CARB can make all the economy destroying, quality-of-life reducing regulations it wants, but all it takes is one short sighted, ignorant environmental policy to make it all meaningless.
Florida is one of several states in the Southeast where wind energy is virtually nonexistent, which is one reason wind farms have not been an economically viable energy source in the region. But a new study from the FAMU-FSU College of Engineering shows how upcoming technological advances could make wind energy a hot commodity in the Sunshine State.
Sean Martin, a researcher in civil and environmental engineering, is working with an interdisciplinary team of scientists to examine wind resource characteristics at nine different locations in Florida. Their analysis will help the wind industry and policymakers know how viable wind energy production using developing technologies could be.
Their work was published in the journal Applied Energy.
“With advances in turbine technology, taller towers, larger rotor diameter and new control systems, we will be able to provide low-cost wind power to low-wind regions, such as Florida and the Southeast,” Martin said. “The increased hub heights and taller turbines can take advantage of greater wind speeds that occur higher up to harvest more wind power.”
Compared to states like Texas or Iowa, the wind in Florida is not something wind farms can profitably capture at the moment. Wind speeds are slower because of increased surface friction and turbulence caused by buildings, trees and other obstructions. Most utility-scale turbines installed in the United States are west of the Mississippi River, where more favorable wind speeds, greater than 13 miles per hour, are prevalent.
But using new tools that can capture wind energy at higher elevations, where wind speeds are faster, might make wind energy feasible.
So how tall are these turbines? The average height of most existing on-shore turbines from the ground to the top of the blades is more than 380 feet, similar to a 32-story building. The new, taller turbines are almost twice the height at 660 feet, close to the height of a 55-story building, and are the kind of wind turbines that will be most useful in Florida.
Martin is collaborating with Arda Vanli, an associate professor of industrial and manufacturing engineering, and Sungmoon Jung, an associate professor of civil and environmental engineering.
“I don't think anybody can predict the timing for wind energy,” Jung said. “We almost had it a few years ago. There was a private company that proposed a wind farm in Florida, but the company withdrew the plan because the technology at the time was not economical enough. I hope we will see wind energy in the future as technology improves.”
One of the things the researchers are looking at is the capacity of wind turbines to operate at different sites. Wind speed varies, so turbines must be able to spin at different velocities. Researchers want to know what percentage of time in a year that the turbine can operate at full capacity. In general, turbines that generate at least 30 percent of their total capacity are more economical for utility-scale wind power. The data will be able to predict the best areas in Florida to place the new turbines based on their ability to produce wind energy at specific sites.
“The key is finding and identifying characteristic patterns in the wind data,” Martin said. “Once we establish the patterns, the data can assist in site selection and can improve energy estimation measures to help industry and policymakers make decisions on where wind farms are most profitable.”
There are other factors the researchers must consider when choosing a site for a wind farm. Safety for birds, noise from rotors and the fact that some people may find wind turbines unsightly are all considerations.
When including some of these elements with wind speed data, the scientists found that the best locations for wind farms appear to be in rural areas of northwest, central and southern Florida.
“Site selection is an important decision, especially in low-wind power areas,” Vanli said. “Transporting huge wind turbines to these locations is a significant investment and having good data can eventually determine whether the investment will be successful or not.”
Wind energy is gaining significant attention both from academia and industry. New, affordable methods for generating renewable energy are on the horizon. Wind farms could be viable in Florida within this decade, and turbines even taller than the ones used for this research could be more prevalent in the future.
“The real question is whether factors such as public perception, acceptance and environmental factors will prevent this resource from being developed,” Martin said. “We hope the research will add additional renewables to the U.S. energy portfolio and can offset our reliance on a single fuel source, adding energy security to meet a growing need.”
A "Copy and Paste" from the online footprint of the Florida A&M University and Florida Statue University College of Engineering; dated July 31, 2020.
Florida gets the more hurricanes than any other state and you want to put 660' wind mills off the coast. Thinking not a strong point.
[This message has been edited by jdv (edited 10-24-2022).]
Originally posted by jdv: Florida gets the more hurricanes than any other state and you want to put 660' wind mills off the coast. Thinking not a strong point.
I didn't say that I wouldn't want to examine questions like "What would happen to the wind turbines and other wind energy infrastructure that are being proposed for Florida in the event of a hurricane?" before voting to approve any such proposals... if that were my role.
That is a "Copy and Paste" from the online footprint of the Florida A&M University and Florida Statue University College of Engineering; dated July 31, 2020.
What I presented was their own summary of their analysis. I do not know if their research considered the effects of hurricanes. That was just their summary or blog post (essentially) for general readers who would (for whatever reason) go to their website. (It may also have been highlighted in some Florida local news reports.)
I have not seen hardly anything specific being reported about the risks that hurricanes and other violent wind storms pose to wind energy installations. But I have not specifically tried to find that kind of reporting online. It doesn't mean that I am not interested in it, or that I haven't already had that question come pop up in my own mind.
I can think of certain Pennock's forum members who might come up with a snarky, "wind energy dissing" meme to the effect of "Wind Turbines.... Hurricanes... What Are They Thinking?" But I wouldn't expect any of these same meme-addicted forum members to present anything of substance, like references to reports about what experts in the field have to say about hurricanes and wind energy infrastructure, and why they are saying it. Because "beef" is not one of their strong points... these particular forum members. As in "Where's the beef?" They're not like "Arby's". They don't "Have the Meats."
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 10-24-2022).]
It dont take a rocket surgeon, or investigations, or reports, to figure out what happens to a wind farm in a hurricane.
Sheesh.
I don't think you know quite as much about that as you imagine.
Site selection (obviously) is very important when it comes to wind energy installations.
Maybe Florida isn't a good place for wind energy infrastructure, in any of its permutations. But it interests me that these people who were part of the Florida state university system were willing to say as much about it publicly, as they did. I would "drill down deeper" on it, but right now... I'm out of both drills and drill time.
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 10-24-2022).]
You are correct. I dont know squat about building a wind farm.
HOWEVER, I live smack in the middle of S-W Ontario's "windfarm alley" and see what the storm winds off the lakes can do and do do to those things. Lake winds are nowhere near hurricane winds.
I'ts not edumacation and inductrunation....It's simple common sense.
See all that red on the left side of the map ????
I might have seen one or 2 over the years. Maybe.
[This message has been edited by MidEngineManiac (edited 10-24-2022).]
Originally posted by rinselberg: Lots of stuff. Ad nauseum.
First... The so called "Inflation Reduction Act" is a piece of sh!t. It will do anything BUT reduce inflation. This is well documented elsewhere. I'll leave it at at that.
Nuclear power? I'm all for it. A consortium of the power companies in GA banded together almost a decade ago, and decided to build Plant Vogtle, Units 3 and 4. As of last week, they're loading the fuel into Unit 3, I believe. Unit 4 will follow, shortly after.
Nuclear power is the only positive thing I can think of that is a part of this act. The fact that it is only recently recognized would be laughable, if it weren't so sad.
I'll mention this, as a bit of a tangent... Before Covid became a thing, I was planning to transfer into the Grid Operators group. (Not really what they're called, but the most useful thing I can think of, to describe the responsibilities.) I was given an intense "grand tour" of the jobs and work functions of the folks in that area, for a couple of days. As part of that grand tour, I was introduced to a gentleman who tracked and monitored "alternative generation", aka wind and solar. Most all aspects of our company's involvement. The predominant technology in our part of the country is solar. I asked him, point blank, if it was worthwhile, from a financial perspective. He evaded the question. I asked him, again, worded differently, allowing a bit of wiggle room. Again, he evaded the question. Spoke volumes, as far as I'm concerned.
So... IMHO, the bottom line is that our tax dollars are subsidizing an effing boondoggle. In the real world, using real dollars, it's pretty much useless. But it will satisfy the greenies. Bless their pointed little heads.
In the mean time, the taxpayers are taking it in the shorts, if not up... other places.
Manipulating Temperature Data - deranged marxists committing fraud scams. ' we promise, we're not lying, trust us. ' ' Looking up, you will see that the sky is falling and it's, like, so green ! ' ' Nah, you're making that sheet up, a fakery. ' ' Yeah, a scam to scam blue sky suckers out of cash. ' ' Yeah, the sky around here is yellow, and red, and orange ! ' ' Yeah, the sky is all the colors around here, all of them '
[This message has been edited by Valkrie9 (edited 10-25-2022).]
The "green" slice of the pie, Renewable Energy, came to 12 percent of the entire U.S. energy sources portfolio over the entirety of 2021.
If we subdivide that Renewable Energy slice into its component slices, Wind came to just over 3 percent of the entire U.S. energy sources portfolio. Solar, between 1 and 2 percent.
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 10-25-2022).]
Originally posted by williegoat: Yeah, America would be a much better place if we were more like China.
We should be vigilant, and do what we can to ensure that our Floating Offshore Wind Shot is not based on authoritarian modes of governance and economics, as is very possibly the case with this project in China. But that doesn't mean that we cannot take advantage of the same sciences, engineering and technologies that are integral to China's project.
“The United States has 13,000 miles of shoreline, which is a huge opportunity to lead the world in capitalizing offshore wind,” said [WHO?] “The ATLANTIS projects will help advance American offshore wind production and the accompanying job, manufacturing, and investment growth for the nation.”
Rick Perry, in his capacity as the U.S. Secretary of Energy. He's quoted in a DOE press release on February 1, 2019. Curiously, the obvious moniker "Father of ATLANTIS" never really caught as a recurring aspect of the media's coverage of Rick Perry's tenure at "Energy".
Click to show
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 12-15-2022).]
Good luck. I hope they have a plan when the wind doesn’t blow. China is building more coal fired power plants than any other country. Seems we have half the solution.
Originally posted by Hudini: Good luck. I hope they have a plan when the wind doesn’t blow. China is building more coal fired power plants than any other country. Seems we have half the solution.
Not just "wind." Not just "offshore wind." It's "Floating Offshore Wind." What's floating is not the wind, but the wind turbines, which will be positioned farther offshore.
quote
The appeal of floating wind is obvious. Somewhere around 60 meters deep (nearly 200 feet) it becomes impractical for developers to build what are called fixed wind foundations. But the winds above deep waters far off the coast are often ideal: strong and consistent.
Off Morro Bay and other potential California sites, the winds dip at midday but rise in the early evening, in nearly perfect sync with consumer demand—and in much the opposite pattern from the electricity generated by solar farms.
China is not just taking a pass on Floating Offshore Wind.
"California’s coming offshore wind boom faces big engineering hurdles"
quote
The US is auctioning off its first floating offshore wind power sites this week, which could unlock a vast new source of clean electricity along the West Coast.
The appeal of floating wind is obvious. Somewhere around 60 meters deep (nearly 200 feet) it becomes impractical for developers to build what are called fixed wind foundations. But the winds above deep waters far off the coast are often ideal: strong and consistent.
Off Morro Bay and other potential California sites, the winds dip at midday but rise in the early evening, in nearly perfect sync with consumer demand—and in much the opposite pattern from the electricity generated by solar farms.
Those characteristics will help the state’s grid operators draw more of their electricity from carbon-free sources through the evening, which will serve an increasingly crucial function as the California power sector moves off fossil fuels, says Alla Weinstein, chief executive of Trident Winds, which is a partner in the Castle Wind joint venture, which is bidding in the auction this week.
The state’s climate laws will require 90% of its electricity to come from such resources by 2035. That same year, California will mandate that all new passenger vehicles sold in the state must be zero-emissions, placing growing demands on the grid.
quote
Research groups estimate that the costs [of floating offshore wind] could fall from around $200 per megawatt-hour to between $58 and $120 by 2030. That would leave floating offshore wind more expensive than solar and onshore wind, but it could still serve an important role in an overall energy portfolio.
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 12-15-2022).]
Oil floats on water, doesn't it? Maybe they should use more oil in floating wind turbines to make them more bouyant.
Oil is organic, so maybe the fish will eat whatever oil spills when the floating turbines leak oil.
Maybe the reason that the Green energy people don't want more carbon dioxide in the air is because widespread famine would reduce world population levels, especially in resource rich developing countries.
Maybe one of the above ideas might be true.. It's up to you to determine which one.
"Despite the challenges, fans of floating [offshore] wind remain optimistic.
Walt Musial, who leads the research efforts on offshore wind at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, predicts that costs will come down as the industry moves beyond the pilot scale and developers gain experience building more and bigger floating wind facilities."
This meme is a Non Sequitur. It's as if I said "the sky is blue" and someone came along and tried to debunk that by offering evidence that the sky is not chartreuse or fuchsia. It comes from the same place as the meme in the message that came before this message, and the meme in the message that came right before that message.
This is what happens when dumb people think of dumb reasons to call other people dumb (or #IDIOTS) and the memes that they create are picked up from Dumb Net or Dumb Chan or Dumb-a-gram and reposted here. I'm only posting it again myself, as a reminder of the discussion that ensues after some other forum member posted it as if it were something smart.
Even if you don't believe that there's any real climate emergency or climate urgency to reduce CO2 and other greenhouse gases, trying to validate this "ice cube" meme by posting it reveals your Inner Dumb because it doesn't address anything that climate scientists are actually saying. It misses its target because it starts with the ice cube already floating in the glass of water, and so, it only represents what climate scientists call "sea ice".
What about land ice? The experiment would have to start, not with the ice cube already floating in the glass of water, but with the ice cube still in the freezer, or in the hand of the experimenter, before that hand drops it into the glass of water. That would cause the water level in the glass to rise, proportionate to the mass of the water that's in the ice cube. Ergo, sea level rise. And that's only the phase transition. There's also the thermal expansion of seawater as it warms, also significant, but completely outside the scope of this meme.
Have a good dumb.
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 12-16-2022).]
Have you ever seen a palm tree in a hurricane? They can survive because they flex and have a very large root ball to anchor them in the ground. I want to see a wind turbine do this.
Have you ever seen a palm tree in a hurricane? They can survive because they flex and have a very large root ball to anchor them in the ground. I want to see a wind turbine do this.
As an admitted fanboy of floating offshore wind energy, I want to see that happen myself.
I don't know that the vertical tower or mast would have to bend like the trunks of those palm trees. Think back to that brief YouTube video that I just posted. They were testing a two-bladed turbine with an active system that keeps the blades oriented downwind. That's not the same as the large leaf fronds at the tops of those palm trees.
So far, the attitude of the investors that have bought into the Floating Offshore Wind Shot mantra by purchasing the offshore lease areas seems to be "Damn the hurricanes, full turbine speed ahead!"
Another possibility for storm and hurricane resistance are the vertical axis wind turbine designs. And even farther afield from the common three-bladed horizontal axis wind turbines that are currently state of the art, are the prototypes of "no blade" wind-powered generators that convert vibratory motion into electricity, and one design that I've seen that uses electrostatic potential to generate electricity from the saltwater spray in the air just above the surface of the ocean. A wind energy generator without any moving parts.
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 12-17-2022).]
Storm and hurricane-resistant floating wind turbines extraordinaire
quote
The "American Turbine," created by American Offshore Energy (AOE), is the first wind turbine of its kind without a central shaft. The lightweight fibreglass foundation of the vertical axis turbine makes it float like a hybrid between sailboat masts and bicycle wheels. The bearings and generator, two of the heaviest parts, are located on the outer rim, close to sea level, where surface speeds are high even at low revolutions per minute (RPM), doing away with the need for rolling bearings, gearboxes, and oil.
The AOE design also uses far less steel than a standard wind turbine and doesn't necessitate forgings, castings, conventional generators, or AC/DC converters while operating at sea.
Because of their reduced weight, these turbines might be produced and launched from locations that would be inaccessible to traditional floating turbines. They might be dragged and maintained by already operating boats that do not violate the Jones Act. The turbines could be manufactured in the U.S. without having to wait for components from other countries, since they could be constructed entirely of fabricated steel and fibreglass. The AOE CTO, Drew Devitt, said in a news release that this would aid manufacturers in deploying the turbines more rapidly and cheaply.
The absence of oil in the turbines makes it possible to submerge them in the eye of a cyclone and wait out the storm there. The cost of financing and insurance might be drastically reduced as a result. In the aftermath of a storm, the turbines might be elevated by releasing compressed air cylinders in the fibreglass floats from afar.
It would be easier to do routine maintenance at sea if service boats had their bearings and generator components on the deck. And if repair is required, the turbines may be disconnected and transported back to port in a day by Jones Act-compliant tugs already in service.
The advantages of the design include safeguards for vessels and marine wildlife. The vast vertical wing area is easily visible to birds and provides excellent horizontal radar reflection for seafaring purposes, but little vertical reflection for airborne navigation.
Posted on November 22, 2022 on the TechWiki channel on YouTube.
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 12-18-2022).]
