Suckered again

[B. Max]

It's this kind of nonsense that the greems would have government throw millions of dollars at.

http://www.globeadvisor.com/servlet/Articl...61130/RREGULY30

[mikedavid00]

It's this kind of nonsense that the greems would have government throw millions of dollars at.

http://www.globeadvisor.com/servlet/Articl...61130/RREGULY30

Lol.

"Following Paul Martin's assumption of the office of Prime Minister, Dion was dropped from Cabinet, in large part because of his association with the outgoing Chrétien"

[PocketRocket]

From what I can see, the writer of the article spent half his time telling us something everyone knows; The wind does not blow all the time.

So this invalidates the whole idea of wind farms???

He also mentioned that Denmark currently has 20% of their power supplied by wind farms.

No mention of them having any problem over there, and from the tone of the article, I'm sure if there were any nits to pick, he would have found them.

This article is simply another example of a political hacks making mountains out of molehills.

[B. Max]

From what I can see, the writer of the article spent half his time telling us something everyone knows; The wind does not blow all the time.

So this invalidates the whole idea of wind farms???

He also mentioned that Denmark currently has 20% of their power supplied by wind farms.

No mention of them having any problem over there, and from the tone of the article, I'm sure if there were any nits to pick, he would have found them.

This article is simply another example of a political hacks making mountains out of molehills.

I guess you don't understand to well.

The capacity factor is a crude but important measure of efficiency. A generating plant (whether coal, gas, nuclear or hydro) running at a 100-per-cent capacity factor means it's pumping out the juice 24/7 with no down time to fix technical glitches, and no transmission problems. Running flat out all the time is impossible. But the wind farms -- running at about a fifth of their theoretical capacity, at least in the Energy Probe analysis -- are at the low end of the scale among generators. A wind farm in Quebec, called Le Nordais, had a capacity factor of only 18 per cent in its first five years of operation. Ontario's coal plants generally run at a 70- to 80-per-cent capacity factor, the nuclear plants somewhat higher.

[geoffrey]

I work in power transmission and I can tell you our current system in Alberta is at the full capacity of wind that we can allow. Anything more will make the system too unstable.

Every other province has tons to build on though, Alberta is really the only province that puts it money where the rest of their mouths are and builds green projects.

[jbg]

It's this kind of nonsense that the greems would have government throw millions of dollars at.

http://www.globeadvisor.com/servlet/Articl...61130/RREGULY30

Ted Kennedy, who will tell people he's a "green" Senator, has blocked wind farm development off his beloved patrician Hyannis home.

Hypcorisy, anyone?

[B. Max]

It's this kind of nonsense that the greems would have government throw millions of dollars at.

http://www.globeadvisor.com/servlet/Articl...61130/RREGULY30

Ted Kennedy, who will tell people he's a "green" Senator, has blocked wind farm development off his beloved patrician Hyannis home.

Hypcorisy, anyone?

I wouldn't want them around me either.

[Leafless]

I work in power transmission and I can tell you our current system in Alberta is at the full capacity of wind that we can allow. Anything more will make the system too unstable.

Every other province has tons to build on though, Alberta is really the only province that puts it money where the rest of their mouths are and builds green projects.

Why is it you always talk about Alberta like it is not part of Canada or it is the only place to live.

In two short one sentence paragraph's you mentioned Alberta twice.

Your green projects simply cancel out because of your high level of pollution unless you can prove otherwise.

Something about windmills no one has mentioned and that windmills apparently generate a low level frequency. According to one article I read forced this family, who lives near one, to put their house up for sale which no one will buy because of this unbearable low frequency hum.

[kimmy]

I work in power transmission and I can tell you our current system in Alberta is at the full capacity of wind that we can allow. Anything more will make the system too unstable.

Every other province has tons to build on though, Alberta is really the only province that puts it money where the rest of their mouths are and builds green projects.

Why is it you always talk about Alberta like it is not part of Canada or it is the only place to live.

In two short one sentence paragraph's you mentioned Alberta twice.

Uh, he mentioned Alberta because it was relevant, Einstein.

While some people are trying to use the article to say that Wind Power doesn't work, Geoffrey's comments show the opposite: in Alberta, wind power is generating *too much* power.

The article in the original post says the same:

In May, the Alberta government effectively put wind development on hold because the province's transmission grid could not handle wind power's rising megawatts.

A relative of mine built a new home in northern Alberta and went "off the grid" for power because the utility company was going to charge them almost $30,000 to run powerlines to their home. For less than the cost of powerlines, they built a solar and wind power generating setup. The sun doesn't shine all the time, and the wind doesn't blow all the time, but they have a diesel generator that kicks in when the battery reserves start getting low. They tell me that in the time they've been running this setup, they haven't had to buy much diesel.

And the same logic applies to a wind-farm. The wind doesn't blow all the time, but we still have fossil fuel generating stations to take up the slack. If the fossil fuel stations run at low capacity most of the time and only fire up to full capacity when the wind farms are running slow, that's still a big reduction in pollution.

-k

{B-Max, mikedavid, and Leafless posting in the same thread? It's "the perfect storm".}

[stignasty]

I work in power transmission and I can tell you our current system in Alberta is at the full capacity of wind that we can allow. Anything more will make the system too unstable.

I don't understand what you're saying. Are you saying that we can't add any more wind turbines? What do you mean "full capacity of wind?" How would it make the system unstable to add more?

Don't get me wrong, I'm not being facetious, I just don't understand how we can have too much wind generated power.

[B. Max]

And the same logic applies to a wind-farm. The wind doesn't blow all the time, but we still have fossil fuel generating stations to take up the slack. If the fossil fuel stations run at low capacity most of the time and only fire up to full capacity when the wind farms are running slow, that's still a big reduction in pollution.

There are five coal fired power plants in the area and six if you count inland cement. Yet there is no smog. If you take a look right at the top of one those stacks you can't see anything coming out short of some steam. They are equipped with scrubbers. C02 is not a pollutant, and as far as a greenhouse gas it hasn't been doing a very good job around here.

-k

{B-Max, mikedavid, and Leafless posting in the same thread? It's "the perfect storm".}

Nah.

[geoffrey]

Something about windmills no one has mentioned and that windmills apparently generate a low level frequency. According to one article I read forced this family, who lives near one, to put their house up for sale which no one will buy because of this unbearable low frequency hum.

Yup, they said it made them all upset at each other. It was weird.

There may be some truth to that, but I think it more likely along the lines of the wacko's that don't go need high voltage transmission lines because of 'health effects'. There simply is no real evidence of it... transmission lines or wind generated frequencies.

There is evidence that windmills kill hundreds of birds... it seems like that same frequency attracts some migratory birds and kills alot of them. Bats as well as it interferes with their echo location.

I work in power transmission and I can tell you our current system in Alberta is at the full capacity of wind that we can allow. Anything more will make the system too unstable.

I don't understand what you're saying. Are you saying that we can't add any more wind turbines? What do you mean "full capacity of wind?" How would it make the system unstable to add more?

Don't get me wrong, I'm not being facetious, I just don't understand how we can have too much wind generated power.

Easily stig. There's two major reasons right now.

First, landowners and ridiculous people are holding up the developing of a 500kV line from Edmonton to Calgary. Essientially in Alberta, the power is imbalanced, the North has quite a bit, the South is struggling to meet demand all the time. What compounds this problem is the second half of why we can't build more wind. All of the generation of wind is in the south. And wind is only at best 20% reliable. So we have a strained grid already, and you want to add more unreliable power? Wind isn't guarnteed all the time. You can't based your power needs on wind ever, there always has to be more fossil fuel generation (or nuclear if you wish) then the highest level of demand possible.

There also needs to be expansion of a line from Pincher Creek (where much of the wind is generated) to Lethbridge that is being held up by ridiculous native bands that don't want transmission lines on their property (again, believing in 1903 type fear of the unknown). So the actual transmission framework isn't in place to develop more wind even if we have the reliability to sustain it.

Wind is definitely not the solution to our GHG problems. Nuclear may be, but there are so many issues with nuclear, there is no place on Earth that is stable enough to safely store radioactive waste to depletion. Really, nuclear power is the best way to pass on our problems to future generations. GHG may be trouble, but nuclear waste will be much more costly.

[BubberMiley]

Every other province has tons to build on though, Alberta is really the only province that puts it money where the rest of their mouths are and builds green projects.

Manitoba and California have been singled out as the two most progressive regional governments for sustainability. I don't think Alberta even comes close.

[theloniusfleabag]

I find this thread interesting because I went to Jr. and High school in Lethbridge, and it seemed to be one of the windiest places on earth. 100kph winds, gusting to 120kph, were not uncommon. Not everyday, of course, but often enough for me to foster an uncanny hatred of the place. A couple of buddies rode their bikes from Pincher Creek to the 'Bridge, and they told me that for one stretch they travelled 35 km without pedalling.

As to 'health effects', almost every source of power generation has it's problems and it's stigmas. No one wants to live near a sour gas well, let alone a nuclear power plant. Alberta's famous nut, 'Reverend' Wiebo Ludwig, had numerous run-ins with the law over his perceived 'ill-health effects' while residing beside a gas well. (I am sure that being a 'loner-loon' breeding with his kinfolk had nothing to do with it)

Some years ago I had seen a documentary about a self-sustaining property someone had built, powered by wind and solar energy. At the time, they had stored excess energy in DC batteries, for those times of dark and calm. Seemed to work fine, though the DC batteries were expensive. They also recycled their own waste into fertilizer, etc, with the notion that they would not create nor destroy anything that would alter the environment (other than their own presence). Seems to me a noble gesture, and on a small scale, it worked. What would be the harm if society went in this direction on a bigger scale?

[blueblood]

I heard somewhere that England was planning to put windmills in the ocean to generate power, I don't know if this is feasible or not, but it wouldn't be a bad idea here to put a couple of those suckers in Hudson Bay, you wouldn't lose any landspace, and i'm pretty sure its windy there a lot of the time.

[Wilber]

Some years ago I had seen a documentary about a self-sustaining property someone had built, powered by wind and solar energy. At the time, they had stored excess energy in DC batteries, for those times of dark and calm. Seemed to work fine, though the DC batteries were expensive. They also recycled their own waste into fertilizer, etc, with the notion that they would not create nor destroy anything that would alter the environment (other than their own presence). Seems to me a noble gesture, and on a small scale, it worked. What would be the harm if society went in this direction on a bigger scale?

Lasqueti Island in Georgia Strait has a population of around 400 and no services. Most of the people there use their own wind and water powered generating systems. As you say power can only be stored in DC batteries and an inverter is needed to convert to 110V AC. It can be done but the average person would have to drastically reduce consumption for it to work.

[geoffrey]

I find this thread interesting because I went to Jr. and High school in Lethbridge, and it seemed to be one of the windiest places on earth. 100kph winds, gusting to 120kph, were not uncommon. Not everyday, of course, but often enough for me to foster an uncanny hatred of the place. A couple of buddies rode their bikes from Pincher Creek to the 'Bridge, and they told me that for one stretch they travelled 35 km without pedalling.

In the summer I often ride from Longview up to Bragg and then into Calgary. The winds are fantastic, sometimes you get a good tailwind and ya, you don't really have to give much effort to get a considerable speed going. Riding into that wind is another story though... builds character.

As to 'health effects', almost every source of power generation has it's problems and it's stigmas. No one wants to live near a sour gas well, let alone a nuclear power plant. Alberta's famous nut, 'Reverend' Wiebo Ludwig, had numerous run-ins with the law over his perceived 'ill-health effects' while residing beside a gas well. (I am sure that being a 'loner-loon' breeding with his kinfolk had nothing to do with it).

Gas flaring is a major issue in Alberta and we need to fix this up quick. While I don't condone Ludwig's acts of terrorism (they generally put him into great health risk than the flaring), I think he is correct in assessing the risk involved with flaring of sour gas. In Texas, it is illegal to do much of what we do in Alberta with gas.

I heard somewhere that England was planning to put windmills in the ocean to generate power, I don't know if this is feasible or not, but it wouldn't be a bad idea here to put a couple of those suckers in Hudson Bay, you wouldn't lose any landspace, and i'm pretty sure its windy there a lot of the time.

It's been done in a few places. Putting 'mills in Hudson's Bay would be completely impractical though. Something you've got to understand, the further power is transmitted the greater the line loss. Those high voltage lines generate heat and the noise that you hear when you pass near them. That actually uses some of the power being transmitted... not a big deal when your transmitting a few hundred kilometres. But the thousands of kilometers from Hudson's Bay to civilization would be a huge loss, and make it extremely costly. The building of the transmission lines alone would be prohibitive, a big line through that area of the country, say into Northern Ontario would be well over a couple billion dollars. Power generation needs to be near the market, otherwise it's not economical.

Lasqueti Island in Georgia Strait has a population of around 400 and no services. Most of the people there use their own wind and water powered generating systems. As you say power can only be stored in DC batteries and an inverter is needed to convert to 110V AC. It can be done but the average person would have to drastically reduce consumption for it to work.

DC batteries are also extremely harmful to the environment in manufacturing and disposal. It makes more sense to just burn trees or something.

[Michael Hardner]

The article talks about a project to put turbines in Lake Ontario too.

I still don't understand what the problem is. The article seems to be saying that people thought the wind would blow all the time. Clearly, that's not the case.

Can someone take another run at explaining what's going wrong here ?

[Saturn]

The article talks about a project to put turbines in Lake Ontario too.

I still don't understand what the problem is. The article seems to be saying that people thought the wind would blow all the time. Clearly, that's not the case.

Can someone take another run at explaining what's going wrong here ?

I've read articles about lots of people complaining that wind turbines are ugly and would take away from the view of the lake. Imagine that, ugly! Smog and asthma are much more aesthetically pleasing.

Overall, this is BS in my opinion. Wind turbines work quite well elsewhere but not in Canada. They work just fine in very densely populated countries but there's no place to put them in Canada. And they are noisy. Coal is dirty and makes you sick! The real problem is that someone wants to sell us nuclear plants but first they have to show us that no other energy source is available. When we are convinced that nuclear is the only feasible way to go, they will make a good sale.

[Wilber]

DC batteries are also extremely harmful to the environment in manufacturing and disposal. It makes more sense to just burn trees or something.

True of lead acid batteries but there are better options such as absorbed glass mat which are expensive but can last up to 20 years. Still a DC system is not particularly efficient and only possible on a small scale. Too bad it's the only way to store electricity.

[jbg]

It's this kind of nonsense that the greems would have government throw millions of dollars at.

http://www.globeadvisor.com/servlet/Articl...61130/RREGULY30

Ted Kennedy, who will tell people he's a "green" Senator, has blocked wind farm development off his beloved patrician Hyannis home.

Hypcorisy, anyone?

I wouldn't want them around me either.

But you don't purport to be a green, enviro-advocate tree hugger. Ted Kennedy does.

[geoffrey]

When we are convinced that nuclear is the only feasible way to go, they will make a good sale.

It's not Saturn, what do we do with the waste? Nuclear is the ultimate passing of the buck to future generations.

[mikedavid00]

When we are convinced that nuclear is the only feasible way to go, they will make a good sale.

It's not Saturn, what do we do with the waste? Nuclear is the ultimate passing of the buck to future generations.

Can't we just shoot the old nuclear waste in a rocket up to space.. maybe towards the sun?

We can also put a kitty cat in the front of the rocket and film him getting all paroid and afraid as he meets his destiny.

[geoffrey]

When we are convinced that nuclear is the only feasible way to go, they will make a good sale.

It's not Saturn, what do we do with the waste? Nuclear is the ultimate passing of the buck to future generations.

Can't we just shoot the old nuclear waste in a rocket up to space.. maybe towards the sun?

We can also put a kitty cat in the front of the rocket and film him getting all paroid and afraid as he meets his destiny.

Rocket launches have too high a failure rate to seriously consider that proposal.

[blueblood]

When we are convinced that nuclear is the only feasible way to go, they will make a good sale.

It's not Saturn, what do we do with the waste? Nuclear is the ultimate passing of the buck to future generations.

Can't we just shoot the old nuclear waste in a rocket up to space.. maybe towards the sun?

We can also put a kitty cat in the front of the rocket and film him getting all paroid and afraid as he meets his destiny.

Rocket launches have too high a failure rate to seriously consider that proposal.

You'd be needing a huge rocket, piles of money. I don't think a rocket is the most efficient way to transport things (most of rocket used just to get out of atmosphere). Youd be better off with deep burial in precambrian rock with an education program saying that theres waste there. The problem with waste is that it takes way to long to become safe, on the order of thousands of years, I don't think the world will be quite the same geopolitically, culturally, language like in that time. Disposing of waste is one thing, but to keep others informed that the waste exists throughout time would be another.