Wind Turbines Could Theoretically Power the Entire World, and Then Some

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I was hearing about a coastal project somewhere with a powerstation built into a harbour - basically said that there was a practical limit to how much energy could be taken out of the water, because you could basically stop the current completely.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Until they kill some endangered multi-colored bird or something, (the kind that only mate every 20 years, with one paticular mate)

then they will all have to be shut down....

Urban myth.

No matter if people think it's a myth or not, get some tree hugger with enough cash to push it through the courts - and... oopsie...

There was a story where tree huggers were trying to stop a wind farm, because of some rare bat was in the same area or something - I will see if I can stop it.

Kinda ironic - tree huggers want cleaner sources of power, but when given that, they find something to try to stop it...

butter/bread

If environmentalists had that much clout, they would have been able to shut every coal power plant in America down. It's a red herring.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Personally I think they should ditch coal fired plants and move to nuclear. At least for the short term.

[GaryC 7]

Personally I think they should ditch coal fired plants and move to nuclear. At least for the short term.

Hey!!! What just happened? I agree with you! Go nuclear and ditch coal, wind or solar. Remember the story about the laser? I have a feeling that by the time the new nuke plants need replacing we could convert them to N-fusion. No need to clutter things up with wind and solar farms.

Oh, Steven. The pictures you posted are rather disingenuous. A coal power plant takes up a few acres while a wind farm takes up many square miles. The pictures of the smoke with dark clouds in the background give the impression that the plants darken the skies. That is no longer the case. Most of what comes out of a smoke stack has been scrubbed and is mostly steam. It still isn't totally clean but it isn't choking the air like it used to.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I don't know if that's true about coal - I'm sure its cleaner than it used to be, but its still the filthiest fossil fuel as far as power plants go (at least compared to oil and natural gas).

[Peikko 1,575]

I thought the reason nuclear was ditched was a combo of expense (which may not be the same issue as other forms of fuel costs have increased) and the proliferation of nuclear material suitable for weapons getting into the wrong hands. What I do know is that it is not simply because environmentalists don't like it. That's a joke if ever I heard one

[GaryC 7]

I don't know if that's true about coal - I'm sure its cleaner than it used to be, but its still the filthiest fossil fuel as far as power plants go (at least compared to oil and natural gas).

Your right that it is the least clean way of making power. In the old days it did choke the skies and cover everything with soot. They have cleaned it up a great deal now. The soot is being captured and the sulfur is being scrubbed. It has a long way to go but it isn't the way it used to be.

[Bobby+Umit 161]

Picture of the nuke plant - that's steam - not "smoke".

Cleaner than the coal plant.

(of course you have that pesky waste material to deal with.. )

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

You do - which is why you use nuclear as a short term transition.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Whether we use wind or solar power on a large scale will not be determined based on aesthetic reasons.

[NickD 203]

No matter if people think it's a myth or not, get some tree hugger with enough cash to push it through the courts - and... oopsie...

There was a story where tree huggers were trying to stop a wind farm, because of some rare bat was in the same area or something - I will see if I can stop it.

Kinda ironic - tree huggers want cleaner sources of power, but when given that, they find something to try to stop it...

butter/bread

Perhaps I am a bit paranoid, but I do not really feel these tree huggers are tree huggers, feel they are oil maggots in disguise.

[GaryC 7]

Whether we use wind or solar power on a large scale will not be determined based on aesthetic reasons.

Tell that to Senator Kennedy.

[scandal 951]

You do - which is why you use nuclear as a short term transition.

With all due respect, that's ridiculous.

What does "short term" mean? The cost of building a nuclear power station cannot possibly be amortized over anything less than decades. You don't invest in nuclear plants unless you are prepared to operate them for many years out.

More importantly, the nuclear waste has elements with half-lives of tens of thousands of years. They will be dangerously radioactive for many times that.

There is no current plan for disposal of spent rods. The plan of the last two decades to use Yucca Mountain has now been officially scrapped by the Obama Administration (it was all but dead even during the Bush administration). We have no current plan. Nuclear facilities across the country are holding their waste in "temporary" holding pools (see map). This is both a seismic concern (earthquakes could release massive radiation) and a terrorism concern (each power plant in the country becomes an attractive target to saboteurs).

I'm not against nuclear power. I'm for it. But there are massively serious concerns and problems that need to be addressed here.

[GaryC 7]

You do - which is why you use nuclear as a short term transition.

With all due respect, that's ridiculous.

What does "short term" mean? The cost of building a nuclear power station cannot possibly be amortized over anything less than decades. You don't invest in nuclear plants unless you are prepared to operate them for many years out.

More importantly, the nuclear waste has elements with half-lives of tens of thousands of years. They will be dangerously radioactive for many times that.

There is no current plan for disposal of spent rods. The plan of the last two decades to use Yucca Mountain has now been officially scrapped by the Obama Administration (it was all but dead even during the Bush administration). We have no current plan. Nuclear facilities across the country are holding their waste in "temporary" holding pools (see map). This is both a seismic concern (earthquakes could release massive radiation) and a terrorism concern (each power plant in the country becomes an attractive target to saboteurs).

I'm not against nuclear power. I'm for it. But there are massively serious concerns and problems that need to be addressed here.

We have a solution for nuclear waste if we could just find the political will to do it. We have the technology to vitrify the waste and bury it at Yucca. The decision to not use it was terrible. It has to be safer there than in all these holding pools.

[Down With PMP 0]

Vitrified waste does not leach. Therefore, no contamination.

But, let's be hysterical like a bunch of sissy girls instead.