http://www.aweo.org/problemwithwind.html
While I see some problems with some of the content of this site, I do think that overall it outlines some problems over this renewable energy that most aren't aware of.
From Murph
I’m sure most of the readers on this site are quite familiar
with all the hype concerning sustainable/green power being pushed by various
sources all over the news and internet.
I have written about them periodically over the years and I’m going to
hit on it again today.
First, some things that I think we can agree on concerning
the basics of this. Everyone of the
schemes for nearly free power also demand the use of non renewable resources,
everyone one of them, from nuclear to wind to solar power to the touted free
power from the ether or the magnetic characteristics of our universe. To build the machines to harness those
power sources takes non-renewable resources, at least in human lifetime
measurements.
Secondly, we need a working definition of
“sustainable”. In the absolute sense,
which, seemingly, no one wants to talk about, it means that resources are not
used up faster than they can be regenerated.
I can understand the reluctance to look at it that way because
everything that is renewable in human life time terms is based on sunlight,
including, lumber, farming, water critters we eat, drinkable water and
breathable air. That does not include
the vast amount of substances we mine out of the ground. They are renewable but on a scale of time
that makes them meaningless in terms of human societies. So, excluding what might as well be termed
as non renewable resources what is talked about in sustainability is how long
those non renewable resources can last and under what conditions and scale of
usage.
If we try to produce all the electricity needed by the use
of the “green” technologies, we also have to look at how much of the non-green
technologies and resources also have to be used. It appears to me that the amount of non-renewable resources to
do this would be incredible and that does not include the cost of
infrastructure to utilize it and the cost of maintenance and repairs. The current big buzz is of course solar and
wind power.
I am going to assert that from an economic and resource
position, neither of these sources are viable.
Take wind power. I
presume all of you have looked at these huge wind turbines that are mainly
being built in China. They are gigantic
and take a huge amount of infrastructure and non-renewable resources to build,
install and maintain. Plus, I have
mentioned before, there is a very simple problem with physics here. It is called the law of conservation of
energy and the laws of thermodynamics.
Simply put, if you remove energy from one place and convert it to
another form of energy, you have inherent losses but the amount of energy stays
the same, just at a lower lever. We
all know that the movement of air (wind and currents) controls what the weather
is at any particular location and time.
The energy to move air around is controlled by many other factors but
one of the largest factors is the sun, heating and cooling areas of the earth
and causing wind. So, putting up a
windmill pulls energy out of the air movement and converts it to
electricity. The result is less energy
in air movement to some amount. If
enough of these huge wind turbines are built and installed, the question comes
up as to whether they will have an ultimate effect on the movement of air, ie, the
weather. Now I realize we are talking
about a huge artificial system compared to the even larger ecological system we
call weather. But, I have seen no
studies concerning what can/probably happen if we build enough of those huge
turbines. I rather suspect and assert
that there will be a large influence on weather patters if enough of them are
put up. What amount of changes and the
observable effects is not being investigated as far as I know and what the
tipping point would be. Is this just
another example of ignoring the consequences of our actions?
Virtually the same observations also apply to solar
power. If enough of the sunlight
hitting the earth is converted to electrical power, what happens to the weather
patterns influenced by the heat of the sun?
Again, I find no research on this subject.
The standard retort concerning this is that the ecological
system is so huge and the amount of energy it contains is so big and the amount
of energy we could possibly drain from the system is too small to make a
difference. This point of view is
touted by folks with little or no training in the sciences, mostly by the
political class but not limited to them.
IMO, it is a mute point.
I do not think that we have the resources or the ability to make
sufficient investments to get to the point of unforeseen consequences. But, government and private business is
going to try. The amount of damage
they can inject into the ecological system and society by trying is going to be
severe I think.
On to the “free sources of energy”. There is lots of information on the web
concerning these schemes. I have no
idea concerning their validity.
However, for the same reasons above, there ain’t no such thing as “free
energy”. To use the purported
electromagnetic properties of our universe takes non renewable resources in the
form of rare earths and oil and mined metals.
I am going to assert that there isn’t enough of these resources left at
a price that is affordable to make either home units for everyone or scaled up
devises to feed the electrical infrastructure we have or could develop.
Now, in contradiction to all of this, I will admit that I
would produce my own electrical power for my own usage if the cost benefit
ratio made it worthwhile. I also admit
that I would ignore that ratio if the cost came down enough where I could
handle the out of pocket cost. What it
comes down to is being able to continue to use electrical power in the advent
of the grid having prolonged outages or just plain going away. Home generators can handle short-term power
outages. It’s the longer term ones
that I would invest the money in for our use. But, currently, to run our household on personal generation of
electrical power is not feasible. I
suspect this is also true for most homeowners in this country. What I can do is put in, relatively
speaking, enough generating capabilities to run essential elements of modern
life, namely, preservation of refrigeration and water source and maybe even
cooking. Heating would still be a
problem since we have a central electrical furnace. (The codes involved to put in a wood heater present an even
larger outlay of money) A friend who
lives nearby has put in a small system to run the essentials with some
success. To put in something similar
would cost me in the neighborhood of $1500-$2000. This might be doable, will take some more investigation.
