Comments on: WIND ENERGY NSM 21 (PROTOTYPE 2)

By: GreenEnergyToday

GreenEnergyToday — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 17:03:33 +0000

I suggest that you build one yourself. Building your own wind turbine is actually a lot easier than one could imagine. You can contact me if you have any questions.

By: TelfLad

TelfLad — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 23:10:59 +0000

Only retards fall for this shit

By: velveetaslingshot

velveetaslingshot — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 06:49:08 +0000

It looks like a good idea, but I wouldn’t be surprised if the math involved proved it to be less energy efficient than a regular turbine with straight blades.

By: chavenor

chavenor — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 12:15:24 +0000

Well some of the best ideas came from the failures of others. So take it easy.

By: upajos

upajos — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 14:51:51 +0000

No matter how fancy the wind turbine is, it stops generating when the wind stops blowing. I like my lights, my computer, my entertainment systems and my electric appliances to work even at night when there’s no sun and no wind. Germany is seriously reconsidering their foray into wind power now due to cost and reliability problems. The only solution for the long term is nuclear power.

By: baur02

baur02 — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 04:53:17 +0000

alright then you pay a premium for your electricity. the only thing holding wind power back is ignorant people who dont like change. every form of power came through these phases, even your precious nuclear. so relax, step back and appreciate that people are trying to make a difference for the now and futur.

By: upajos

upajos — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 16:57:55 +0000

Nuclear power costs have been artificially inflated due to politics in most countries. The actual cost to the end user, including a comfortable profit for the power company, comes to less than $0.02 per kilowatt-hour, and there’s NOTHING on Earth that can compete with that, either now or in the foreseeable future. You’re the ignorant one, baur02: Wind power has been used for thousands of years, but has been largely abandoned since more reliable sources were developed in the Industrial Age.

By: Teratornis

Teratornis — Sat, 31 Oct 2009 03:42:38 +0000

Actually large scale hydro has been the cheapest source of electricity for last 100 years. A hydro plant repays its investment cost within 10 years and then gives nearly free power for another 90 at least. Plus it is dispatchable. The main drawback is the very limited number of acceptable sites for large hydro dams. China had to move 1.2 million people out of the way to make room for Three Gorges. They can do that in China. No way in the US.

By: upajos

upajos — Sat, 31 Oct 2009 00:23:01 +0000

It’s even worse than you say. In California, land of Luddite loonies, they’re dismantling hydro projects and preventing construction of new ones or even upgrades of existing ones to protect some species of non-native fish, frog or whatever. The push is for wind and solar, so our lights go out at night and when the wind stops blowing. Now the nuts complain that windmills are “too loud” and that they “kill birds”. Madness.

By: Teratornis

Teratornis — Wed, 28 Oct 2009 23:47:10 +0000

It’s like David MacKay says in his video and book: if people want the lights to go on, they cannot be against every single form of power generation.

The Chinese don’t seem to have a problem with wind-NIMBYs. They more than doubled their installed wind power capacity each year from 2005 through 2008 and will nearly double it again this year to over 20 GW.