techreview.com — Huge turbines mounted on floating platforms could make wind power competitive with fossil-fuel-generated electricity. These advanced wind turbines, which are in development, could be situated far from the shore, too, avoiding battles with onshore residents who object to the presence of large wind farms.
May 9, 2006 View in Crawl 4
arduennMay 9, 2006
I'm heavily concerned with the potential climate change that might take effect after planting huge floating wind turbine farms worldwide. Seriously. If the low-altitude air currents are slowed down by these things, this slowing down may structurally influence weather patterns.I'd rather go for nukerlar power.
zentroMay 9, 2006
Interesting fact: In Denmark the annual output of renewable energy [is] numerically equivalent to about 26.5% of demand (source: <a class="user" href="http://www.warmwell.com/05aug17windmason.html).">http://www.warmwell.com/05aug17windmason.html).</a>
ozymandias42May 9, 2006
Are you listening to yourself? You call nuclear power "clean" in the same breath that you used to describe a method for burying the by-product in a desert so it can't hurt anyone. A toxic by-product pretty much removes it from the running for 'clean.'Also, if a wind farm blows up, it takes out maybe a house or two, and you can clean it up in under a million years.
Closed AccountMay 9, 2006
dupe
vorlonsMay 9, 2006
Agreed! I am a Mass resident. Even liberal's here are heckling Kennedy at events on his opposition to the Capewind project.
wvdavisMay 9, 2006
Get involved! Help reduce our dependence!<a class="user" href="http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/news/stop-dirty-politics-save-offs">http://www.greenpeace.org/usa/news/stop-dirty-politics-save-offs</a><a class="user" href="http://members.greenpeace.org/action/start/97/">http://members.greenpeace.org/action/start/97/</a>
cpanicMay 9, 2006
Studies are being conducted that are determining how much weather we be effected by large turbine farms. So, yes, to some degree wind power is not necessarily totally environmentally friendly:<a class="user" href="http://www.sciencenews.org/articles/20041016/fob7.asp">http://www.sciencenews.org/articles/20041016/fob7.asp</a><a class="user" href="http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn6608">http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn6608</a>
joeyjojoMay 9, 2006
"visual polution"So sad that THAT issue is blocking us from one source of renewable, cleaner energy. We're all for a better planet, but the rich folks with beach side property...they get to decide.
analogaiMay 9, 2006
Unless it makes a ton of noise, "visual pollution" is a non-issue for me. How cool would it be to have football field sized turbines spinning around in the back yard? Hell, I'll live in one of those. I think old school wooden windmills look quite nice, which turbines would be its replacement in 100-300 years.But don't tell this to the energy companies... because they can pay me off to place one of these "visual polluters" in my backyard.
kablamo1234May 10, 2006
@NitromuleYou're right, bury me.<a class="user" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_power_transmission#HVDC">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electric_power_transmission#HVDC</a>In fact, there is a HVDC line running from Canada into the state I live.<a class="user" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quebec_-_New_England_Transmission">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quebec_-_New_England_Transmission</a>
Closed AccountMay 11, 2006
this idea is so much better than the idea that we should just have things flying around to produce electricity. I wouldn't want one of those falling on my head...