Information From A Different Perspective
Japanese Breakthrough Makes Wind Power Cheaper Than Nuclear
19th January 2012
By Karl Burkart - mnn.com/green-tech
The International Clean Energy Analysis (ICEA) gateway estimates that the U.S. possesses 2.2 million km2 of high wind potential (Class 3-7 winds) — about 850,000 square miles of land that could yield high levels of wind energy. This makes the U.S. something of a Saudi Arabia for wind energy, ranked third in the world for total wind energy potential.
Let’s say we developed just 20 percent of those wind resources — 170,000 square miles (440,000 km2) or an area roughly 1/4 the size of Alaska — we could produce a whopping 8.7 billion megawatt hours of electricity each year (based on a theoretical conversion of six 1.5 MW turbines per km2 and an average output of 25 percent. (1.5 MW x 365 days x 24 hrs x 25% = 3,285 MWh’s).
The United States uses about 26.6 billion MWh’s, so at the above rate we could satisfy a full one-third of our total annual energy needs. (Of course, this assumes the concurrent deployment of a nationwide Smart Grid that could store and disburse the variable sources of wind power as needed using a variety of technologies — gas or coal peaking, utility scale storage via batteries or fly-wheels, etc).
Now what if a breakthrough came along that potentially tripled the energy output of those turbines? You see where I’m going. We could in theory supply the TOTAL annual energy needs of the U.S. simply by exploiting 20 percent of our available wind resources.
Well, such a breakthrough has been made, and it’s called the “wind lens.”
Imagine: no more dirty coal power, no more mining deaths, no more nuclear disasters, no more polluted aquifers as a result of fracking. Our entire society powered by the quiet “woosh” of a wind turbine. Kyushu University’s wind lens turbine is one example of the many innovations happening right now that could in the near future make this utopian vision a reality.
Yes, it’s a heck of a lot of wind turbines (about 2,640,000) but the U.S. with its endless miles of prairie and agricultural land is one of the few nations that could actually deploy such a network of wind turbines without disrupting the current productivity of the land (Russia and China also come to mind). It would also be a win-win for states in the highest wind area — the Midwest — which has been hard hit by the recession. And think of the millions upon millions of jobs that would be created building a 21st century energy distribution system free of the shackles of ever-diminishing fossil fuel supplies.
It’s also important to point out that growth in wind power capacity is perfectly symbiotic with projected growth in electric vehicles. EV battery packs can soak up wind power produced during the night, helping to equalize the curve of daytime energy demand. So the controversial investment currently being entertained by President Obama to pipe oil down from the Canadian Tar Sands would — in my utopian vision — be a moot point.
It is indeed a lofty vision, but the technology we need is now in our reach. And think of the benefits of having our power production fed by a resource that is both free and unlimited. One downside often cited by advocates of coal and gas power is that wind turbines require a lot more maintenance than a typical coal or gas power plant. But in a lagging economy this might just be wind power’s biggest upside — it will create lots and lots of permanent jobs, sparking a new cycle of economic growth in America.
Related Posts
No related posts.
about 1 month ago
When will this technology be available so I can get it to Africa.
about 1 month ago
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/moslive/article-1350811/In-China-true-cost-Britains-clean-green-wind-power-experiment-Pollution-disastrous-scale.html
about 1 month ago
When we put our beautiful minds to it, all problems can be met with breathtaking solutions. Go, mankind, go!
about 1 month ago
This is heartening news! Thanks for this important information and for the video.
about 1 month ago
I don’t see one word about how much it’s going to cost to build all those turbines. Nor how much the average electric bill is going to be to pay for all that construction.
about 1 month ago
So the plan is to pollute an area a quarter the size of Alaska with giant threshing machines that will kill all migratory birds, cost an inestimable amount, employ countless people on an ever increasing scale?
So that people an continue to heat/cool their houses and drive cars pointlessly for fun?
We need a far better solution to the problem than this.
about 1 month ago
Emotive words, but little substance. Wind turbines don’t ‘pollute’ any more than any other feature of the built environment, and directly emit zero pollution. There’s far more harm birds, including migratory ones from loss of habitat than direct morbidity, and climate change plus human residential encroachment threatens habitat. I hear very little complaint from enemies of windfarms about roads, rail, tourism, housing, coal plants land clearance and so forth.
The costs of deployment will have been entirely estimated before any commercial project goes ahead, and the people will be counted for sure. It seems unlikely that as a function of MWhe more people will be employed on maintaining wind farm operation than maintaining coal plant operations, but if the composition of employment shifts from harvest, transportation, preparation of fuel feedstock, and direct operation of the plant, to maintenance of systems, and from off-shore employees to onshore ones who are typically living locally, I’d call that a win.
about 1 month ago
Hello Fran,
I am not sure if you have visited Alaska but I am sure that once you have you will see what a blot a scheme like this would have on the pristine environment up there. It is Mr Burkart who suggested that this would be the price to pay for wind energy and that is before considering all the pylons, cables, roads and widespread interference with every aspect of the landscape.
But of course this scheme will not just happen far away in Alaska, it will happen near your back yard.
Have you ever lived near one of these giant windmills?
They make a horrible varying vibrational noise that is far worse than the wind howling around the chimneys. When they burst into flame they drop molten metal all over the place with streams of burnt acrid smoke trailing away downwind. The ones that will be located at sea will involve almost impossible complications with regard to maintenance.
People who live near these machines complain of all sorts of ailments that possibly have to do with electromagnetic energy, but that will have to be investigated more. Be aware that there will be problems, just as there are for people who live near any sort of high energy electrical device.
Also please remember that the cost estimates will be done by people who have an interest in these sorts of projects going ahead, so for them to be honest and dispassionate is a difficult call.
As for the pollution aspects of these turbines, please bear in mind that the manufacture of these machines involves a huge investment in buildings, energy, transport etc etc. They don’t just appear in situ.
As for complaints by people who live near these contraptions, have a look at the houses for sale near them, and the reduced prices the sellers have to ask, and the reluctance of anyone with free choice to want to buy a house near one.
The tourism aspect is curious. Do you believe that people will want to pay to come and stare at these machines? I assure that in France people just want to get away from them.
It might also interest you to know that when there is no wind, which is quite a lot of the time, the electricity companies have to “power” these windmills to turn so that the “brushes” do not deteriorate, so when you see them all turning gently in no wind, they are absorbing and “taking” energy from the grid, rather than generating it.
When I mentioned “inestimable cost”, that was from the author who suggested that the employment benefits for people working on these projects would grow exponentially. I am pleased that I am not a tax payer in a country that considers projects that do not have limits and over-run penalties for contracts of this nature.
I notice that you are interested on “on shore” and “off shore” jobs. Please be assured that wide-scale deployment of windfarms in the United States will definitely involve the importation of prefabricated materials from the Far East, which coincidentally is that where the author of this article is based.
Interesting?
Thanks for your input in this debate which is an important one for all of us.
about 1 month ago
So chris, the current oil pipeline projects and oil exploration at the moment are preferable to this?? What oil company are YOU working for? Giant threshing machines?? LMFAO Employ countless people?? WTF’s wrong with employing countless people? Especially in the production of clean energy…Kill ALL migratory birds?? Yeah riiiight …every migratory bird on the planet is going to decide to fly at a much lower altitude than ever bore, line up in formation and aim for these huge blenders….put the crack pipe down bro….you’re making an fool of yourself
about 1 month ago
Hello Revolva,
Perhaps it would be wise for you to learn to debate the subject rather than distribute insults and then hide behind a pseudonym.
Please see some of the points I have raised with Fran, engage brain and then make a reasoned, sensible response.
about 1 month ago
right on chris.
the answers not the energy production, it’s the consumption.
not saving lifestyles, but saving lives.
however, i’m not knowledged in electricity… but what if you lined that lens with copper? and put magnets on the blades? isn’t that somehow creating electricity?
about 1 month ago
Hello Dan,
People have tried rotating magnets on windmill blades which is a crude way of turning a rotor in a controlled magnetic field. All these windmills do is convert one form of energy into another form of energy, in this case electricity. They can be used, and have been used for hundreds of years to mill wheat and pump water. One of the most efficient and “clean” ways to use wind energy is to use sailing ships, but in the old days that involved huge destruction of forests to build these ships, however there was a lot of employment back then in the ship building industry, which is one of the things that Fran seems to value.
I fear that people overvalue these wind turbines because they have been presented as a “green” solution, and I am not convinced that they are. There are so many aspects to consider.
about 1 month ago
Higginson,
1. Polution? How about Nuclear waste and/or carbon imprint??
2. Kill ALL migratory birds? Really, every last one of them?
3. What makes you think that it’s an “inestimable amount”? You think they’ll just start building it without architects or structural engineers too?
4. Employment is a good thing.
5. I don’t know if this is about driving cars pointlessly for fun. I’m gonna leave that one alone.
about 1 month ago
Hello DM, whoever you are.
Yes what about Nuclear Waste? Have you any idea what a tiny volume nuclear waste needs? And how securely it can be kept under control? If the amount of effort that is going into creating windmills was expended on making nuclear energy safe and containable, the odds are that we would all be a lot better off.
Yes I said all migratory birds for the sake of brevity, please be sensible about this. Birds use wind channels to migrate and these windmills are probably going to be built in the same wind channels. Geese, Storks and other large birds migrate at altitude, but many small birds migrate at low level, so low in fact that they are easily trapped by nets strung across valleys.
I used the expression “inestimable amount” because the author, Mr Burkart suggested “millions upon millions” of jobs would be created by this deployment of windmills. I don’t know about you, but I am not interested in technology that costs so much that I have to take out a loan to afford to boil a kettle of water.
As for driving, the quickest way to make people economise on energy is to make it expensive, that is the Capitalist Way. And that isn’t going to happen in an election year. But it will happen in the future.
about 1 month ago
What’s up with the tagline at 4:19?
“Unfair and biased”
about 1 month ago
I bet all the coal miners are thrilled to death.
about 1 month ago
Sadly many coal miners have already died either in accidents or medical complications due to their profession.
Would they be better off learning to polish windmill blades instead of working underground?
Maybe.