Bryant E. Byrd, BSSE MCDBA MCAD[/font]
Business Intelligence Administrator
MSBI Administration Blog
Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 20 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply