read posts on VAWTsJohnG@lt wrote:
Yep. Unless the turbines are getting hit precisely on the nose much of the energy is wasted with inefficient buffeting. A few degrees off and you lose up to 70% of the potential energy.Dilbert_X wrote:
Only if the wind blows in exactly the right direction. Otherwise it will be turbulent, useless and well above the bridge.m3thod wrote:
well consider bridges that cross valleys, the funnelling on the land will force the wind to travel down the valley so direction is no longer a problem and secondly the funneling effect will accelerate wind speed and thus maximising turbine efficiency (\o/ GCSE geog)
We need a geography nerd to explain this in more detail i.e. ted4mods.
You've only gotta drive across one (for those in the UK, know of the one crossing lake Hollingworth on the m62) the cross wind is very apparent as the wind is forced downwards through the valley and if this engineering and mafs is correct a lot of free energy is going to waste.
a good idea in some cases
Load factor of turbines is bad enough, restricting them to a few degrees out of 360 would be total fail.
This is one of those 'feel good' projects that is pointless.
aw, poor thing...m3thod wrote:
[Youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=na6HxKQQsAM[/url]Pug wrote:
About a year ago, my town put up big wind turbines and the environmentalists freaked about bird kills. I imagine putting the blades up where birds like to roost isn't going to be very popular with them.
Though I'm not gonna start hating wind power for that... just look at oil soaked coasts and the harm pollution from coal plants do and a wack on the head of a few birds is nothing
Your thoughts, insights, and musings on this matter intrigue me
Looks inefficient and expensive.
inane little opines
Of course, it's a concept and semi-decorativedayarath wrote:
Looks inefficient and expensive.
Your thoughts, insights, and musings on this matter intrigue me
It's neither realistic nor practical so whoever made this was wasting his time on this concept, really D:.
Unless it's just art. I don't see why it placed second, it's pretty but that's about it.
Unless it's just art. I don't see why it placed second, it's pretty but that's about it.
inane little opines
I'm not saying I agree with them, but I did see a presentation when the folks were lobbying against it. Basically anything people build over one story kills bird...because birds are stupid and don't bother looking where they are flying. So, the number of bird kills is related to the height, surface area, and average local wind speed. BUT, on the other side of the coin...birds usually like to fly where it's windy...aka the logical spot to put a wind turbine.globefish23 wrote:
[I've just read an article where a German biologist and environmentalist says that only 1-2 collisions of birds with wind turbines occur each year in Germany, as opposed to millions which die in road traffic.
Also, most birds are not frightened by the moving shadows, some keep a distance of several hundred meters and only few species of birds and bats are endangered, if the location isn't carefully selected (e.g. in or near wood, next to bodies of water).
http://www.wind-energie.de/fileadmin/do … _Flyer.pdf
So to sum up, birds are dumb.
Keep up! I already said thatdayarath wrote:
It's neither realistic nor practical so whoever made this was wasting his time on this concept, really D:.
Unless it's just art. I don't see why it placed second, it's pretty but that's about it.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
where have you been?JohnG@lt wrote:
Keep up! I already said thatdayarath wrote:
It's neither realistic nor practical so whoever made this was wasting his time on this concept, really D:.
Unless it's just art. I don't see why it placed second, it's pretty but that's about it.
doin time, i'd betHurricane2k9 wrote:
where have you been?JohnG@lt wrote:
Keep up! I already said thatdayarath wrote:
It's neither realistic nor practical so whoever made this was wasting his time on this concept, really D:.
Unless it's just art. I don't see why it placed second, it's pretty but that's about it.
and the livin's easyburnzz wrote:
doin time
dayarath wrote:
It's neither realistic nor practical so whoever made this was wasting his time on this concept, really D:.
Unless it's just art. I don't see why it placed second, it's prettybut that's about it.DrunkFace wrote:
Ugly...
LurkingHurricane2k9 wrote:
where have you been?JohnG@lt wrote:
Keep up! I already said thatdayarath wrote:
It's neither realistic nor practical so whoever made this was wasting his time on this concept, really D:.
Unless it's just art. I don't see why it placed second, it's pretty but that's about it.
I couldnt take the stupid in dst anymore.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
Solar Wind, it gives comets their fucking trails.