Uh Oh

will probably provide some much needed jobs.

 

Optimistic

I'm optimistic, personally. The cost is huge when compared to building enough coal-fired plants that could deliver equivalent power, but the fact that we're doing it anyway makes me hopeful that we're finally willing to "pay up" the initial costs of developing such technologies. It'll get cheaper as we figure out more efficient ways to do it. For comparison, our aircraft carriers deliver about 1100 MW between their two nuclear plants. I don't know the cost, but it's probably pretty close to this project (maybe more, actually?). I've always argued that we need to build some more nuclear reactors while the "renewables" catch up. Though I work in the nuclear business, I'd still rather we power the country with wind/solar/etc where possible.

How will this affect the surf? Once built, I think it'll have little effect. I'd guess these things will have a pretty high cost to maintain. Think about the challenge of driving a barge out to offshore choppy northeast waters, then setting up a maintenance operation...no small task! I'd love to see the design in more detail. It's difficult to speculate the impact without knowing exactly what they're planning to do. On a positive note 6000 MW is HUGE compared to any other current wind power operation. Creating something that can actually compete with coal in terms of power output, instead of just creating a "symbol" of renewable energy that doesn't really contribute much to the grid, shows that we're getting somewhere.

It's only one part of the equation, though! We need to be more efficient in our consumption as well...the new light bulbs are a great example of many things we can do. Better insulation for buildings, improved home appliances, reasonable mass transit...lots of opportunities out there to not only get rich, but help save the world (and our beloved ocean) along the way.

So I didn't really answer your question. I think the designers' feet must be held close to the fire every step of the way. Shortcuts generally do two things. One, lower costs. Two, pollute. If they're not watched closely...I'm sure the temptation already exists. It's not that these guys don't care. Hell, they're in the renewable energy business...it's not something you do if you don't have a passion for clean energy. At the same time, we need to watch and evaluate to make sure they don't screw up.

 

i read this here:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/12/science/earth/12wind.html?scp=1&sq=google wind&st=cse

you have to wonder how durable these things are. think about a hurricane, like Bill, running these things right over. if they can hold up to beatings like that, we can use all of the energy from it and reduce reliance on fossil fuels. as long as they're far enough offshore that they aren't an eyesore, i'm totally for it.

also, large scale projects like these are great for job creation and maintenance. if this gets underway, it will take many years and a large amount of both human and technological resources for it to succeed.

anyone disagree?

 

Agree...

agreed...to a point.

"Succeed" stands alone as the key word. BP taught us all a harsh lesson in assuming "the experts" can never fail to perceive serious problems, resulting in a disaster of epic proportions.

My big questions, all of which require solid answers (may have already been answered...still researching!)....

1. How stable are the wind currents associated with this project, and will the turbine design allow favorable response to changes in wind direction that could negatively affect power output? From where do we derive the 6000 MW output? Can we expect this during typical operations?

2. How intensive/frequent is the required maintenance? Does the design allow for long periods of resistance to harsh weather without maintenance?

3. What is the environmental impact of building massive structures along this "spine"? "Unique" features may support unique habitats. Could building along this geological feature potentially destroy important areas, hence disrupting/destroying our fisheries?

4. Does the design support expansion of the project? If it works well, we may want to build more turbines. Has anyone thought about this, and to what extent to the proposed cables allow increased current flow?

 

i don't think you can compare an offshore oil well to a wind farm in terms of possible consequence of failure. we've all seen what happens when an oil well fails, but for an offshore wind turbine, what's the worst that can happen? large pieces of metal floating around?

in terms of marine life, usually structures like these tend to support instead of harm. i recently read an article about an abandoned well somewhere off the coast in the pacific being an attractive location for divers for this reason.

i know very little about the actual design and operation of a wind turbine, but what i've noticed about the small farm in atlantic city is that they adjust to wind direction. i'd always know when it's offshore when the turbines were facing a certain direction. one would definitely assume that this would be the case with offshore turbines. also, since wind is obviously allowed to blow without impediment in the open ocean, i'd imagine even a small amount of wind would be enough to generate some energy.

 

I think you're probably right...just saying that we should carefully examine all possible consequences. The fact that no obvious disasters seem to be possible is a great reason to think a little harder to be sure. BP clearly didn't think the failure that occurred would dole out such tragic results (otherwise, they would have tested their systems more frequently).
I tend to agree with your optimisim, even though I probably sound skeptical. The whole thing strikes me as a win-win with the potential to give us one of the many large breakthroughs that we need.

 

yeah, i agree w/ that.

the entire nature of underwater drilling is associated w/ high risk. operating the machinery is very dangerous and there are whole divisions in large oil companies associated with quality control and safety (the job they do is obviously questionable). you're dealing with a highly combustible substance in a location under tremendous water pressure. the rigs that extract the oil are very complex systems and as we've seen, very fragile as well. the times did a feature on how they work but i'm having a hard time finding it online.