Unexpected Downside of Wind Power

The bird thing has been done to death. Buildings cause a far more substantial slaughter every year. Ditto cats. The environmental issues with coal and nuclear are far in excess of what the turbines contribute. The biggest sleeper issue with coal and nuclear is the MASSIVE amount of water consumed in these kinds of power plants to the tune of 0.49 gal/kWh for coal and 0.62 gal/kWh for nuclear. In fact, 48% of all water consumption in the US is for power generation! The heated waste water is then dumped into lakes and streams where the hot water causes all sorts of problems in the surrounding area. Also don't forget about the mercury contamination for coal plants. The typical 300 MW plant churns out something like 42 lbs of Hg/yr!

Of course, the downside of wind is that we can't (yet) use it for base load. Until we solve the storage problem or completely decentralize the grid (and go for the www approach, which would be great for so many reasons) Nuclear is probably the most sustainable base load solution.

 

How about just building a better wind turbine?

TMA's vertical axis wind turbine introduces competitive advantage
Design creates pull on the back side, contributing to 40%+ wind conversion efficiencies; doesn't kill birds; runs more quietly; and doesn't need to be installed as high, blending better with landscape. Generating costs estimated at 3.5 cents per kilowatt-hour, surpassing conventional energy sources.
http://opensourceenergy.org/txtlstvw.aspx?...8d-2a44417a564b

 

The only problem that I see with TMA's design is the (appearent) 1MW size limit.

This could make off-shore deployment really expensive. The modern offshore turbines are approaching 5MW. Still this is a cool development and from Wyoming where coal is king. Very cool.

 

Combine the wind generator, cell tower, power line, tv transmitter, radio transmitter, nulear stack all into one tower. Then put a single ultrasonic transmitter on it so birds can hear it and avoid it.

 

I am by no means an expert, or even particularly informed on this problem, so take my comments with a grain of salt --

AFAIK, altamont pass is one of, if not the worse offender in bird kills, at least in NA. One should not over-extrapolate altamont to wind energy as a large scale industry. It's geographical placement and blade spin speed do not and should not be reporduced. A lot more is known today how to avoid bird killing than the naive no-planning that happened there.

I say minimize as much as possible, and set limits on allowable bird killing that should not exceed that caused by the tech it is replacing.

How much effort has gone into mitigating the problem ? How much Fed and State research money has been invested ? Billions would be reasonable, given the alternatives.

 

From what I can tell you're absolutely right. Altamont utilized much older turbine technology. What this means is that to generate x amount of power a very large number of turbines must be used increasing the turbine density. The lower output turbines have very high rpms versus the modern 1.5+ MW turbines that are being installed which increases the lethality of the turbine. On top of this the wind farm appearently sits smack-dab in the middle of a migration route. Sort of a perfect storm of bad planning/ignorance.

There has been some research on this issue. New Jersey suspended all new wind projects to conduct studies. In Pennsylvania there were some studies done on the impact on bat populations near a windfarm (I forget which one).

My Alma Mater recently (SEP 2004) installed an commisioned a 1.65 MW turbine that supplies about 40% of the campus' power needs. When I was there for my tenth reunion in June they took us on a tour and mentioned that they were unaware of any bird kills up to that time.

The bird kill thing is totally overblown in my opinion. Sure it's something that we need to be mindful of during the planning phase of new wind farms. But the turbines are not disproportionate bird killers.

 

Sometimes these environmentalist almost make a religion out of an animal dying.. similiar to india starving while cows roam everywhere.

*I bet farmers fences kill more animals that this?
*What about the fish nets in the rivers taking countless millions of fish that are not even the target fish and so they die needlessly to serve no purpose?
*Don't birds know how to fly thru tree limbs that are dancing in the wind?.. they learn to avoid natural dangers with no problem?
If the blades were spinning so fast that they were invisible, I could see some rational...
*Clear glass is much more merciless than a windmill blade?
*How many birds crash into skyscrapers as they see thier reflection in the mirrors and think there is more airspace to fly into.
* If we put solar panels on the ground, the environmentalist would scream that the sun reflects off of them and blinds the birds.. or they do not have enough ground space to make their nest?

I see the real problem is that the enviromentalist have so much money because of thier strong support from the public, they then are irresponsible with thier activities with that money.

I'm sure they can pay for high powered lawyers and come against many issues and win because thier opponent doesn't have the means to pay for all the lawyers they can?

Sometimes giving too much money to a cause, only perverts the cause into misrepresenting that cause.
Similiar to the government.. they feel they must use the money or they will lose it and have to give reasons for thier existence! So good programs mean't to assist the needy get perverted into helping the rich.

Would they be happier if we humans just killed all of us to leave the planet for the animals?...

As far as the species dissappearing.. I think thats part of evolution, because new species are always being created that never were! Creatures are always improving themselves and learning how to coexist with their envirionment better than the last species.
So hopefully a bird can learn to quit flying into blades like they learn to avoid cars rolling by one after one everyday at 70mph.

 

Go with the newer more efficient wind generators! I hope to be totally off the grid in my next house using a combination of wind and sun, with the Prius hooked in! The fun is in the challenge.

 

The point of finding and utilizing alternative energies is to implement them to a degree that causes the least "footprint" on our environment. There are now too many people on this earth to ignore the ramifications of our future actions. A massive slaughter of birds will not adhere to this philosophy. Birds may have good vision but a whole lot of birds migrate in the dark, at night. In fact, some species migrate solely at night. Hence the problem. The City of Chicago no longer has their high rises lit up at night due to the numerous tower strikes. Economy, tourism, was believed to take a hit but we're still doing ok despite. Additionally, bats are now being studied as they are thought to be attracted to the motion of the blade and fly right into it thinking it's an insect swarm. Bats are an enormous consumer of mosquitoes and as those nasty tropical diseases make their way to the states, we may have grown an appreciation for this mammal. Birds, too, eat a ton of nasty insects and as much as some don't appreciate them, the serve to fill an important ecological niche. We have to start thinking on a grand scale how our actions are going to influence the wildlife community and our wild places. I'm a proponent of wind energy but believe that the placement and technology should be researched so as to cause the least negative impact possible.

 

True,

Modern wind turbines are both more efficient and safe for birds. The "bird killing" turbines are a thing of the past, at least with respect to manufacturing more of them. So eventually, this will become a non-issue if it isn't already.

 

I believe some of those windmills have exposed steel frames (the old style) which allow roosting places for birds. The newer enclosed style doesn't give birds such good places to sit. Also, it's on a pass which apparently has a lot of raptor migrations.

My parents live on the MN/SD line, which has hundreds of windmills, several of which I've walked under (kinda scary when the big blades go whooshing right above you, even if they are probably still >50 feet up at the closest). I haven't seen any dead birds under them, and my parents are unaware of any reports or controversy in the area on this. Certainly the locals aren't upset (about birds or aesthetics). I think the problem is on that one particular wind farm in California, which has gotten a lot of press.

nerfer

 

There have been a few problems else where. Usually isolated events. There was a bat issue in PA and NJ suspended all new wind developments pending some study about migration patterns... yada yada yada.

 

Do solar panels kill birds? If so, how?

 

Do solar panels work at night? If so, how?

 

How many birds are killed around airports? And how would we really know since not much is left of a bird that is injested into a turbofan?

 

From what I have read about the subject, bird kills are not a significant problem with newer wind generators. Altamont is the one example that is always brought up in opposition to wind power. Certainly, airplanes, windows, and house cats kill far more birds than wind generators. And I am sure that birds are harmed more by the emissions of power plants than by the wind generators that take their place.
Still, I think is is good policy to ensure that environmental studies take into account the possible effect of wind turbines on wildlife when making decisions on siting.
I think that we should at least address concerns that are legitimate (e.g., bird kills) in a respectful manner, so that they can be kept separate from objections that are clearly nonsense (for instance, some idiot wrote a letter to the local newspaper claiming that the rotation of wind turbines cause friction and hence adds to global warming!)
One of the most controversial wind projects is the proposed wind farm offshore of Cape Cod. Most of the objection seems to be from wealthy property owners on the shore, one of them apparently is a CEO of an oil or gas company. I have seen some studies that suggest that the offshore towers may present a hazard to marine life. I do know more about that subject than I do about birds, and I haven't seen any compelling evidence that the towers present a problem.

 

Birds Smirds.... how many to you think die flying into window panes, or cars on the freeways.. or limbs of trees swaying in the wind?.....

Lets make some power and let the birds figure it out on thier own... they are not stupid... they know how to fly around objects by now??????

Its not like the blades of a windmill spin like airplane blades..... they are really slow.... at least the big ones that count.

Seems you can't fart without someone taking a reading and filing a complaint for pollution....... are we going to help the birds rule the earth or are we?

I don't think they are doing to bad... whats the problem?