OT: Making bigger wind-turbines 5.6MW now, 12MW soon.

[Bill Sloman]

IEEE Spectrum published this piece recently

https://spectrum.ieee.org/energy/renewables/wind-turbines-just-keep-getting-bigger-but-theres-a-limit

Individual wind turbines go up to 5.6MW at the moment, should hit 10MW shortly, and 12MW isn't much further away.

The article contemplates what a 100MW wind turbine would look like, but thinks that it is some way off.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[amdx]

On 10/30/2019 6:31 PM, Bill Sloman wrote:

IEEE Spectrum published this piece recently

https://spectrum.ieee.org/energy/renewables/wind-turbines-just-keep-getting-bigger-but-theres-a-limit

Individual wind turbines go up to 5.6MW at the moment, should hit 10MW shortly, and 12MW isn't much further away.

The article contemplates what a 100MW wind turbine would look like, but thinks that it is some way off.

https://dailycaller.com/2018/07/15/wind-turbine-disposal/
Mikek

 

[Phil Allison]

Bill Sloman wrote:

--------------------------

IEEE Spectrum published this piece recently

** All marketing hype.

https://spectrum.ieee.org/energy/renewables/wind-turbines-just-keep-getting-bigger-but-theres-a-limit

Individual wind turbines go up to 5.6MW at the moment, should hit
10MW shortly, and 12MW isn't much further away.

** Way back in 1946, the Rolls Royce Limited ran a turbine engine called the Avon. By 1950 it was powering aircraft like this.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English_Electric_Canberra

The engine measures under 1m in diameter and a tad over 3m long.

It weighs about 1300 kg.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9d/RR_Avon.jpg

Current models put out 21,000shp operating on natural gas and are used for generating electricity and gas compression.

Generator sets with the engine output 15MW, nice and steady, all day.

No wind necessary, around 30,000 hours (3.5 years) between overhauls.

Huge, ugly wind mills have some catching up to do.




..... Phil



...... Phil

 

Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in
news:d07cca24-b09a-429c-a7db-d4144259ad96@googlegroups.com:

IEEE Spectrum published this piece recently

https://spectrum.ieee.org/energy/renewables/wind-turbines-just-keep
-getting-bigger-but-theres-a-limit

Individual wind turbines go up to 5.6MW at the moment, should hit
10MW shortly, and 12MW isn't much further away.

The article contemplates what a 100MW wind turbine would look
like, but thinks that it is some way off.

https://www.ge.com/renewableenergy/wind-energy/offshore-wind/haliade-x-
offshore-turbine

 

Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in
news:d07cca24-b09a-429c-a7db-d4144259ad96@googlegroups.com:

IEEE Spectrum published this piece recently

https://spectrum.ieee.org/energy/renewables/wind-turbines-just-keep
-getting-bigger-but-theres-a-limit

Individual wind turbines go up to 5.6MW at the moment, should hit
10MW shortly, and 12MW isn't much further away.

The article contemplates what a 100MW wind turbine would look
like, but thinks that it is some way off.

GE already produces a 12MW wind turbine.

<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qu0RqylJdQo>

 

amdx <nojunk@knology.net> wrote in news:qpd7c1$nsh$1@dont-email.me:

On 10/30/2019 6:31 PM, Bill Sloman wrote:
IEEE Spectrum published this piece recently

https://spectrum.ieee.org/energy/renewables/wind-turbines-just-kee
p-getting-bigger-but-theres-a-limit

Individual wind turbines go up to 5.6MW at the moment, should hit
10MW shortly, and 12MW isn't much further away.

The article contemplates what a 100MW wind turbine would look
like, but thinks that it is some way off.


https://dailycaller.com/2018/07/15/wind-turbine-disposal/
Mikek

Why would you want to throw one away?

Old planes get sold to smaller companies.

Old turbines would get sold to smaller customers.

 

[Martin Riddle]

On Wed, 30 Oct 2019 19:16:49 -0700 (PDT), Rick C
<gnuarm.deletethisbit@gmail.com> wrote:

On Wednesday, October 30, 2019 at 7:46:19 PM UTC-4, amdx wrote:
On 10/30/2019 6:31 PM, Bill Sloman wrote:
IEEE Spectrum published this piece recently

https://spectrum.ieee.org/energy/renewables/wind-turbines-just-keep-getting-bigger-but-theres-a-limit

Individual wind turbines go up to 5.6MW at the moment, should hit 10MW shortly, and 12MW isn't much further away.

The article contemplates what a 100MW wind turbine would look like, but thinks that it is some way off.


https://dailycaller.com/2018/07/15/wind-turbine-disposal/
Mikek

This seems to be a fluff piece. There is only one paragraph in the whole article that has any real information content about the problem.

"The high-tech blades used in wind turbines contain exotic compounds that are laborious to recycle. These rotor blades use carbon fibers and glass, and give off toxic gases and dust — which means burning them is not an option. Additionally, the concrete bases used to uphold wind turbines can go as far as 30 meters deep into the ground, making them very difficult to fully remove."

So they are worried about something giving off gasses??? They don't explain that very well. Certainly the glass fibers don't outgas and I don't think carbon does either. Generally when refuse is burned it is done at a high temperature so toxic residue is not produced.

Then they seem to be worried about massive amounts of concrete being left in the ground. I wonder if they are ever going to remove the concrete flak towers around Berlin, Vienna...? Maybe they can put windmills on top of them?

Actually the blade leading edges wear out first. All because of
airborn dust, interesting.

Cheers

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Thursday, October 31, 2019 at 12:31:06 PM UTC+11, DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:

Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in
news:d07cca24-b09a-429c-a7db-d4144259ad96@googlegroups.com:

IEEE Spectrum published this piece recently

https://spectrum.ieee.org/energy/renewables/wind-turbines-just-keep
-getting-bigger-but-theres-a-limit

Individual wind turbines go up to 5.6MW at the moment, should hit
10MW shortly, and 12MW isn't much further away.

The article contemplates what a 100MW wind turbine would look
like, but thinks that it is some way off.


https://www.ge.com/renewableenergy/wind-energy/offshore-wind/haliade-x-
offshore-turbine

That's actually a picture of a part that is going to go into a 12MW wind turbine.

It's a part for one of the 12MW wind turbines that the article said were in the pipe-line.

You should pay closer attention.

--
Bill Sloman, Sydney

 

[Rick C]

On Wednesday, October 30, 2019 at 10:24:59 PM UTC-4, Martin Riddle wrote:

On Thu, 31 Oct 2019 01:32:37 +0000 (UTC),
DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org wrote:

amdx <nojunk@knology.net> wrote in news:qpd7c1$nsh$1@dont-email.me:

On 10/30/2019 6:31 PM, Bill Sloman wrote:
IEEE Spectrum published this piece recently

https://spectrum.ieee.org/energy/renewables/wind-turbines-just-kee
p-getting-bigger-but-theres-a-limit

Individual wind turbines go up to 5.6MW at the moment, should hit
10MW shortly, and 12MW isn't much further away.

The article contemplates what a 100MW wind turbine would look
like, but thinks that it is some way off.


https://dailycaller.com/2018/07/15/wind-turbine-disposal/
Mikek


Why would you want to throw one away?

Old planes get sold to smaller companies.

Old turbines would get sold to smaller customers.

Economically, it's cheaper to just scrap the mill vs take it apart
piece by piece.

Lol! No one is going to do either if it still worked. They will run them until they aren't working well enough and then they will be scrapped because no one will want them. Just like we do with the millions of worn out cars each year. Why doesn't anyone get upset about that?

I remember seeing a photo of some hundreds or more likely thousands of cell phones laid out for the photo to make the point that we toss out some hundreds of millions of cell phones each year. Not really anything wrong with them. They just aren't new anymore.

So a few thousands of these windmills vs. a billion cell phones. Which is the worse ecological disaster?

--

Rick C.

-- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

[Phil Allison]

Winfield Hill wrote:

--------------------

Two US windfarms are using GE's 12MW version: Ocean Wind,
off New Jersey’s coast, and Skipjack, off Maryland’s coast.

** So how many do we need operating off the coast of NSW to eliminate coal power ?

Allowing for lots of battery capacity for windless days and nights.

Currently installed coal generation is about 10,000 MW.

Lets see you get the math even slightly right.



...... Phil

 

[Martin Riddle]

On Thu, 31 Oct 2019 01:32:37 +0000 (UTC),
DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org wrote:

amdx <nojunk@knology.net> wrote in news:qpd7c1$nsh$1@dont-email.me:

On 10/30/2019 6:31 PM, Bill Sloman wrote:
IEEE Spectrum published this piece recently

https://spectrum.ieee.org/energy/renewables/wind-turbines-just-kee
p-getting-bigger-but-theres-a-limit

Individual wind turbines go up to 5.6MW at the moment, should hit
10MW shortly, and 12MW isn't much further away.

The article contemplates what a 100MW wind turbine would look
like, but thinks that it is some way off.


https://dailycaller.com/2018/07/15/wind-turbine-disposal/
Mikek


Why would you want to throw one away?

Old planes get sold to smaller companies.

Old turbines would get sold to smaller customers.

Economically, it's cheaper to just scrap the mill vs take it apart
piece by piece.


Cheers

 

[Rick C]

On Wednesday, October 30, 2019 at 7:46:19 PM UTC-4, amdx wrote:

On 10/30/2019 6:31 PM, Bill Sloman wrote:
IEEE Spectrum published this piece recently

https://spectrum.ieee.org/energy/renewables/wind-turbines-just-keep-getting-bigger-but-theres-a-limit

Individual wind turbines go up to 5.6MW at the moment, should hit 10MW shortly, and 12MW isn't much further away.

The article contemplates what a 100MW wind turbine would look like, but thinks that it is some way off.


https://dailycaller.com/2018/07/15/wind-turbine-disposal/
Mikek

This seems to be a fluff piece. There is only one paragraph in the whole article that has any real information content about the problem.

"The high-tech blades used in wind turbines contain exotic compounds that are laborious to recycle. These rotor blades use carbon fibers and glass, and give off toxic gases and dust — which means burning them is not an option. Additionally, the concrete bases used to uphold wind turbines can go as far as 30 meters deep into the ground, making them very difficult to fully remove."

So they are worried about something giving off gasses??? They don't explain that very well. Certainly the glass fibers don't outgas and I don't think carbon does either. Generally when refuse is burned it is done at a high temperature so toxic residue is not produced.

Then they seem to be worried about massive amounts of concrete being left in the ground. I wonder if they are ever going to remove the concrete flak towers around Berlin, Vienna...? Maybe they can put windmills on top of them?

--

Rick C.

+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

[Rick C]

On Wednesday, October 30, 2019 at 7:31:59 PM UTC-4, Bill Sloman wrote:

IEEE Spectrum published this piece recently

https://spectrum.ieee.org/energy/renewables/wind-turbines-just-keep-getting-bigger-but-theres-a-limit

Individual wind turbines go up to 5.6MW at the moment, should hit 10MW shortly, and 12MW isn't much further away.

The article contemplates what a 100MW wind turbine would look like, but thinks that it is some way off.

I assume the blade length and so the tower height scales with the square root of the power? That means 100 MW turbines would need to be over four times taller than a 5.6 MW turbine. I found info on a 3.4 MW unit that is 809 feet tall (246 m). So we would be looking at a tower that would be something approaching a mile in height to collect 100 MW? I suppose the swept area could be less by finding more wind which I expect added height would do. So maybe half a mile tall? I have no concept of what that would imply in terms of visual impact or other problems.

I know some windmills produce low frequency vibrations people find objectionable. I'm pretty sure even at half a mile tall such a windmill would need to appear on maps for airplanes. It wouldn't just be a tower since the blades would be sweeping nearly a half a mile wide at the quarter mile height..

Wow!

--

Rick C.

- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

[Winfield Hill]

DecadentLinuxUserNumeroUno@decadence.org wrote...

Bill Sloman wrote

Individual wind turbines go up to 5.6MW at the moment,
should hit 10MW shortly, and 12MW isn't much further away.

GE already produces a 12MW wind turbine.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qu0RqylJdQo

Two US windfarms are using GE's 12MW version: Ocean Wind,
off New Jersey’s coast, and Skipjack, off Maryland’s coast.


--
Thanks,
- Win

 

Phil Allison <pallison49@gmail.com> wrote in
news:0856ac0b-404f-474a-96ed-a64053263c80@googlegroups.com:

Winfield Hill wrote:

--------------------

Two US windfarms are using GE's 12MW version: Ocean Wind,
off New Jersey’s coast, and Skipjack, off Maryland’s coa
st.



** So how many do we need operating off the coast of NSW to
eliminate coal power ?

Allowing for lots of battery capacity for windless days and
nights.

Currently installed coal generation is about 10,000 MW.

Lets see you get the math even slightly right.



..... Phil

Let's see. Wind is free, coal is not, and wind does not pollute
and coal does. So 100 100MW turbines would have a better impact on
the planet than hunreds of tons of polutants in the air.

The wind is here. We should use it.

 

[Phil Allison]

Bill Sloman wrote:

-------------------

If 12MW wind generators were to take over from coal and gas - we would need several million of them plus massive battery banks.


You don't seem to haver read this morning's paper.

** Bill - hello - it ain't one tiny bit relevant.

All needing replacement at intervals vastly shorter than for
coal and gas power stations.

What makes you think that?

** So wind turbines at sea and batteries last 60 to 80 years now?

Real easy to maintain too.

News to me ....

Many thousands of the buggers instead of just four, land based power stations.


FFS

Bill try to write meaningful answers or better write nothing.



...... Phil

 

Martin Riddle <martin_ridd@verizon.net> wrote in
news:68ikrehk4sokvg63jptf4inlkrtl2su70h@4ax.com:

Actually the blade leading edges wear out first. All because of
airborn dust, interesting.

The blade does not wear out. The surface preparations get abraded.

 

Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in
news:47ae924e-2b1e-45b0-86fe-cf3cc3fc2d7b@googlegroups.com:

On Thursday, October 31, 2019 at 12:31:06 PM UTC+11,
DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:
Bill Sloman <bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote in
news:d07cca24-b09a-429c-a7db-d4144259ad96@googlegroups.com:

IEEE Spectrum published this piece recently

https://spectrum.ieee.org/energy/renewables/wind-turbines-just-k
eep -getting-bigger-but-theres-a-limit

Individual wind turbines go up to 5.6MW at the moment, should
hit 10MW shortly, and 12MW isn't much further away.

The article contemplates what a 100MW wind turbine would look
like, but thinks that it is some way off.


https://www.ge.com/renewableenergy/wind-energy/offshore-wind/halia
de-x- offshore-turbine

That's actually a picture of a part that is going to go into a
12MW wind turbine.

Yeah, I know exactly what it is. You have a problem with making
stupid assessments about people instead of just looking at the data.

That picture is not a "part", it IS the generator. You know...
the 12MW part that gets perched on top of the tower.

It's a part for one of the 12MW wind turbines that the article
said were in the pipe-line.

No. They are being produced, as in ON THE PRODUCTION LINE. That
one is a finished roll-out off the line.

You should pay closer attention.

Maybe you should. The site I posted with my pics has the GE
turbine in the set. Been that way for days, and I have had the pics
for over a year now. Several pics of it, in fact.

 

[Phil Allison]

DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:

-------------------------------------

Let's see.

** Let's not - cos you are a bullshitting fuckwit.

Wind is free, coal is not,

** Coal is free here.

We dig it out the ground.

Sunlight stored for us by God, over millions of years.



...... Phil

 

Phil Allison <pallison49@gmail.com> wrote in news:af54c42e-a25b-4db6-
a94b-6c96e7425324@googlegroups.com:

DecadentLinux...@decadence.org wrote:

-------------------------------------



Let's see.


** Let's not - cos you are a bullshitting fuckwit.

Oh boy! Phil baby is in one of his special moods. Especially
immature and retarded.

Wind is free, coal is not,


** Coal is free here.

Coal is NOT free anywhere, and that decidedly makes you the
fuckwit, dipshit.

We dig it out the ground.

Which has a substantial cost attached to it, you stupid, Donald J.
Trump like absolute fucking retard.

> Sunlight stored for us by God, over millions of years.

Yeah... we gonna use the sunlight direct now, thanks.

..... Phil

All the stupid fuck posts by you are not ever negated ny any single
intelligent post you may have ever made.

I have yet to see the latter as you so often do the immature
dipshit post thing. Good job, typical human asswipe.