Courtesy of http://favimages.net/image/458701/Environmental Writer, Activist and Resident Smart Ass
Follow me on...
Follow me on...
Friday, August 22, 2014
Thursday, August 21, 2014
Winds of Change
Wind gets a lot of knocks as an energy source these days. Critics have been vocal and quick to strike. Many think Wind is not a viable source of energy, despite humans using it for thousands of years to power their ships and spin their windmills. But it is the misconceptions, coupled with Congress last year failing to renew some of the tax credits for Wind, that suggest that the industry would float away quietly on a breeze. But, quite the opposite is taking place.
I know I talk a lot about Solar Energy on here and on my Facebook page. I worked in the industry and know more about Solar then Wind, I admit. The Sun will be burning for another 5 billion years, so its only natural that we look toward harnessing its energy for our needs. I didn't mean to give anyone the impression that I consider Wind to be the red-headed stepchild of the renewable world. Quite the contrary. After all, the wind has been blowing around Planet Earth for billions of years. And I suspect it will continue to do so long after we have gone the way of the Tasmanian Tiger.
There are more then a few myths and misconceptions about Wind Energy: the turbines are expensive and can catch on fire (rare, but true), the drafts created by the blades can disrupt ground temperatures affecting sensitive eco-systems, rare and protected (even endangered) birds are vulnerable to and are killed by the spinning blades, there is no place to store excess energy produced when the grid can't handle it and you can't produce energy when the wind isn't blowing. But, as is so often the case, a lot of these knocks on Wind are taken out of context and some are just plain old bullshit. So let's dive in, shall we?
Myth #1: Is Too Expensive
Back before turbines were massed produced, this was true. But that is changing as more and more countries have started adding Wind energy to their respective grids. With increased demand, the cost of the turbines has dropped. Taking into consideration the rising costs of fossil fuels, Wind is just as affordable. Wind is even more cost effective if you factor in the environmental costs of fossil fuels versus Wind. Fossil fuels are currently priced without taking into consideration their effect on the environment. Oil spills, coal mining, pollution and carbon emissions all come with a cost to clean up or deal with after they are utilized. Those costs (to clean up the damaged environment, rising health costs due to pollution, the list goes on) are being pushed far into the future, but will one day have to be paid. Wind turbines have a drastically reduced environmental cost, so in the short term and the long term, it is more affordable.
Since 2007, one third of all new energy projects in the United States were wind projects (Woody, 2014). Despite Congress' failure to extend a popular wind tax credit, more and more Wind farms keep coming online. If it wasn't viable and cost effective, investors wouldn't be shelling out for these types of projects. Follow the money. It points to more Wind Energy investment.
Myth #2: Kills Birds/Disrupts Eco-systems
Okay, so this one is true. It has been well documented that wind turbines kill birds. The biggest concern here is about Bald Eagles and other birds of prey that fly with their eyes to the ground, looking for their next meal. They don't see the blades of the turbines and SPLAT! Not cool, when you are talking about our National Symbol and an endangered species. However, all is not lost. Right now, as I am writing this, there are researchers working on ultrasonic acoustic systems that will warn off birds that fly too close to turbines (Drouin, 2014). That, coupled with better siting of wind farms and the utilization of radar should drastically reduce bird deaths. Now if someone would think up ways to reduce the number of bird deaths caused by oil spills, deforestation, habitat destruction, buildings, planes, coal ash spills, pesticides...
A recent study in Texas pointed out that turbines that spun at night disrupted the ground temperatures in certain areas, stirring up the cooler air near the ground and disrupting sensitive ecosystems (Daemmerich, 2012) Again, true. Except, the solution to this issue is a simple one: Turn off the turbines at night. Then, go do an environmental impact study to find the places that have the right amount of wind and less sensitive ecosystems to disrupt. Texas is a big state. I have driven across the longest portion of the state. I happen to know there are more then a few of places in Texas where there is absolutely nothing.
Myth #3: Is Unreliable
This one seems easy: When the wind isn't blowing, there is no way to produce energy. Right? Well, sorta kinda maybe. Like I mentioned before, the Wind blows pretty much all the time, even at low speeds. Ever been to the beach? Even on a hot, calm day, the wind is blowing. It is imperative that wind farm sites are chosen to ensure the most amount of wind in order to be viable energy sources. In addition, turbine technology is getting better, so their ability to generate electricity at low wind speeds is increasing. Humans love to use innovation to solve problems, and this is a prime example. Investors recognize these factors and the money keeps flowing.
Myth #4: Over-Produces Energy
Sounds weird that those who say Wind isn't viable will complain it produces too much, doesn't it?But, this one is also true. But what most of the critics that point out this over-production issue fail to mention is that every other energy producing facility in the world over-produces energy. Coal plants over produce to counter act transmission loss over large distances. Solar over produces due to the difference in peak production and peak demand, depending on the amount of sunlight in a given day. Our energy grid has an amazing amount of energy loss due to over production, transmission distance, an aging and out-dated energy grid and a failure to upgrade an antiquated power grid in a manner that would reduce those losses. We would waste a lot less energy if we had a way to store it and use it when we needed it.
Compressed Air Storage uses underground rock to store Wind produced energy without the necessity of battery manufacturing and costly infrastructure (Garthwaite, 2013). That would increase the yield from Wind energy and reduce pollution that is caused from the manufacturing of batteries back-up systems. It would also save precious natural resources. Being able to store energy in a natural rock formation that acts as a "battery" without the messy byproducts of battery manufacturing, to eliminate wasting energy produced? Sounds like the epitome of sustainable to me.
The fossil fuel companies like to bash Solar and Wind, saying they are unreliable and wasteful, while failing to acknowledge there own flawed methodology. They will do the whole song and dance about how over-production is required, that energy loss is unavoidable and their methods are tried and true. As battery technology improves, it will allow for better storage of the energy produced that can not be utilized right away.
Myth #5: Wind Turbines Kill People
Believe it or not, they do. According to the Forbes article below, in 2011, there were fourteen deaths related to Wind turbines. Being hit by the blades, falling during maintenance/construction, fire when turbines over heat, and even the strange instances of turbine blades throwing pieces of ice hundreds of yards. Those numbers are sure to rise as more wind turbines are put into service in the coming years. But, my issue with this is that when you compare the number of deaths caused by wind, to other energy sectors like oil or coal, the difference is staggering!
Putting this into context, the Forbes article shows the number of deaths based on the amount of energy produced. The number of Wind energy related deaths from 2011 in England "translates to about 1000 deaths per trillion kilowatt hours produced (the world produces about 15 trillion kWh's of energy per year)." (Conca, 2013). In the US, Wind energy deaths were about 100 per trillion kWhrs, most of which were related to people falling during routine maintenance (Conca, 2013). In contrast, in the US and England combined, Coal energy related deaths were 30,000 per trillion kilowatt hours. There are risks involved in everything we do, and producing energy is included. But at a glance, it seems to me that since Wind has far fewer related deaths than coal, then we are moving the needle in the right directionand making things safer and cleaner.
As Wind gains traction and expands, the technology will get better, which means a more reliable energy source. The better technology, the safer it becomes. Utilizing the natural limestone or volcanic rock formations underground to store energy would revolutionize how we produce energy world wide. As we understand the environmental impacts, the better we will be able to plan, mitigate and adjust our actions to protect the ecosystems and wildlife that we live with. Wind Energy is more then viable, and investors are the single biggest indicator that it is. If the US government subsidized the Wind Energy sector with a fraction of what they dish out to oil or coal, we would see an even larger Wind presence in this country. With that would come cleaner energy, cleaner air and less reliability on foreign oil.
Conca, J. "Forget Eagle Deaths, Wind Turbines Kill Humans". Forbes, 29 Sep. 2013. Web. 19 Aug 2014. http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2013/09/29/forget-eagle-deaths-wind-turbines-kill-humans/
Daemmrich, B., Corbis. "Wind Farms Warming Texas". Discovery, 29 Aug. 2012. Web. 21 Aug, 2014. http://news.discovery.com/earth/weather-extreme-events/hot-wind-farms-120429.htm
Drouin, R. "For the Birds (and the bats): 8 ways wind companies companies are trying to prevent deadly collisions". Grist, 3 Jan. 2014. Web. 21 Aug. 2014. http://grist.org/climate-energy/for-the-birds-and-the-bats-8-ways-wind-power-companies-are-trying-to-prevent-deadly-collisions/
Garthwaite, J. "Too Much Wind Energy? Save It Underground in Volcanic Rock Reservoirs". National Geographic, 1 July 2013. Web. 20 Aug. 2014. http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/energy/2013/07/130702-compressed-air-storage-for-wind-energy/
Woody, T. "U.S. Installed Record 13.2 Gigawatts of Wind Energy in 2012". Forbes, 18 Jan. 2013. Web. 19 Aug. 2014. http://www.forbes.com/sites/toddwoody/2013/01/18/u-s-installed-record-13-2-gigawatts-of-wind-energy-in-2012/
I know I talk a lot about Solar Energy on here and on my Facebook page. I worked in the industry and know more about Solar then Wind, I admit. The Sun will be burning for another 5 billion years, so its only natural that we look toward harnessing its energy for our needs. I didn't mean to give anyone the impression that I consider Wind to be the red-headed stepchild of the renewable world. Quite the contrary. After all, the wind has been blowing around Planet Earth for billions of years. And I suspect it will continue to do so long after we have gone the way of the Tasmanian Tiger.
There are more then a few myths and misconceptions about Wind Energy: the turbines are expensive and can catch on fire (rare, but true), the drafts created by the blades can disrupt ground temperatures affecting sensitive eco-systems, rare and protected (even endangered) birds are vulnerable to and are killed by the spinning blades, there is no place to store excess energy produced when the grid can't handle it and you can't produce energy when the wind isn't blowing. But, as is so often the case, a lot of these knocks on Wind are taken out of context and some are just plain old bullshit. So let's dive in, shall we?
Myth #1: Is Too Expensive
Back before turbines were massed produced, this was true. But that is changing as more and more countries have started adding Wind energy to their respective grids. With increased demand, the cost of the turbines has dropped. Taking into consideration the rising costs of fossil fuels, Wind is just as affordable. Wind is even more cost effective if you factor in the environmental costs of fossil fuels versus Wind. Fossil fuels are currently priced without taking into consideration their effect on the environment. Oil spills, coal mining, pollution and carbon emissions all come with a cost to clean up or deal with after they are utilized. Those costs (to clean up the damaged environment, rising health costs due to pollution, the list goes on) are being pushed far into the future, but will one day have to be paid. Wind turbines have a drastically reduced environmental cost, so in the short term and the long term, it is more affordable.
Since 2007, one third of all new energy projects in the United States were wind projects (Woody, 2014). Despite Congress' failure to extend a popular wind tax credit, more and more Wind farms keep coming online. If it wasn't viable and cost effective, investors wouldn't be shelling out for these types of projects. Follow the money. It points to more Wind Energy investment.
Myth #2: Kills Birds/Disrupts Eco-systems
Okay, so this one is true. It has been well documented that wind turbines kill birds. The biggest concern here is about Bald Eagles and other birds of prey that fly with their eyes to the ground, looking for their next meal. They don't see the blades of the turbines and SPLAT! Not cool, when you are talking about our National Symbol and an endangered species. However, all is not lost. Right now, as I am writing this, there are researchers working on ultrasonic acoustic systems that will warn off birds that fly too close to turbines (Drouin, 2014). That, coupled with better siting of wind farms and the utilization of radar should drastically reduce bird deaths. Now if someone would think up ways to reduce the number of bird deaths caused by oil spills, deforestation, habitat destruction, buildings, planes, coal ash spills, pesticides...
A recent study in Texas pointed out that turbines that spun at night disrupted the ground temperatures in certain areas, stirring up the cooler air near the ground and disrupting sensitive ecosystems (Daemmerich, 2012) Again, true. Except, the solution to this issue is a simple one: Turn off the turbines at night. Then, go do an environmental impact study to find the places that have the right amount of wind and less sensitive ecosystems to disrupt. Texas is a big state. I have driven across the longest portion of the state. I happen to know there are more then a few of places in Texas where there is absolutely nothing.
Myth #3: Is Unreliable
This one seems easy: When the wind isn't blowing, there is no way to produce energy. Right? Well, sorta kinda maybe. Like I mentioned before, the Wind blows pretty much all the time, even at low speeds. Ever been to the beach? Even on a hot, calm day, the wind is blowing. It is imperative that wind farm sites are chosen to ensure the most amount of wind in order to be viable energy sources. In addition, turbine technology is getting better, so their ability to generate electricity at low wind speeds is increasing. Humans love to use innovation to solve problems, and this is a prime example. Investors recognize these factors and the money keeps flowing.
Myth #4: Over-Produces Energy
Sounds weird that those who say Wind isn't viable will complain it produces too much, doesn't it?But, this one is also true. But what most of the critics that point out this over-production issue fail to mention is that every other energy producing facility in the world over-produces energy. Coal plants over produce to counter act transmission loss over large distances. Solar over produces due to the difference in peak production and peak demand, depending on the amount of sunlight in a given day. Our energy grid has an amazing amount of energy loss due to over production, transmission distance, an aging and out-dated energy grid and a failure to upgrade an antiquated power grid in a manner that would reduce those losses. We would waste a lot less energy if we had a way to store it and use it when we needed it.
Compressed Air Storage uses underground rock to store Wind produced energy without the necessity of battery manufacturing and costly infrastructure (Garthwaite, 2013). That would increase the yield from Wind energy and reduce pollution that is caused from the manufacturing of batteries back-up systems. It would also save precious natural resources. Being able to store energy in a natural rock formation that acts as a "battery" without the messy byproducts of battery manufacturing, to eliminate wasting energy produced? Sounds like the epitome of sustainable to me.
 |
| http://www.daviddarling.info/encyclopedia/C/AE_compressed_air_storage.html |
The fossil fuel companies like to bash Solar and Wind, saying they are unreliable and wasteful, while failing to acknowledge there own flawed methodology. They will do the whole song and dance about how over-production is required, that energy loss is unavoidable and their methods are tried and true. As battery technology improves, it will allow for better storage of the energy produced that can not be utilized right away.
Myth #5: Wind Turbines Kill People
Believe it or not, they do. According to the Forbes article below, in 2011, there were fourteen deaths related to Wind turbines. Being hit by the blades, falling during maintenance/construction, fire when turbines over heat, and even the strange instances of turbine blades throwing pieces of ice hundreds of yards. Those numbers are sure to rise as more wind turbines are put into service in the coming years. But, my issue with this is that when you compare the number of deaths caused by wind, to other energy sectors like oil or coal, the difference is staggering!
Putting this into context, the Forbes article shows the number of deaths based on the amount of energy produced. The number of Wind energy related deaths from 2011 in England "translates to about 1000 deaths per trillion kilowatt hours produced (the world produces about 15 trillion kWh's of energy per year)." (Conca, 2013). In the US, Wind energy deaths were about 100 per trillion kWhrs, most of which were related to people falling during routine maintenance (Conca, 2013). In contrast, in the US and England combined, Coal energy related deaths were 30,000 per trillion kilowatt hours. There are risks involved in everything we do, and producing energy is included. But at a glance, it seems to me that since Wind has far fewer related deaths than coal, then we are moving the needle in the right directionand making things safer and cleaner.
As Wind gains traction and expands, the technology will get better, which means a more reliable energy source. The better technology, the safer it becomes. Utilizing the natural limestone or volcanic rock formations underground to store energy would revolutionize how we produce energy world wide. As we understand the environmental impacts, the better we will be able to plan, mitigate and adjust our actions to protect the ecosystems and wildlife that we live with. Wind Energy is more then viable, and investors are the single biggest indicator that it is. If the US government subsidized the Wind Energy sector with a fraction of what they dish out to oil or coal, we would see an even larger Wind presence in this country. With that would come cleaner energy, cleaner air and less reliability on foreign oil.
Conca, J. "Forget Eagle Deaths, Wind Turbines Kill Humans". Forbes, 29 Sep. 2013. Web. 19 Aug 2014. http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamesconca/2013/09/29/forget-eagle-deaths-wind-turbines-kill-humans/
Daemmrich, B., Corbis. "Wind Farms Warming Texas". Discovery, 29 Aug. 2012. Web. 21 Aug, 2014. http://news.discovery.com/earth/weather-extreme-events/hot-wind-farms-120429.htm
Drouin, R. "For the Birds (and the bats): 8 ways wind companies companies are trying to prevent deadly collisions". Grist, 3 Jan. 2014. Web. 21 Aug. 2014. http://grist.org/climate-energy/for-the-birds-and-the-bats-8-ways-wind-power-companies-are-trying-to-prevent-deadly-collisions/
Garthwaite, J. "Too Much Wind Energy? Save It Underground in Volcanic Rock Reservoirs". National Geographic, 1 July 2013. Web. 20 Aug. 2014. http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/energy/2013/07/130702-compressed-air-storage-for-wind-energy/
Woody, T. "U.S. Installed Record 13.2 Gigawatts of Wind Energy in 2012". Forbes, 18 Jan. 2013. Web. 19 Aug. 2014. http://www.forbes.com/sites/toddwoody/2013/01/18/u-s-installed-record-13-2-gigawatts-of-wind-energy-in-2012/
Tuesday, August 19, 2014
The ALS Ice Bucket Challenge
I took the ALS #24hourIceBucketChallenge today. Holy crap! I was anticipating someone throwing down the gauntlet and my boy Michael J did not disappoint. I thought I was ready. But, holy crap! That was damn cold. I'm still waiting for my boys to drop back down into my shorts. The funny part was that my wife and I had to drive around for over an hour to find a bag of ice! We don't have an ice maker here in Germany. Not yet. That will be in the new house. And our ice trays make like 3 cubes each. So I figured I would just go to the tanksteller (gas station) and buy a 12 pounder. Wrong.
I am in view of the Alps, Austria is literally twenty minutes from here. Its 55 degrees Fahrenheit today...in August. Believe me, they are very familiar with ice around here. They like their beer cold and their sodas colder. Yet, finding a bag of ice took me over an hour. We went to five different stores: three supermarkets and two gas stations. You can't just climb a mountain and chop out a bag of ice from the closest mountain glacier, they melted a few decades ago. You can't yodel to the next town and order up some Alpine ice, because no one yodels anymore, not since John Denver passed away (God rest his soul). I am no wuss. I wasn't going to jump in a cold lake or the cold-ass river in the mountains, about twenty five minutes from here. I have done those things and will do them again, probably on Thursday. But, I wanted to live up to the ALS Ice Bucket Challenge and I couldn't find any ice!
Needless to say, we found bags of ice at the gas station on the other side of town (its a big town, but only two gas stations, and only one with ice, wtf?!). We asked my neighbor to do the honors of pouring while my wife filmed it. You can watch it below. I thought it would be fun, but it was shockingly cold.
Take the challenge. It's for a great cause. Visit the link below to learn more about how to fight ALS.
http://www.alsa.org/fight-als/ice-bucket-challenge.html
I am in view of the Alps, Austria is literally twenty minutes from here. Its 55 degrees Fahrenheit today...in August. Believe me, they are very familiar with ice around here. They like their beer cold and their sodas colder. Yet, finding a bag of ice took me over an hour. We went to five different stores: three supermarkets and two gas stations. You can't just climb a mountain and chop out a bag of ice from the closest mountain glacier, they melted a few decades ago. You can't yodel to the next town and order up some Alpine ice, because no one yodels anymore, not since John Denver passed away (God rest his soul). I am no wuss. I wasn't going to jump in a cold lake or the cold-ass river in the mountains, about twenty five minutes from here. I have done those things and will do them again, probably on Thursday. But, I wanted to live up to the ALS Ice Bucket Challenge and I couldn't find any ice!
Needless to say, we found bags of ice at the gas station on the other side of town (its a big town, but only two gas stations, and only one with ice, wtf?!). We asked my neighbor to do the honors of pouring while my wife filmed it. You can watch it below. I thought it would be fun, but it was shockingly cold.
Take the challenge. It's for a great cause. Visit the link below to learn more about how to fight ALS.
http://www.alsa.org/fight-als/ice-bucket-challenge.html
Monday, August 18, 2014
Stats and Thanks
July was my most viewed month here at Climate Guy '73. This month is on pace to blow last month out of the water! Thanks to everyone who visits and takes a look at what I am doing here. Hopefully, some of those page views are repeat readers. Now, about the lack of comments...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)