Long ago in the olden days of 1952-53, I was what today would be known as a project manager of a government-funded experimental 10 Kw wind turbine generator known as the Orkney Windmill. This was a wind turbine with three, 40 feet long, blades hydraulically-feathered to compensate for the variable wind strength and velocity. The turbine was built on one of the Orkney Islands off the west coast of Scotland where the wind was strong and constant for most of the year. Even so, we could only operate the turbine with mechanical safely within a narrow range of wind velocities. The technical details are unimportant, but from an economic standpoint the Orkney experiment was costly failure. That was because, despite the unlimited wind power, the turbine could operate for a fraction of the time only. Advocates of this ‘alternative form of energy’ whistle in the wind at public expense, but what expense? The cost of wind power energy is many times the cost of nuclear energy, but still those wind farms dot the landscape. Still, looking on the bright side, and forgetting the resulting ugliness of the landscape, the industry occupies a large work force. For that matter, solar energy is almost, if not equally, inefficient. In short, let’s build more nuclear-power generating stations.
Tags: Politics
I miss your banter. I’m so pleased to come across this blog – it is refreshing. I hope life is well. ( ;
It is certainly surreal. On that we can agree. As to its beauty, that is in the eye of the beholder. Nevertheless, the point I was making was its high economic inefficiency.
Oh, how you make me laugh! You state that the turbines cause ugliness to the landscape. Have you seen the Tehachapi Wind Farm in California? It is both surreal and beautiful. Just a thought.
M