Wind Energy in Iowa...Your Thoughts

[motorcy90]

I should note --

The Soviets looked into doing the same thing with their nuclear industry -- build isolated, well-guarded "giga-plants" in Siberia and transmit the power back west.

They came to roughly the same conclusions that the U.S. and Canada did.

Soviets even had the idea of ship based reactors and sailing them to where they were needed https://www.theverge.com/2018/5/2/1...t-russia-academik-lomonosov-chernobyl-titanic

Honest question.

How do these windmills generate energy as they seem to spin at such a low RPM? I would think they would need to be spinning like crazy! The faster, the better. But I never see one spinning fast. I know the blades are moving fast (because they are so long), but how does that matter if the RPM's are so low?

as others have mentioned high ratio gearboxes, or a direct drive where hundreds of magnets are embedded around the rotor so the degree between them is extremely small thus allowing the points to produce the needed sine wave. most rotors spin in the 15-20rpm range with blade tips moving in the 200-300mph range.

On a side note, does ice collect on the wings? Could they fling a big chunk of ice several hundred yards? That would be awesome to see. And, when are one of those guys from "JackAss" going strap themselves to one of those blades on a windy day?

yes Ice does collect on the blades enough that it will effect the efficiency of the blades, and small chunks can be thrown a few hundred yards from the tower when temperatures warm enough to shed the ice off. a lot of new towers will run wiring embedded in the fiberglass, and use the heat generated by the resistance to heat the surface of the blades enough to try to prevent icing.

 

[ISU22CY]

I'm still skeptical that cover crops improve yield in low-erosion environments at this juncture, but I'm a big fan of vertical tillage and see scenarios playing out that make no-till and cover crops better options than they once were.

Cover crops and no-till have always made sense in more traditionally erosive settings. What we're seeing now is that areas that didn't previously have problems with soil loss are starting to experience it due to the rain patterns.

This changing reality is forcing a change in land management practices, pure and simple. Just because something didn't make a difference 10 years ago doesn't mean it won't tomorrow.

I can tell you that in flat NC IA ground cover crops have no yield enhancement at all. They make great grazing but as far as a yield benefit there is zero. 8 years experience...not saying just because there is no yield benefit there means there is no benefit to them.

Strip till is the best thing for the full blown tillage guys to transition into. Also 8 years into using it and it’s a crutch to get to no till. Still not there but getting there

 

[arobb]

I don't like them.

They alter the visual landscape for miles and miles. When the towers needs replacing or repair I'm afraid they may sit there for a generation (unless their construction had an escrow fund for their removal).

I'm with you. They should probably go ahead and paint them blue and put the "Harvestore" logo on them. I'm guessing that they will be just as outdated and defunct 30 years from now as those silos are.

 

[NWICY]

I don't even understand how this happens:

That was a pretty impressive fail.

 

[JM4CY]

That was a pretty impressive fail.

I know. I'd like to see one smash the hell out if a bird

 

[BCClone]

https://www.cals.iastate.edu/news/r...arch-finds-wind-farms-positively-impact-crops

 

[harimad]

100% TOTAL AND COMPLETE HOAX

 

[BCClone]

100% TOTAL AND COMPLETE HOAX

YOU'RE THE HOAX!!!!

 

[kingcy]

how far does it need to be from a residence?

They have smaller ones you can put closer

 

[harimad]

YOU'RE THE HOAX!!!!

 

[BCClone]

You know I'm messing around Harimad. If there was ever the real deal out there, it would be you.

 

[Cyclonepride]

Generally speaking, going in the direction of renewable energy makes all the sense in the world, so long as we aren't pushing it faster than the efficiency of the technology develops (we are). Need to have a long range plan that is less wasteful of taxpayer money.

 

[BCClone]

Generally speaking, going in the direction of renewable energy makes all the sense in the world, so long as we aren't pushing it faster than the efficiency of the technology develops (we are). Need to have a long range plan that is less wasteful of taxpayer money.

I would say that a better way to handle the alternative energy source would be to require companies to get X% of their sources through alternative energy. When you have these large incentives that make it feasible to do, then people just rely on those and don't develop them as well as they could. You hang that dog around the neck of a company but allow them to boost prices for it at first, they will try to find a way to reduce the costs to make more money.

 

[Cyclonepride]

I would say that a better way to handle the alternative energy source would be to require companies to get X% of their sources through alternative energy. When you have these large incentives that make it feasible to do, then people just rely on those and don't develop them as well as they could. You hang that dog around the neck of a company but allow them to boost prices for it at first, they will try to find a way to reduce the costs to make more money.

I agree. I'd much prefer, if we are going to throw all sorts of money at it, to incentivize research into making the technology more efficient and effective, rather than to push the immediate building of all sorts of wind farms that aren't really self sustaining (without taxpayer money).

 

[Cycsk]

This does a really good job explaining it.
https://www.energy.gov/maps/how-does-wind-turbine-work

At first, I thought this just illustrated my question. It talks about spinning at 30 to 60 rpms. The illustration was pretty "fast" compared to ones I see and it is only doing 22 rpms.

The answer was "the Gear Box" (see below).

Now, I no longer have to look at one of these windmills and wonder. Thank you very much.


GEAR BOX

Connects the low-speed shaft to the high-speed shaft and increases the rotational speeds from about 30-60 rotations per minute (rpm), to about 1,000-1,800 rpm; this is the rotational speed required by most generators to produce electricity.

 

[Skyh13]

It's pretty much the very definition of a hoax. She's trying to legislate into law an edeavor she claims to be possible, but in reality is an endeavor that is a physical impossibility in the time frame she has proposed and with the technology that is likely to be available well beyond the proposed timeframe.

American politics in 2019, my friend.

Free **** and unrealistic promises. Everything is either all-good or all-bad.

Hard policy choices with important trade-offs are so 1956.

But that doesn't mean it's a HOAX. Unrealistic goals are not a hoax!

I can't believe I'm doing this..

hoax
noun
something intended to deceive or defraud: The Piltdown man was a scientific hoax.
verb (used with object)
to deceive by a hoax; hoodwink.

C'mon people. You can ****** disagree with it all you want, and believe it would be impossible (which is likely) but it. is. not. a. hoax.

 

[Sigmapolis]

But that doesn't mean it's a HOAX. Unrealistic goals are not a hoax!

I can't believe I'm doing this..

hoax
noun
something intended to deceive or defraud: The Piltdown man was a scientific hoax.
verb (used with object)
to deceive by a hoax; hoodwink.

C'mon people. You can ****** disagree with it all you want, and believe it would be impossible (which is likely) but it. is. not. a. hoax.

Asking the American people for trillions of dollars to fundamentally remake the energy sector during the next ten years in ways that the technical experts involved decry as unrealistic, if not outright impossible with current technology, sounds like a hoax.

Completely de-carbonizing the U.S. economy without regressing our living standards to those last seen before industrialization in the next decade is just as realistic as those promises that Madoff made about 15% returns no matter what the market did.

The goals are more noble -- we do need to transition off fossil fuels, and I believe smart, realistic, market-based policy, R&D, and, above all, technological innovation driven by billions of human beings collectively working on the problem -- will do it. Climate change is a serious issue, but selling the "solution" on an unrealistic timescale with the product actually inside the box being the planned economy they wanted the whole time...

Well, that sounds like a bait-and-switch. A hoax, if you will.

This kind of stuff is called fraud in the private sector.

 

[Skyh13]

Asking the American people for trillions of dollars to fundamentally remake or energy sector during the next ten years in ways that the technical experts involved decry as unrealistic, if not outright impossible with current technology, sounds like a hoax.

Completely de-carbonizing the U.S. economy without regressing our living standards to those last seen before industrialization in the next decade is just as realistic as those promises that Madoff made about 15% returns no matter what the market did.

The goals are more noble -- we do need to transition off fossil fuels, and I believe smart, realistic, market-based policy, R&D, and, above all, technological innovation driven by billions of human beings collectively working on the problem -- will do it. Climate change is a serious issue, but selling the "solution" on an unrealistic timescale with the product actually inside the box being the planned economy they wanted the whole time.

Well, that sounds like a bait-and-switch. A hoax, if you will.

It's not a hoax. It'd be a hoax if they passed it and then spent the money on yachts or oil subsidies.

It may be a terrible idea, but that doesn't make it a hoax. Let's say it were to pass -- we spend untold amounts of money, actually attempt to meet the goals and guidelines set out, but fall short based on the timeline. That is not a hoax. Poor planning? A bad idea? Predictable, given the impossible scale? Perhaps. But NOT A HOAX.

But the purpose of the idea is not to deceive or defraud. You may feel that it is so unrealistic that even proposing it is irresponsible, but that still does not make it a hoax. It. is. not. a. hoax.

The reason I'm beating this horse is because it seems people are too often taking sensationalized language at face value. Those of us who know the difference need to be more responsible with our words.

 

[Sigmapolis]

It's not a hoax. It'd be a hoax if they passed it and then spent the money on yachts or oil subsidies.

It may be a terrible idea, but that doesn't make it a hoax. Let's say it were to pass -- we spend untold amounts of money, actually attempt to meet the goals and guidelines set out, but fall short based on the timeline. That is not a hoax. Poor planning? A bad idea? Predictable, given the impossible scale? Perhaps. But NOT A HOAX.

But the purpose of the idea is not to deceive or defraud. You may feel that it is so unrealistic that even proposing it is irresponsible, but that still does not make it a hoax. It. is. not. a. hoax.

The reason I'm beating this horse is because it seems people are too often taking sensationalized language at face value. Those of us who know the difference need to be more responsible with our words.

I appreciate your concerns and agree with many of your points.

I just do not find "hoax" an unfair description of something that...

-- is impossible to accomplish, despite the incredible price tag, even if the problem it seeks to address is real and its goals are attempting to be noble

-- that is incredibly difficult or improbable to accomplish, and still with that incredible price tag, but with the price tag not being discussed at all and/or the advocates of the idea not being forthright in discussing the cost of their ideas simultaneously with the benefits

All these "free" ideas sound great -- rarely do you hear about the black hole they create in the federal budget, and when you do, Mexico is somehow going to pay for it.

I agree with you that hoax can have more troubling usages, however. Climate change is often dismissed as a "hoax," which I find the worst kind of sticking your head in the sand. The most common way "hoax" is used in this context is not a good one.

 

[harimad]

You know I'm messing around Harimad. If there was ever the real deal out there, it would be you.

I was just messin' too. <3