http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/22/rock-port-missouri-celebrates-being-100-wind-powered/ Engadget Comments for Rock Port, Missouri celebrates being "100% wind powered" http://www.engadget.com/media/feedlogo.gif http://www.engadget.com en-us Copyright 2012 Weblogs, Inc. The contents of this feed are available for non-commercial use only. Blogsmith http://www.blogsmith.com/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/22/rock-port-missouri-celebrates-being-100-wind-powered/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/22/rock-port-missouri-celebrates-being-100-wind-powered/
...and cows, of course.]]>May 22nd 2008 2:17AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/05/22/rock-port-missouri-celebrates-being-100-wind-powered/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/22/rock-port-missouri-celebrates-being-100-wind-powered/May 22nd 2008 2:20AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/05/22/rock-port-missouri-celebrates-being-100-wind-powered/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/22/rock-port-missouri-celebrates-being-100-wind-powered/May 22nd 2008 2:51AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/05/22/rock-port-missouri-celebrates-being-100-wind-powered/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/22/rock-port-missouri-celebrates-being-100-wind-powered/
We should know exactly what we are doing and no repeat the mistake we made with the environment and gasoline.]]>May 22nd 2008 9:43AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/05/22/rock-port-missouri-celebrates-being-100-wind-powered/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/22/rock-port-missouri-celebrates-being-100-wind-powered/May 22nd 2008 12:04PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/05/22/rock-port-missouri-celebrates-being-100-wind-powered/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/22/rock-port-missouri-celebrates-being-100-wind-powered/May 22nd 2008 2:18AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/05/22/rock-port-missouri-celebrates-being-100-wind-powered/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/22/rock-port-missouri-celebrates-being-100-wind-powered/
and yeah. i like green tech. this makes me happy.

next is 100% cow released methane powered communities]]>May 22nd 2008 2:19AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/05/22/rock-port-missouri-celebrates-being-100-wind-powered/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/22/rock-port-missouri-celebrates-being-100-wind-powered/May 22nd 2008 2:18AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/05/22/rock-port-missouri-celebrates-being-100-wind-powered/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/22/rock-port-missouri-celebrates-being-100-wind-powered/May 22nd 2008 2:37AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/05/22/rock-port-missouri-celebrates-being-100-wind-powered/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/22/rock-port-missouri-celebrates-being-100-wind-powered/
Sure, building a wind turbine may not be cheap up front, but it will save money in the long run. There are a couple of things that people have to realize though.

1) Power will not be free. At least not completely. Turbines require maintenance and someone to run the site. These things cost money. Surplus power sales may provide a method to pay for said maintenance fees, but perhaps not completely.

2) Power is not limitless. Rules may be imposed giving people "X" amount of power from the wind turbines, and any excess use may be billed at a pre-set rate.

3) The wind turbine has to go somewhere. It may be close to where you live/work/play/insert verb here. Oh well. If we want to reap the benefits of these power sources, we need to be prepared to pay the price in terms of a structural footprint. Everyone can't be a NIMBY (Not In My BackYard) person.

4) Manhattan can't do this (unless you mean Manhattan, KS). This is a solution for the plains areas that have areas of wide open wind friendly space. Additionally, if you set up a wind farm, you have now basically reserved space (same land) for a solar farm, in between the wind turbines, to further augment your power generation.

Small towns, take note.

Cheers

Chris]]>May 22nd 2008 2:42AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/05/22/rock-port-missouri-celebrates-being-100-wind-powered/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/22/rock-port-missouri-celebrates-being-100-wind-powered/May 22nd 2008 3:51AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/05/22/rock-port-missouri-celebrates-being-100-wind-powered/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/22/rock-port-missouri-celebrates-being-100-wind-powered/May 22nd 2008 3:57AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/05/22/rock-port-missouri-celebrates-being-100-wind-powered/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/22/rock-port-missouri-celebrates-being-100-wind-powered/May 22nd 2008 8:17AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/05/22/rock-port-missouri-celebrates-being-100-wind-powered/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/22/rock-port-missouri-celebrates-being-100-wind-powered/May 22nd 2008 9:07AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/05/22/rock-port-missouri-celebrates-being-100-wind-powered/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/22/rock-port-missouri-celebrates-being-100-wind-powered/May 22nd 2008 10:46AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/05/22/rock-port-missouri-celebrates-being-100-wind-powered/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/22/rock-port-missouri-celebrates-being-100-wind-powered/
The main benefits of this are -- fewer ocean-based wind turbines to generate the equivalent land-based turbines power, doesn't take up precious land real estate (since the majority of the world is water not land), can be made in much greater size, can be made off the coasts of big cities (such as NY maybe?) to be piped directly to that city.

The main detractions are -- because of higher wind speeds the turbines must be more durable/stronger which makes each one more expensive, maintenance is more of a problem because it's off the coast and not as easy to get to, sea life as some people will most certainly complain about, slower reaction to problems/non-working turbines (kinda maintenance but i think it deserves a separate mentinon)

Anything I left out, feel free to add in...]]>May 22nd 2008 11:08AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/05/22/rock-port-missouri-celebrates-being-100-wind-powered/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/22/rock-port-missouri-celebrates-being-100-wind-powered/May 22nd 2008 2:49AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/05/22/rock-port-missouri-celebrates-being-100-wind-powered/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/22/rock-port-missouri-celebrates-being-100-wind-powered/May 22nd 2008 3:44AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/05/22/rock-port-missouri-celebrates-being-100-wind-powered/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/22/rock-port-missouri-celebrates-being-100-wind-powered/May 22nd 2008 3:44AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/05/22/rock-port-missouri-celebrates-being-100-wind-powered/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/22/rock-port-missouri-celebrates-being-100-wind-powered/May 22nd 2008 12:31PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/05/22/rock-port-missouri-celebrates-being-100-wind-powered/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/22/rock-port-missouri-celebrates-being-100-wind-powered/May 22nd 2008 3:25AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/05/22/rock-port-missouri-celebrates-being-100-wind-powered/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/22/rock-port-missouri-celebrates-being-100-wind-powered/May 22nd 2008 6:12AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/05/22/rock-port-missouri-celebrates-being-100-wind-powered/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/22/rock-port-missouri-celebrates-being-100-wind-powered/So, just what DO they do when there's not enough/too much wind?
Also, I note from the linked article that the output of these turbines is only PREDICTED to be 16 million KWH (which is approximately 36.5% of their maximum capacity, they need to make 29.7% to 'break even' at 13 million KWH). I also noted when I visited their site that the wind speed, as shown on their indicator was 8mph, below the threshold of 9mph. So no electricity there then. They also quote that the maximum generation is at 14mph. Not much of an envelope either. I note they dont quote the speed at which you have to shut them down for safety.
I will be more than happy to congratulate this community when they have actually PROVEN to be "100% Wind Powered" and not just declared this based on "predicted" results. It IS a step in the right direction, and certainly a great deal 'greener' than going out and buying a Toyota Pious, thinking that youre saving the planet.]]>May 22nd 2008 3:47AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/05/22/rock-port-missouri-celebrates-being-100-wind-powered/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/22/rock-port-missouri-celebrates-being-100-wind-powered/May 22nd 2008 5:14AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/05/22/rock-port-missouri-celebrates-being-100-wind-powered/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/22/rock-port-missouri-celebrates-being-100-wind-powered/
Although those turbines should produce at least 20% more electricity than what the community uses, the generation most definitely won't be following the load. I would bet of the 16 million kWhs, more than half are sold back to the electricity provider - probably to the point where less than half of the electricity consumed in Rock Port is from wind energy.

Unfortunately, wind doesn't follow typical loads. It blows more at night and during the spring and fall, when the need for electricity is the lowest. As a result, most of the electricity ends up going to offset baseload generation (the cheapst kind) for loads like industrial customers that are running their plants 24/7 at a low electricity rate.]]>May 22nd 2008 10:27AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/05/22/rock-port-missouri-celebrates-being-100-wind-powered/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/22/rock-port-missouri-celebrates-being-100-wind-powered/
OK. Bill & Yuoface have valid points that wind is higher on top of the buildings. However, much of Manhattan is not skyscrapers - many buildings are quite a bit lower. In this case, the wind power is nearly useless.

Additionally, the "acreage" of a building in Manhattan is very limited for a wind turbine, and so you could have have many on a skyscraper. There is no possible way to get enough power to make a building, let alone the city, 100% wind powered like a town can do.

I also tend to believe that the cost of a wind turbine on top of a skyscraper would be quite a bit more expensive than one on the ground.

So, yes, a building could lessen its energy drain on the current grid by installing a wind turbine, but it might not be worth it.

Cheers

Chris]]>May 22nd 2008 4:14AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/05/22/rock-port-missouri-celebrates-being-100-wind-powered/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/22/rock-port-missouri-celebrates-being-100-wind-powered/May 22nd 2008 8:26AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/05/22/rock-port-missouri-celebrates-being-100-wind-powered/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/22/rock-port-missouri-celebrates-being-100-wind-powered/May 22nd 2008 11:49AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/05/22/rock-port-missouri-celebrates-being-100-wind-powered/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/22/rock-port-missouri-celebrates-being-100-wind-powered/
As found sound and vibration, sound is just a given its ny, vibration the buildings already sway and are built to withstand earthquakes.]]>May 22nd 2008 12:13PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/05/22/rock-port-missouri-celebrates-being-100-wind-powered/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/22/rock-port-missouri-celebrates-being-100-wind-powered/
We have nuke plants in the US that generate over 1400MW.

Oh yeah, power will never be free. The only way we can come to live and function from wind or "green" power generation is to consume less. Sure, technology will make our devices and lights (etc..) run more efficiently, but, that won't be enough to curb the demand for power. So, toss out your computers, TV's, and don't go to or watch sporting events. Don't use any air conditioners, toasters, hair dryers, electric cars, or get sick and go to a hospital.

Have fun dreamers!]]>May 22nd 2008 7:34AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/05/22/rock-port-missouri-celebrates-being-100-wind-powered/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/22/rock-port-missouri-celebrates-being-100-wind-powered/
ya a nuke plant also powers more than a small city... why put em down at least their trying thats more than most other cities.

Also ya wind power is less continuous, but then again at 3-4mw excess that there putting away daily, they're pretty much countering most of the "traditional" usage.

And no consuming less isnt the only way

concentrated solar and melted salt energy storage are cheap and readily available, as well as 24hr solutions. their are also a trillion other ways...

one other way is SAFE nuclear power using helium3 (moon mission anyone?)]]>May 22nd 2008 8:23AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/05/22/rock-port-missouri-celebrates-being-100-wind-powered/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/22/rock-port-missouri-celebrates-being-100-wind-powered/May 22nd 2008 8:19AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/05/22/rock-port-missouri-celebrates-being-100-wind-powered/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/22/rock-port-missouri-celebrates-being-100-wind-powered/May 22nd 2008 10:24AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/05/22/rock-port-missouri-celebrates-being-100-wind-powered/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/22/rock-port-missouri-celebrates-being-100-wind-powered/
Rock Port actually got the turbines for free. A company named Wind Capital Group is building wind farms across Northwest Missouri with financial backing from John Deere. John Deere gets money from the equipment used, WCG gets money from the electricity generated, and Rock Port gets the turbines for free. Not one cent of taxpayer money was spent on the project. (unless you count federal tax credits for wind energy, which we all pay whether our town gets wind power or not) The landowners actually get a $3,000 annual check for each turbine on their land. I know a guy from a nearby town that akes $30,000 per year just watching the blades spin outside his window.

And in a town of 2,000 people, you can actually liveon $30,000 per year.

Also:
numba1son,

Your comment about nuclear power was more relevant than you know. Many of Rock Port's residents work just across the Missouri River in Nebraska at a nuclear power plant less than 10 miles from their town.]]>May 22nd 2008 11:39AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/05/22/rock-port-missouri-celebrates-being-100-wind-powered/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/22/rock-port-missouri-celebrates-being-100-wind-powered/
Wind turbine companies usually will not go near such a small project because it is not economically feasible to do so. (cost to move equipment, etc, cannot be recouped on a small project).

In this case, Wind Capital Group already had plans to build a wind farm 10 times larger west of Rock Port, so they just stopped by and built the 4-turbine Rock Port site on their way to the larger project west of town.

This is NOT yet feasible for most small towns. Rock Port got lucky by its proximity to a planned project.

Eric: Was the "paper of record in NW Missouri" that you worked for based in St. Joseph? If so, I'm there now.]]>May 22nd 2008 11:51AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/05/22/rock-port-missouri-celebrates-being-100-wind-powered/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/22/rock-port-missouri-celebrates-being-100-wind-powered/
And I seem to remember that Waste Management tried to build a toxic waste incinerator nearby. The problem what with what they planned to burn in that incinerator, it would have been expelling phosgene gas (see: World War I) which is some nasty stuff.

The guy who wrote the Superfund Bill for the EPA showed up and filled the good citizens in and they nixed the plan. (My employer intentionally tried to defame him, but luckily they failed. The reporter was so mad at the owners of the paper forcing him to do a hatchet job on the guy that he quit and joined Habitat for Humanity and went to Africa.)

Good to see Rock Port is still an eco-friendly village.]]>May 22nd 2008 11:40AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/05/22/rock-port-missouri-celebrates-being-100-wind-powered/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/22/rock-port-missouri-celebrates-being-100-wind-powered/May 26th 2008 4:31PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/05/22/rock-port-missouri-celebrates-being-100-wind-powered/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/22/rock-port-missouri-celebrates-being-100-wind-powered/May 24th 2008 10:07PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/05/22/rock-port-missouri-celebrates-being-100-wind-powered/http://www.engadget.com/2008/05/22/rock-port-missouri-celebrates-being-100-wind-powered/Jul 18th 2008 9:34PM