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.
about 3 months ago
Hello Coltrane
You must have seen the Utube video of perfectly serviceable electric cars being crushed for “economical” reasons, rather than let people buy them after their “lease”.
There is also the “air car” which runs on compressed air. That died a natural death after the promoters extracted their development scam money from their respective governments.
about 3 months ago
to all the naysayers. Grow up and smell the turbines. Wildlife can be protected and mufflers can be engineered. Why shoot down this idea before it gets off the ground? You must prefer the current state of our energy woes, coal fired, nuclear, and petroleum based technologies. So easy a caveman can do it!
about 3 months ago
Nice people! I’m thinking the best idea’s are learning how to control Nuclear power and waste to the point of no concern. Also the thermal heat source 30k feet into the earth’s crust sounds like an idea which would work and cause minimal waste, or Habitat distrubance. Chris and and
David you sound like educated men who need to be heard, wish someone would listen. Good luck
about 3 months ago
Why increase supply when decrease the demand may be the better solution to the energy prob,if there’s one. What of the materials used in these, will future hold disposal sites that can contain the eventual end life of these manufactured items, what will the foot print be in the process to create these.
Jobs? Worry yes , not enough you think, or is it too many people born without a future planned source of income. Scrabble for the system, fear of poverty , diminished social status, all drivers of this system, some become extremely wealthy,
some very poor. When we have less desperation then time to think may be possible,otherwise the scrabble for the daily crust of bread and such is paramount quite likely. The eco days may be delayed due to economic considerations.
Please if this scheme is implemented will yet again the cost be unequally spread by a user fee say , rather than by progressive levy. A dollar to the person earning 10 grand is quite a larger percentage than a dollar to the person who earns 200 grand. The dollar seems much smaller to the 200 grand person. Simple , I hope to understand.