83 Replies to “Giai Blows A Gasket”

  3. I wonder what Kate is trying to prove here?
    I can show a video of people dying while riding a motorcycle. Happen all the time.
    Technology fail all the time. We improve it and we continue to use it.
    Trial and error toward better reliability.

  4. As many may know, there are a few hundred of these in the Crowsnest Pass area and further east by Ft. Mcleod, AB.
    This area is like a wind tunnel, it just blows and blows to no end. If you pump gas at the Shell gas station at Pincher Creek, you better hold on to something or you may get blown away.
    The first batch of about 30 or so of these wind turbines are by now about 25 to 30 years old, these have steel structure supporting them.
    The rest are between 5 to 10 years old, these models are supported on the same fiberglass tubes as the one that collapsed in the video.
    In all the years these hundreds of turbines that have been generating power for the Calgary C-train there never was an accident like this.
    Normally when there is high wind as it seems in the video, the turbines are shut down, they don’t spin, for exactly the reason to avoid what happened here.

  5. Wouldn’t want to be standing near that thing when it let go.
    Can you imagine one of those on every rooftoop in Canada?

  6. I had an interesting discussion recently with someone involved in managing the power grid. We discussed wind power — seems it has some major limitations. First, any generating capacity created by building wind power devices has to be matched by a corresponding expansion of conventional generating capacity, because if the wind doesn’t blow, or as the clip demonstrates, if it blows too hard and the wind generators have to be shut down then the loss in output has to be made up by the conventional generator. In other words, you have to build twice. Second, wind generation is very fickle, and for the most part is least effective when power is most needed, i.e. winds tend to be calmest in the evening and early morning when power demands are highest. Unlike water behind a dam, or coal, there is no way to store wind. Third, wind generators are very expensive to build relative to the power they generate. Finally, wind generators have their own environmental impact. They are unsightly — probably the reason Senator Ted (Save the planet and all causes left) Kennedy fought their installation in Chesapeake Bay, where he likes to sail. And they kill birds — lots of birds. Birds aren’t dumb. If they want to move or migrate they take advantage of prevailing and strong wind currents, right where the enviros like to install the bird blenders. But, they’re a feel good hit so . . .

  7. a very inefficient design, the prop style wind turbine is only capable of generating electricity in a narrow bandwidth of wind speeds. If the wind isn’t strong enough, the turbine doesn’t work. If the wind is too strong, the turbine explodes. A new design featuring a vertical axis and a style much like a revolving door was developed a few years ago. It is able to operate in a much wider band of wind speeds, and would make the cost of implementing wind powered electricity much more affordable. To date, I have yet to hear about this new style implemented anywhere. Does anyone know any more about this?

  8. What about the birds?! will no one think of the birds?!There would be not enough left of them to dip in batter if they ran into one them.

  9. Is anyone familar with the Protectdabee’s report? Apparently they are saying the windmill’s are killing the bee’s, and other flying bugs. Something do with the flight pattern of the bee, and the windmill’s changing the wind patterns.

  10. “I can show a video of people dying while riding a motorcycle.”
    Nobody’s proposing we replace coal generated power plants with motorcycles.
    I’m embarrassed to have to point that out to you…

  12. A great example of renewable energy!
    Remember: “renewable” means “we have to put up a new one every few weeks.”

  14. One safe clean, quiet nuclear power plant can replace 1,000,000 of these stupid, dangerous, ugly, idiotic wind mills.
    A windmill may be a great way to mill flour in
    the quaint country sides of Holland, but we need some real horsepower to light up, heat and cool millions and millions of homes here in the great white north.
    Just more of the gaia stupidity.
    Even if there was severe climate change that would kill off a large chunk of population of Earth, wouldn’t that suit the people hating Left just fine?
    Those folks are oh-so confused.

  15. Until we can build giant batteries or capacitors to store the power, wind power will be nothing more than a curiosity feeding into a power grid. Maybe it could be used to supply electricity to crack water to make hydrogen gas?

  16. Wind generators have a control circuit which is “supposed” to feather the blades once the wind speed exceeds the rating of the windmill … “obviously a major malfunction’.
    I expect this video to be used by many of the anti-windmill lobbies , and rightly so. The “greenies” have so hyped the BS about alternative energy that no one looks at the problems.

  17. I once did the math on blade speed for one of those things. Turns out that the blade tips can easily break the sound barrier at not too high an RPM. Blades are 80 ft long, 10 feet or so of hub gets you a circle with 90 ft. radius.
    Oh, I forgot Lefties can’t do math. ASQ, it means the machine explodes if the brakes fail in anything more than a stiff breeze. Not what I want in my cow pasture, thanks.

  19. Well, there’s one green idea that’s finally qualified for O’Reilly’s no spin zone!

  20. theres one across the bay from me at the pickering nuclear station. standing under it as it is rotating is kind of scarry. there is a very loud whoomp whoomp and you can feel the wind displacement as the blades go by. this model apparantly can be run on a windless day. it has a internal generator to turn the blades which in turn turns the power generator.

  22. While I’m a total non-believer in man-made global warming we don’t have to throw out the baby with the bathwater. There is lots of areas where wind can be harnessed with little danger to man or animal. Oil and natural gas are precious resources that if their use can be replaced for wind power production the supply will just last longer. If wind generation is combined with hydro there are efficiencies. You can pump the water back uphill when wind generation is in excess and regenerate it by hydro when the wind is weak. Sure nuclear is much greater in terms of volume but would someone point out to me one place in North America where environmentalists and even normal neighbours have been willing to put one in their back yard in the last 25 years.Ultimately the answer might be to go back to smaller scale windmill generation such as
    was done on prairie farms prior to rural electrification.

  23. I’m just glad nobody lost an eye!
    There isn’t enough energy density in wind flow to power our modern world.
    Bob Dylan’s little ditty has befuddled the usual suspects.

  24. Not sure what your point is, Kate.
    Technology is known to break down. That happens with cars, home appliances, nuclear power plants and computers, to name a few.
    I agree windmills are only a partial solution for large scale power generation, but they are a good choice for single rural homes.
    I’ve operated a 2-kW windmill, supplemented with solar panels, for the last 5 years without a hitch. I get all the power I need. Sure the wind doesn’t blow sometimes, that’s why you have batteries. I installed it 300 feet away so the noise is not a problem.
    In my neck of the woods the hydro is flaky; the neighbours had 3 major outages so far this year, one lasting 60 hours. I had lights all the time here.

  25. I am a fan of wind power. I helped my brother build a system at his farm. They do have their limitations. I will address some of those here. All the things Dr D says are pretty accurate.
    Speed – the big ones have to turn at the speed required to generate 60 hertz power. This means they are limited to a band of wind speeds.
    Vertical axis machines, which someone mentioned are actually an old design. Their advantage is that you don’t have to point them into the wind. The disadvantage is that they are not as efficient.
    The one I built can take advantage of a much broader range of wind speed. It generates AC, inverts it to DC to charge batteries and then the battery power is converted to AC to be used. The wind speed doesn’t matter because the AC freq doesn’t matter. Its a fairly efficient system, but on a pure cost recovery basis it will never pay for itself.
    I believe the future of this technology is in the generation of power to make hydrogen. The hydrogen would then be used as a fuel. I believe this will be the way they go.
    They are a great technology, but it has a way to go before it is mature. I think the way we are using it now will disappear in the future.

  26. Technology fail [sic] all the time. We improve it and we continue to use it.

    You mean like your frommage-addled brain? If you continue to “improve it” as you say, you just might become a God-fearing conservative someday!
    ROFLMAO!

  27. 2kw Greenneck? Hardly comparable.
    What’s your cost/kwh? And what do you plan to do with the worn out toxic lead acid batteries?

  28. Lev: “The rest are between 5 to 10 years old, these models are supported on the same fiberglass tubes as the one that collapsed in the video.”
    Large turbines like the one in the video have steel towers.
    DrD: “Unlike water behind a dam, or coal, there is no way to store wind.”
    See vanadium redox betteries (http://www.vrbpower.com/applications/renewable-resources.html)
    “Third, wind generators are very expensive to build relative to the power they generate”
    Wind projects are competitive with alternatives – presently somewhere between 8 and 9 cents per KwHr. Natural gas costs between 5 and 6 cents per KwHr for the fuel only and it’s only going to get more expensive. As for nuclear, who knows what it costs (see former Ontario Hydro’s stranded debt which is all due to nuclear).
    “Who wants to live near something that sounds like a 747 taking off every minute of the day?”
    Have you ever listened to one? There is a 1.8 megawatt turbine on Lake Ontario in Pickering and you can walk right up beside it. I’ve been there in 20 mph winds and you can’t hear it beyond 200 yards. As wind speed increases, so does background noise so they aren’t noticeable. The same goes for the large Lake Erie windfarm which I’ve also visited on a windy day.

  29. “2kw Greenneck? Hardly comparable.”
    That’s enough for my needs. I need to electricity to power my water pump, a fridge, a freezer, a few lights and my computer. For heat I use wood, for hot water active-solar in summer and wood in winter. We don’t have A/C, the few days it’s too hot I jump in the lake!
    “What’s your cost/kwh? And what do you plan to do with the worn out toxic lead acid batteries?”
    It’s not cheap, i give you that. My installation cost 10,000$ (windmill, tower, solar panels, inverter, batteries, controller) and that’s because I did buy some of the equipment second-hand and did the whole installation myself. I factor my costs, so far, amount to 35 cents per kilowatt-hour over the last 5 years. Assuming I have another 5 years before some major parts replacement this may drop to 17 cents, still way higher than the going commercial rate. I’m fully aware of that. My goal was independence, not savings.
    As for the batteries, this is indeed a concern. Technically the lead can be recycled, but I’m afraid most used batteries end up shipped in the third world with little say on what’s done with them.

  30. Nobody’s proposing we replace coal generated power plants with motorcycles.
    yah! cuz 6 storey smokestacks spewing poison into the atmosphere is way more attractive and far safer than a windmill.
    i’m embarrassed to have to point that out to you…

  31. Those white tubes that the turbines are on top of are fiberglass, those in souther Alberta are made in Crossfield, AB.

  32. spewing poison into the atmosphere

    You mean like the way you poison everyone around you when you open your mouth to spread your special brand of idiocy?
    I’m NOT embarrassed to point this out to you.

  34. Those white tubes that the turbines are on top of are fiberglass, those in souther Alberta are made in Crossfield, AB.

  35. Mr. Davidson, are you suggesting that we replace coal fired plants with, er….. smokestacked coal fired plant? Whoa there fella, momentarily blinded by eco-rage were’nt ya…….

  36. Posted by: DrD at February 25, 2008 4:00 PM
    They are unsightly
    That depends on your esthetics, they look good to me.
    And they kill birds — lots of birds.
    They have done study on this very thing in the Crowsnest Pass, AB. After the turbines were there about 15-20 years, they found one dead bird and they could not connect it to the windmills, birds usually take a break when it is windy.
    Posted by: pete at February 25, 2008 4:05 PM
    If the wind isn’t strong enough, the turbine doesn’t work. If the wind is too strong, the turbine explodes.
    The turbines work at 15 MPH winds, when the wind became too strong they shut down.
    See Post by: Brian at February 25, 2008 4:45 PM. I would only add, if you have been close to one, you would see on top of the turbine, instruments measuring wind speed, wind direction and other parameters that are fed into the local computer. The computer controls the blades and on and off switch.
    A new design featuring a vertical axis and a style much like a revolving door was developed a few years ago.
    The vertical axis concoctions were tested in Crowsnest Pass some years ago by U of Calgary; they did not have anything good to say about them, the project was abandoned.
    Among the very first wind farms was one in the neighborhood of Palm Spring, all of the turbines were run by the vertical contraptions, it was a debacle of major proportions. Nobody ever heard about the project again.
    Posted by: Honey Pot at February 25, 2008 4:09 PM
    Apparently they are saying the windmill’s are killing the bee’s, and other flying bugs.
    The bees don’t fly at those heights. They usually stick to the flowers.
    Posted by: holdfast at February 25, 2008 4:43 PM
    Maybe it could be used to supply electricity to crack water to make hydrogen gas?
    Bingo! There is your stored energy.
    The wind energy to be sure is not stable due to the wind conditions though it is good as complimentary to the existing other power generating modes.
    Sorry about going on like this.
    A question, how do you do italics.

  37. yah! cuz 6 storey smokestacks spewing poison into the atmosphere is way more attractive and far safer than a windmill.
    Yeah.And you see jeffie poo-boy.That’s the problem.
    The S02 etc they are spewing out is called POLLUTION, not GWG. Something you leftard wingnuts can’t seem to grasp. CO2 IS NOT poisonous,nor causes global warming. The biggest contributor to GW is dihydrogen monoxide. Something you Kyoto Kultists can’t seem to grasp. When you start yapping to clean up REAL smog and pollution,then youu’ll have a true,factual hit.

  39. First off, the world’s largest operator of wind turbines is EOn, one of the large German electric utilities. Here’s their performance report from 2005:
    http://www.eon-netz.com/Ressources/downloads/EON_Netz_Windreport2005_eng.pdf
    Summed up in short, they’re an operational and budgetary disaster with each increment more costly and less productive than the previous one. This is actual utility experience, folks, not promotional rubbish.
    Second, Greenneck, a system may work fine at 2 kW, but modern wind turbines are 1 to 1.5 MW, that’s 500 times the power output and size of your machine. The oldest problem in engineering is scaling, what works at one scale usually doesn’t work at another, particularly if it’s a technology dominated by material structure.
    Pete, the vertical axis turbine was an experimental design in Canada tested by Hydro Quebec in the Gaspe. The design was dropped, I understand, because of very large problems with large bearing rings.
    Atheist quebecois separatiste, yes, sometimes technology does fail. And sometimes, technology is inadequate for solving problems like power generation no matter how vigorously you beat your head against the wall.
    Honeypot, tests conducted by Ontario Hydro in the 1970s, and confirmed by operational experience in Germany has shown that the median throw distance of blade separation from the turbine is about 500 metres. No, you don’t want to be anywhere nearby, considering that the blades weigh up to a tonne. This sucker is going through the roof of your house.
    Phantom, quite right about tip speed. It’s the same problem with ship propellers, and why you have to have multiple propeller shafts to move a ship. At the point of breaking the sound barrier, you get cavitation. This means enormous loss of energy and a lot of sound. Can we say, sonic boom?
    John, there are so many errors in your post it’s difficult to know where to start. The cost for wind you quote doesn’t include the 1.8 cents direct subsidy to the producer paid by the federal government. Further wind only exists in Europe because of a highly consumer unfriendly measure called feed in tariffs. Go look it up. Furthermore, it also ignores the fact that the turbine is always turning, even if the windspeed is too low to generate anything. Wind turbines require excitation current for the converter and to power the gearbox. Finally, your comments on Ontario Hydro stranded debt are wrong. Yes, about half of it was nuclear; the other half was transmission system upgrades, reconstruction and emissions abatement at coal-fired plants, and purchase and refurbishment of a number of hydraulic stations in the late 80s and early 90s.
    Finally, Jake, yes, windmills were useful for early rural work. Remember, however, that their principal use was pumping water, not generating electricity at a constant 60 Hz, 220 V. Water can be easily stored, electricity cannot.

  40. Say Jeffie poo-boy, did you know the Chicoms are bringing on-line one brand new coal fired “6 storey smokestack spewing poison into the atmosphere” every single week? Latest, state of the are 1930’s technology too, with zero pollution controls installed. All the crud straight up the flue, no stupid scrubbers or precipitators to get in the way.
    Did you know that six stories is -short- for a smokestack?
    Did you know that the Chicoms don’t burn the nice, hard, black anthracite coal us bad people in North America use? Nuh uh Jeffie, they burn the cheap brown sh1t they dig up local. Nasssty, ssstinksy stuff it is too. Maximum sulfur content for atmospheric creation of sulphuric acid. Yeah baby!
    Oh and btw, did you know you’re an objectionable buffoon with the brain of a carrot?

  42. It looks like it has been hit by something coming from the left of the screen…
    Was this a two for one; testing missiles on a tower that needed to be taken down anyway or what?

  43. “i’m embarrassed to have to point that out to you..”.
    Posted by: jeff davidson at February 25, 2008 6:31 PM
    It may have been embarrassing but obviously nessesary.

  44. John West: I think you got carried away with the zero’s, it would be between 1200 to 1500 hundred 1Mw plus industrial scale wind turbines to replace a 1000Mw nuclear plant. Not including the backup gas turbines to replace output if there is no wind. I don’t disagree with the rest of your post.
    The issue here is you can easily imagine a whole field of these getting whacked in a windstorm. Not a good option for baseload electricity.
    Like, how often to you hear of a coal or nuclear plant getting blown over by wind?
    Greenneck: Sounds like you have a cool setup, but please realize that not everyone around you is prepared to live your lifestyle (…or has the zoning to plant a wind turbine in downtown Calgary).

  46. “I wonder what Kate is trying to prove here?
    Posted by: atheist quebecois separatiste at February 25, 2008 3:50 PM”
    Prove? That’s a good question. As crazy as it sounds (and these cons appear)anything that can be remotely linked to benefiting the environment is loathed by this bunch. I think when she (“she”. I remain unconvinced) was young she was attacked and traumatised by an enraged ground squirrel. Just look at the picture at the top of SDA.

  47. Dave, it’s worse than that. A typical wind turbine has a capacity factor of about 20 per cent. A typical baseload nuclear or coal fired plant has a capacity factor of 80 per cent. So, to balance off a 1000 MW nuclear plant, you need about 4000 wind turbines, plus back up capacity as spinning reserve (that means fossil plants, gas or coal) burning on no load condition when the wind drops. Checking the performance of large wind fleets such as EOn’s, the spinning reserve requirement is about 70 per cent, so call it an extra 700 MW you need on top of the 4000 wind turbines to ensure electricity production. Just to add spice to the m mix, that’s also about five times the transmission system requirement for the wind fleet as well, all of it chronically underloaded.

  48. Libforlife, you just don’t get it, do you? You stupid leftards are busy screaming about Carbon Dioxide and eeeeeviiiiil oil/gas/coal while a quarter billion cars are stopped dead in heavy traffic spewing out their exausts while not going anywhere. Why? Because you leftist asshats stop any sort of new infrastructure from being built, you delay any sort of improvements to existing infrastructure with years and years of “environmental impact” studies and other useless delays, and all the while the clouds of smog over our cities grow thicker and thicker. Instead of demanding our current coal plants be retrofitted to be extremely high-efficiency plants, you demand they be shut down and replaced with wind turbines. A great idea in principle, but when you realize just how many turbines it takes, and how long it takes, and how much it costs, it just isn’t workable. And to top it all off, you’ll try and force your ideas onto everyone else, but you won’t practice what you preach until everyone else is forced to do so as well. So don’t talk about caring for the environment. If you truly cared, you wouldn’t drive, or use electricity unless absolutely necessary, and instead of screaming about Carbon Dioxide and tilting at windmills you’d be calling for incinerators, clean-coal tech, and traffic clearing infrastructure.

  49. cgh: You’re right, I probably was too optimistic. Most wind farms seldom reach peak capacity.
    lib: People here aren’t “against” the environment.
    More likely they are against spending good money doing dumb feel-good things in the name of the environment that don’t really solve the problem.
    Speaking for myself, I like the idea of wind, solar, geothermal technologies.
    But as an engineer, I know that these won’t be more than a small part of the energy mix for a very very long time.
    How much steel and concrete goes into building a single wind turbine? Multiply that by thousands. How much energy does that take to fabricate, transport, build on-site? Connect it all to the grid? How much land does all this use? Does this still sound green to you?
    I’m much more interested in solutions that work in the real world – “does this work?” – endstop. Now, you may disagree but that’s cool. But if you want to be taken seriously, then come to the table with ideas that work, and recognize the tradeoffs to be made.
    BTW, the name calling doesn’t help. But you know that.

Proudly powered by WordPress & Skyrocket Themes

MENU

Navigation