---

Esqy would you like to live beside a windfarm?

---

Hel - No I wouldn't, but that wasn't the point of the thread! *Thwacks Heltak* Actually, I'm still hoping that someone will tell me what this thread is about. Are we discussing clean energy? The environment? Wind power vs. solar power?

its not about wind VS. Solar. i wanted people to know that wind is a clean easy abundante source of power and in my opinion the best source of power

---

three...
if birds are stupid enough to fly into them its good that they die and remove themseles from the gene pool.

---

That only applies to humans.

Secondly, Windfarms can be a hassle. If the wind is too low, they really do produce little energy to be worth it, and if the wind is too high they have to be switched off or they'll shake themselves to pieces.

Thirdly, there is nothing at all wrong with Nuclear energy. Despite it's bad name, it really is a very safe and clean form of energy. People consistantly whine about how it produces huge quantities of hazardous waste but in fact, the disposal methods are sound and do not endanger the environment. The waste produced by an intensive meat farm is far more hazardous as there are no restrictions on how this can be disposed of. It's that that should worry you. Not metal encased in concrete, steel and lead several kilometers underground.


I'm not evil, just morally challenged

what happens if the winds are too strong and the windmills gewt destroyed? No power? doesnt sound that good to me.
what about Hydro electricity, use the Victoria or Niagra falls

Take your ex out tonight...one bullet should do it

I think Niagara Falls already has hydroelectricity generation set up. It makes sense, considering the volume of water that passes through.

Also, what about geothermal energy? Not many people actually know much about it. The only thing geothermal plants give off is water vapour

How does it work?

It makes use of the fact that the deeper into the Earth you go, the hotter the ambient temperature becomes. Geothermal plants are generally built on "hotspots" that have heated water near the surface - think underground hot springs. They tap this water for its heat and use it to drive turbines. It doesn't produce that much power, compared to conventional power stations, but as I said, it's completely clean energy. And if we could find ways of drilling deeper, we'd get more energy.

Edited by - Darkstone on 9/11/2004 3:28:12 AM

Go to Iceland, lots of Geothermal... in fact, the entire country RUNS off the stuff. All the water has a 'nice' eggy smell due to the sulphur. The hot water is pumped directly from the geothermal vents.

...or was it Greenland? Can never remember offhand.

I'm not evil, just morally challenged

geothermal energy is only found at certain sites where magma/hot rock is manageably close to the surface. these being iceland, and new zealand(iirc) some in the US, i believe there's one in aus as well.

and DSQrn, some data would be nice. like taw said, the contribution of windpower to the grid is really negligible. look up the power output of a single windmill at peak, compare it to the power requirement of a city, choose any, at peak times. i'd bet you'd need to use about 60 times more land than the city occupies just to power it. its simply not practical.

you also want to look at what kind of landscape windmills require. they need land that is clear for miles around, no obstructions whatsoever so the wind comes straight, and not in wave-shapes from squeezing into narrow spaces and blowing back out, going over tall buildings. disturbed wind does windmills no good.

imho, when they figure out how to harness fusion energy, that'll be the ideal source of power. you dont even get radiation production. you just bump two hydrogens together, hard. nukes do fine.

if we're discussing the most ideal source of renewable energy, we need to draw up criteria.
- power output compared to power requirement of standard city
- site requirement (geothermal - magma, etc)
- abundance of this site
- total power output if we harnessed all the ideal sites for this type of renewable energy compared to total power requirement on the planet
- cost of implementing each power plant
- noticeable disadvantages to nature (dams - flood large areas, windmills - bad for landscape, health of stupid birds)

and so on. and compare compare compare... and we have the undisputed winner.

Something called Wave Power exists. Very powerful but hard to implement and you need stormy coasts.

-~-~-~-~
You have called down the Thunder. Now reap the Whirlwind.
Warning! In the intrest of safety it is advisable to keep Heltak away from Fire and Flames!
He that humbleth himself wishes to be exalted.
Hope in reality is the worst of all evils because it prolongs the torments of man.
Friedrich Nietzsche

And, if you have a handy lagoon, try tidal power. At high tide, raise dams to seal it off and release the water over turbines as the tide falls. Can only be used on bodies of water that are affected by tides, though. As for niagra, it is one of the largest hydro electric power stations in North America, and most of the niagra river is dammed for that purpose (something like only 25% of water actually reaches the falls). Edison did most of his power stuff up there, and as we all know from Canadian Bacon, it powers half of canada. --- VH16

---

its not about wind VS. Solar. i wanted people to know that wind is a clean easy abundante source of power and in my opinion the best source of power...

---

Well that's great, but it's pretty pointless isn't it? No offence intended. It is the same as someone creating a topic called "I like soy" that simply says "I like soy because it is very healthy, low in fat, and has no lactose or cholesterol." *Shakes head*

* Shakes Head*
* Gives Topic Creator a cookie *

Wind power is a pretty good source of power, clean, efficient, no left-over toxins, etc ..... only problem is when the wind stops

I thought the Niagra falls are in Africa