Vic Smith wrote:
On Fri, 15 May 2009 11:30:59 -0400, BAR wrote:

Richard Casady wrote:
On Fri, 15 May 2009 09:10:12 -0400, Keith Nuttle
wrote:

Windmills have been tried and were rejected several hundreds of years
ago, because they are dependent on the weather
What utter bull****. Windmills have been in constant use ever since
they were invented. The state of Iowa gets 5% of its juice from wind,
BTW.
Now tell us farming was rejected because it is dependent on the
weather.
How do you increase the power output of a windmill, right now?

How do you generate power from a windmill on a dead calm day?

Windmill's are unreliable for on-demand and controllable power.

I don't know the details, but I've read that one solution to the
"storage" problem that is being used - maybe in Australia - is pumping
water uphill when demand is low then releasing through generators when
needed.
Doesn't seem very scalable.

It looks good on paper. What do you do about the loss of energy
potential due to evaporation?

Richard Casady wrote:
On Fri, 15 May 2009 09:10:12 -0400, Keith Nuttle
wrote:

Windmills have been tried and were rejected several hundreds of years
ago, because they are dependent on the weather

What utter bull****. Windmills have been in constant use ever since
they were invented. The state of Iowa gets 5% of its juice from wind,
BTW.
Now tell us farming was rejected because it is dependent on the
weather.

Casady
It use to be that you would drive through the midwest and every farm had
a windmill in operation. How many have you seen today.

We have recently driven across North Carolina, both Virginias, Kentucky,
and Indiana and not seen one windmill.

Richard Casady wrote:
On Fri, 15 May 2009 11:30:59 -0400, BAR wrote:

Windmill's are unreliable for on-demand and controllable power.

So is the power company, for that matter.

Over the past year the power company has provided me with power 99.5% of
the time. The .5% of the time that we didn't have power about 750,000
other people in my area didn't have power either, massive ice and wind
storm.

Vic Smith wrote:
On Fri, 15 May 2009 11:30:59 -0400, BAR wrote:

Richard Casady wrote:
On Fri, 15 May 2009 09:10:12 -0400, Keith Nuttle
wrote:

Windmills have been tried and were rejected several hundreds of years
ago, because they are dependent on the weather
What utter bull****. Windmills have been in constant use ever since
they were invented. The state of Iowa gets 5% of its juice from wind,
BTW.
Now tell us farming was rejected because it is dependent on the
weather.
How do you increase the power output of a windmill, right now?

How do you generate power from a windmill on a dead calm day?

Windmill's are unreliable for on-demand and controllable power.

I don't know the details, but I've read that one solution to the
"storage" problem that is being used - maybe in Australia - is pumping
water uphill when demand is low then releasing through generators when
needed.
Doesn't seem very scalable.

--Vic

Many dams in the US are currently doing that very thing. I believe the
one at Smith Mountain Virgina has been doing it for over 30 years.

On Fri, 15 May 2009 12:35:45 -0400, BAR wrote:

Vic Smith wrote:
On Fri, 15 May 2009 11:30:59 -0400, BAR wrote:

Richard Casady wrote:
On Fri, 15 May 2009 09:10:12 -0400, Keith Nuttle
wrote:

Windmills have been tried and were rejected several hundreds of years
ago, because they are dependent on the weather
What utter bull****. Windmills have been in constant use ever since
they were invented. The state of Iowa gets 5% of its juice from wind,
BTW.
Now tell us farming was rejected because it is dependent on the
weather.
How do you increase the power output of a windmill, right now?

How do you generate power from a windmill on a dead calm day?

Windmill's are unreliable for on-demand and controllable power.

I don't know the details, but I've read that one solution to the
"storage" problem that is being used - maybe in Australia - is pumping
water uphill when demand is low then releasing through generators when
needed.
Doesn't seem very scalable.

It looks good on paper. What do you do about the loss of energy
potential due to evaporation?

You lose it, of course. But it was "free" in the first place.
You lose some energy pumping it too.
The bigger problem is constructing reservoirs to hold the water.
Not too practical.
There are no easy answers, but necessity is the mother of invention.
I like to see development on all fronts.
"Man will never fly. Impossible"

--Vic

On Fri, 15 May 2009 12:56:46 -0400, wrote:



They have hills in Iowa? ;-)

That's presents a problem, doesn't it?

--Vic

Vic Smith wrote:
On Fri, 15 May 2009 12:35:45 -0400, BAR wrote:

Vic Smith wrote:
On Fri, 15 May 2009 11:30:59 -0400, BAR wrote:

Richard Casady wrote:
On Fri, 15 May 2009 09:10:12 -0400, Keith Nuttle
wrote:

Windmills have been tried and were rejected several hundreds of years
ago, because they are dependent on the weather
What utter bull****. Windmills have been in constant use ever since
they were invented. The state of Iowa gets 5% of its juice from wind,
BTW.
Now tell us farming was rejected because it is dependent on the
weather.
How do you increase the power output of a windmill, right now?

How do you generate power from a windmill on a dead calm day?

Windmill's are unreliable for on-demand and controllable power.

I don't know the details, but I've read that one solution to the
"storage" problem that is being used - maybe in Australia - is pumping
water uphill when demand is low then releasing through generators when
needed.
Doesn't seem very scalable.
It looks good on paper. What do you do about the loss of energy
potential due to evaporation?

You lose it, of course. But it was "free" in the first place.
You lose some energy pumping it too.
The bigger problem is constructing reservoirs to hold the water.
Not too practical.
There are no easy answers, but necessity is the mother of invention.
I like to see development on all fronts.
"Man will never fly. Impossible"

Man has always been able to fly. The problem has been enabling the same
man to fly more than once.

On Fri, 15 May 2009 13:03:37 -0400, wrote:


The fuel is free but the infrastructure isn't. You really need to look
at all the costs before you assess price.

Right, and I'm sure infrastructure is being designed and
cost-justified as we speak.
Cassady said 5% of Iowa power is wind. It's happening.
Infrastructure is a one-time cost, then maintenance cost.
Even provides jobs.
Oil is money sent to terrorists.
That's the argument being played out, anyway.
I like nukes, myself.
But it's all interesting.
I saw a PBS program a couple weeks ago where they were sinking
generating "watermills" in the East River.
I'll bet you can solar/wind power your house down there pretty cheap
in 10-15 years. Things are moving fast.
Froggy should get into that. Needs more mad scientists.

--Vic

"BAR" wrote in message
...
Richard Casady wrote:
On Fri, 15 May 2009 09:10:12 -0400, Keith Nuttle
wrote:

Windmills have been tried and were rejected several hundreds of years
ago, because they are dependent on the weather

What utter bull****. Windmills have been in constant use ever since
they were invented. The state of Iowa gets 5% of its juice from wind,
BTW.
Now tell us farming was rejected because it is dependent on the
weather.

How do you increase the power output of a windmill, right now?

How do you generate power from a windmill on a dead calm day?

Windmill's are unreliable for on-demand and controllable power.



PG&E has been doing pumped water power storage for a lot of years. Maybe
more than my lifetime. The Pit River power stations use the excess power
from Shasta Dam during the night to pump water back up to the top reservoir.
There was a big plant built in the southern Sierras about 40 years ago. I
think it is still in use. Large tunnel when being built had an industrial
disaster when scaffolding collapsed killing some workers. Due to water flow
requirements, there is excess power in the middle of the night, so they use
it to store kinetic energy in the pumped power plants.
http://www.reuters.com/article/rbssI...33931720090504

On Fri, 15 May 2009 12:56:46 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 15 May 2009 11:18:17 -0500, Vic Smith
wrote:

On Fri, 15 May 2009 11:30:59 -0400, BAR wrote:

Richard Casady wrote:
On Fri, 15 May 2009 09:10:12 -0400, Keith Nuttle
wrote:

Windmills have been tried and were rejected several hundreds of years
ago, because they are dependent on the weather

What utter bull****. Windmills have been in constant use ever since
they were invented. The state of Iowa gets 5% of its juice from wind,
BTW.
Now tell us farming was rejected because it is dependent on the
weather.

How do you increase the power output of a windmill, right now?

How do you generate power from a windmill on a dead calm day?

Windmill's are unreliable for on-demand and controllable power.

I don't know the details, but I've read that one solution to the
"storage" problem that is being used - maybe in Australia - is pumping
water uphill when demand is low then releasing through generators when
needed.
Doesn't seem very scalable.

--Vic


They have hills in Iowa? ;-)

If you ask the 10 000 or so who ride bikes across Iowa from river to
river every August, they will tell you there are hills. You don't
store that Iowa breeze. You turn down the stokers on the coal plants
when the wind blows, which is most of the time. They call Chicago the
Windy City, but Des Moines is windier.

Casady