http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/ Engadget Comments for New wind turbines at least 30% more efficient, Earth one step closer to salvation 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/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/Nov 20th 2008 8:36AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/Nov 20th 2008 10:23AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/Nov 20th 2008 10:40AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/wind power? as opposed to .. solar power?

the sun might be jealous about wind power potentially getting the limelight, i suppose.

]]>Nov 20th 2008 10:49AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/Nov 20th 2008 2:23PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/Nov 21st 2008 8:25AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/Nov 20th 2008 8:37AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/Nov 20th 2008 11:36AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/
in the US, windfarms generate over 18,000MW of electricity, enough for 4.9 millions american homes (according to wiki). Germany has even more at over 20,000MW. So you are saying that it took more energy to built these windfarms than it takes to power 5 million american homes for, say, 10 years? (they will last longer than that even).

That's F**king ridiculous...I really wish people would research a little and assess the reality of what they are saying before spreading false information.]]>Nov 20th 2008 12:01PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/
Referring to your question, as it happens one of my friends works in the renewable industry sector, more specifically wind. I would imagine he is fairly knowledgable about the subject. Additionally, one of my relative owns his own contracting business, so to hear it from two different sources is no fluke.

And you obviously overlooked the fact where I said "correct me if I'm wrong" before going off on one. I did find minor amusement in you enquiring to where I had obtained my information, just after you posted facts copied off Wikipedia, the source of all things correct...]]>Nov 20th 2008 1:10PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/All of those costs are reflected in the total cost of the wind farm. Unless you are suggesting that wind turbine manufacturers like GE and Vesta are selling turbines below manufacturing costs...
You're friend may work in the industry, but I'll bring in more direct source for data: me. My civil engineering undergraduate thesis looked at installing a single turbine on the waterfront of a major Canadian city. Wind conditions of the site were considered to be good, but not exceptional, and the assumption was made that one kilometre of transmission lines would be required to connect the turbine to the city's grid. I won't bore you with all the details, but at a borrowing rate of 9% per anum, the single turbine would have broken even in approximately 19.5 years when compared to the average cost of energy production in the region. The turbine under consideration has a design life of 20 years. So this was an adequate break-even scenario, if only barely. However, if you construct a wind farm, the economies of scale are staggering and there's more emphasis on finding a location with prime wind conditions. Plus a 9% interest rate is extremely conservative, especially with the weakening markets. Realistically, it'd be hard not to produce a positively-influencing wind generation project.

You want to talk about breaking even? Look at the true life-cycle costs of a nuclear generation facility. I can appreciate the need for a clean, powerful, steady base load, but it sure doesn't come cheap.]]>Nov 20th 2008 2:29PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/
On a side note, I'm assuming you are referring to the wind turbine by Ontario Place in TO? If so, I can see that from my apartment window (26th floor) and I love it....it looks clean and awesome, especially when it rotates in response to wind changes. ]]>Nov 21st 2008 1:16PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/Nov 20th 2008 8:39AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/Nov 20th 2008 10:34PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/Nov 20th 2008 8:43AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/

]]>Nov 20th 2008 10:06AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/http://www.technologyreview.com/energy/21666/?a=f) it clarifies this point.

In certain locations, the power output can be increased by 50-100% using this turbine as compared to other generators currently in use. This is because even in varying wind speeds, this turbine can still produce power (very high and very low wind speeds). Normal generators are optimized for a specific speed and if varied from that speed, power output goes down, even if the wind speed increases. That is how they claim a higher efficiency. ]]>Nov 20th 2008 2:59PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/
Oh, and please stop with the "addicted to oil" mantra:

adâ‹…dicâ‹…tion: the state of being enslaved to a habit or practice or to something that is psychologically or physically habit-forming, as narcotics, to such an extent that its cessation causes severe trauma.

None of which applies to my or your _chosen_ consumption of a readily available (but politically restricted!) commodity.
]]>Nov 20th 2008 9:05AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/Besides, there are more ways of storing energy for when the wind doesn't blow/sun doesn't shine...]]>Nov 20th 2008 9:08AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/Nov 20th 2008 9:22AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/Oil is a choice. And you are of course pro-choice, right commie buddy?]]>Nov 20th 2008 9:53AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/Nov 20th 2008 3:22PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?menuId=6795&menuItemId=10317&view=PICHEADLINESUMMARY&grid=F7&targetRule=15

read some of this guys stuff]]>Nov 20th 2008 4:40PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/Nov 20th 2008 9:36AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/Nov 20th 2008 9:35AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/Nov 20th 2008 11:42AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/Nov 20th 2008 9:46AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/Nov 20th 2008 9:46AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/Nov 20th 2008 9:51AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/
Wind Turbines provide resistance to wind currents. Put enough of these turbine farms in the way and you permantly change the air currents of the earth. Just goes to show, enough of anything, even GREEN tech, is a bad thing.

Nope... nuclear reactors are the way for now... until we can build huge solar power collecting sails in space and beam the energy back to earth as microwaves.

]]>Nov 20th 2008 10:11AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/
And slowing down the wind wouldn't be such a bad idea, but humans won't be able to do it. ]]>Nov 20th 2008 10:28AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/Nov 20th 2008 10:48AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/
Unless the major wind currents are far higher than these turbines (buildings... trees... etc.)

I hope, for your sake, you were being sarcastic.]]>Nov 20th 2008 11:21AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/Like this:
I asked everybody in my street to park their cars on the driveway outside instead of in the garage. My street is now warmer.]]>Nov 20th 2008 12:05PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/Nov 20th 2008 1:18PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/"they" do a lot of studies that say a lot of things. Plus, PopSci and PopMech are weak at best. As a former bike mechanic, I cringe at how idiotic their coverage of any new bike technology is.
Let's go with these studies for a second though and assume that downwind farms get less rain. Four key questions that need to be answered:
1) Who performed the study? Real scientists or special interest groups?
2) Is there less rain hitting those farms than other farms that don't have wind turbines upwind, or are these farms getting less rain than before the turbines were built. The latter is credible while the former would lead into my next question:
3) Correlation or causality? Did the turbines cause there to be less rain falling on down-wind farmland, or do good wind turbine sites (i.e. good wind conditions) also tend to be lower-rainfall sites?
4) Assuming that the turbines are actually causing these rain issues, what would happen to those downwind farms if there was a nuclear or coal-fire electricity plant in place of the turbines?

The last one is key for all those that trash the environmental benefits of wind energy: it's not about wind turbines being perfect, it's about them being better than the existing practical alternatives.]]>Nov 20th 2008 4:50PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/Nov 20th 2008 10:19AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/Nov 20th 2008 10:50AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/Nov 20th 2008 10:56AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/Nov 20th 2008 5:18PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/http://www.enercon.de) These are 'direct-drive, variable-speed' systems without 'mechanical transmissions' (gearboxes) and claim the corresponding efficiency and reduced-maintenance benefits. I don't think that's the only firm already making these, either.

What's the difference? Or is this just a case of a press-release claiming something is new and comparing it against the worst old technology so as to get high figures for improvement, when really it's only a slight - or no - improvement over existing technology that uses very similar ideas to everyone else?]]>Nov 20th 2008 6:15PMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/Nov 22nd 2008 1:19AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/Nov 22nd 2008 1:19AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/Nov 22nd 2008 1:21AMhttp://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/http://www.engadget.com/2008/11/20/new-wind-turbines-at-least-30-more-efficient-earth-one-step-cl/I am very interested in any energy saving or energy producing technologies for my business and home. I am not mechanically inclined to understand the technical aspect of renewable energy and frankly you might as well tell me in Japanese.

I do have the drive and social consciousness to want to convert my life style and business to it.

I am researching any alternative power sources for my catering company. Presently I use a tremendous amount of electricity. I have a Walk-in Refrigerator/Freezer, 5 freezers, air conditioners, heater and all this in 100 plus year old buildings. Entergy and a Green consultant have audited my business and have made suggestions that were fairly obvious to even me.

With the tax incentives for Solar Power I do seem to be able to get any conclusive answers to how it will effect the cost. It seems like it will be cost prohibitive, although I have been made aware of a business oriented solar power panels that are more effective and are geared towards businesses.

In regards to energy or trash (disposable and renewable eating utensils) , a sharp increase in the cost and initial out put of monies makes it very difficult for a small company that has had so many financial hardships after Katrina and Gustave. My properorties were spared physical damage but the financial damage was great. Gustave took 1 month of business and 1.5 months, no cash flow.

I have always had the plan to be Green with renewable and recycled products and use, before Katrina.I had a young kitchen assistant interested in Environmental issues and charged him with the task of researching the development of a restaurant coop that would produce bio diesel for their delivery vehicles. This was victim to Katrina.
If anyone knows of a research group or organization that would be interested in sponsoring the test pilot of energy conversion, I would offer my company. Please let me know and thank you for your time.

To the winner an unbelievable reward dinner will be created in your honor ! Billy will attest to the meal.

Captaincook04]]>Jan 29th 2009 11:58AM