New York City Could be Powered by 'wind machines'

[Hornius Emeritus]

In reply to:

---

---

 

[JohnnyM]

There is a series called Discovery Project Earth and this was one of their projects. The experiments turned out to be a failure. Not because the winds weren't there, but because the design was unstable. They tried a few different ideas, but couldn't get it right. This episode did, however, make me come up with my first great idea of 2009 (granted, the wife and I watched this on 1/1 or 1/2 I think). The idea was tagged "Johnny's Wind Balls" and is still a great source of laughter.

So the moral of the story is that high altitude winds aren't yet able to power cities, but they can provide a laugh.

Go watch that Discovery Project Earth to see some "wow, really???" moments turn to "yeah, i didn't think so" realizations. Every show they set up a great idea and then depress you because it's currently impossible. Kind of a buzzkill.

 

[kgp]

Any project that resulted in successfully harnessing a significant percentage of the available wind power would affect climate in ways so dramatic that it would make CO2/GW look like a party joke.

 

[accuratehorn]

Could they try and harness all the yankee hot air spewed daily? Think of the energy savings.

 

[TexonLongIsland]

What would these wind catchers look like? In case you don't know, much of the "green" Manhattanistas are very similar to the Cape Cod and Malibu greenites. They talk a big game and are willing to let the rubes in fly-over country blight their views but are the first to squeal and put their vast financial, legal, and government-contact resources to work so as to not destroy the aesthetic beauty of the views that they paid millions for.

Could these be designed by Christo and Jeanne-Claude or Hermès or some transgendered heroin-addicted up and coming artist out of the East Village? Then maybe, just maybe, you have a shot.

 

[Uninformed]

What is wrong with nuclear power? It is the most viable and cost effective green technology available.

 

[BA93]

nothing is better than the current methods to produce power.

 

[l00p]

Why not? D.C. and every other capital city in the world is.

 

[Bevo Incognito]

In reply to:

---

---

 

[Uninformed]

1) Nuclear waste solvable2) Private control of the lands on which raw materials are found mean the possibility of future interruptions or the kind of dependency we've seen with oil. Non issue

3) The possibility of accidents, explosions. solvable

4) The possibility of weaponization. solvable
The Link

 

[general35]

1) Nuclear waste: there really isnt that much of it and it can be disposed of easily and safely.

2) Private control of the lands on which raw materials are found mean the possibility of future interruptions or the kind of dependency we've seen with oil. We have plenty of the stuff ourselves.

3) The possibility of accidents, explosions. This isnt 1976, Jack Lemmon isnt running the reactor, nuclear power is very safe.

4) The possibility of weaponization. Because we dont already have 3,000 warheads?


What's wrong with wind, solar, and tidal? It is not efficient, even most european countries have to borrow their power from france (nuclear). it may be able to one day, but the area of land needed to power a major city with wind would scorn the brain of any environmentalist. solar is good for powering a calculator or a street light.

 

[RayDog]

This kind of reminds me of Tesla's idea to harness the electrical gradient in the atmosphere. It looks fine until you start thinking about how to actually build something that works and is cost effective.

Put me in the camp of people who wonder why we are chasing windmills while nuclear power is a proven technology. I really need to get back to my nuclear fusion experiments.

 

[JohnnyM]

Nuclear is a band-aid, not a cure. I'm all for using it as long as we also AGGRESSIVELY pursue better options.

 

[bullzak]

The concept is a bit controversial but I think that Integral Fast Reactors run on nuclear waste and are thought to be much safer.

Could kill a couple of birds with that stone. Sure someone here knows the limitations and problems but seems like a worthy idea.

 

[MaduroUTMB]

1) FNR
2) FNR+weapons stockpiles+waste
3) And you want to suspend how many thousands of tons of aluminum and composites over a major metropolitan area? Okay.
4) We have enough and we really don't need any more.

In reply to:

---

---

 

[RayDog]

In reply to:

---

---

 

[Math Mudrat]

In reply to:

---

---

 

[HornHuskerDad]

Wrong city for a test of wind-generated power. We should do it in Washington, D.C. instead - surely all of the hot air coming from Congress would power the city.

HHD

 

[Hornius Emeritus]

In reply to:

---

---

 

[Ramius]

so how long does the training course take to learn how to service those 40,000 ft towers?

 

[score4OU]

What a great new green job. We need you to climb that 40,000 ft tower and change the red aircraft warning light that burned out.

 

[911_horn]

In reply to:

---

---

 

[majorwhiteapples]

score:

That was funny. We need you to go change the aircraft warning light, 40K feet hight, that was great, I can see some guy with a hard hat and his lunch pale strapped to his back and his hard hat has an OU symbol on it, that makes it even funnier, thanks....

 

[Coelacanth]

In reply to:

---

---

 

[HornBud]

^^ I've wondered the same thing. Sun and wind are the fuel for our weather patterns. If we use their energy to convert to electricity, what happens to the weather patterns?

Anyway, this could help NYC and other major metros in a big way:

Windcube

Takes advantage of Bernoulli effect to generate the same power as a 50' windmill in a 12x22x22 package.

 

[BillyW]

In reply to:

---

---