DO not let anyone tell you that wind turbines don't need fossil fuels to move.
-
Having trouble using the site?
Contact support
Diesel powered wind turbines
- Thread starter HeavyAssault
- Start date
Those wind turbine are on a hybrid. 
Do they have to get them turning with diesel over electric? Then wind maintains rotation?
I think he means they have to get where they're going on a fossil-fuel-using train/truck. Which kinda defeats the purpose, just a wee bit.
But incidentally, no, they don't need anything but wind power to actually turn. This is what the turbine looks like on the inside (gearbox, rotor shaft, brakes).
Hip hip hooray. I'll take my pay raise in primers, please.Good news, Lieutenant Obvious.
You have been promoted.
Somebody's mom joke waiting to happen.
Every bearing needs grease, the gears need oil, the seals are made with hydrocarbons. This is why i laugh at hippies who ride bikes... tires, chain oil, bearings,.... that bike doesnt go down the road without the oil feild.
yeah, but they don't need to use that 'dinosaur blood' for grease and oil. They can use environmentally (heavy on the "Mental") friendly and sustainable resources, like whale-oil and blubber!
Shut down 'big oil'. Man the harpoons.
..... whaling.... does sound like fun. I stab at thee from hells heart!!!
Go back to old school leather and make seals from seals.... be real man and beat a baby seal to death with a walrus penis bone to bike down to whole foods.
I would straight up club the shit out of a baby seal for a set of mittens, cause when the next -30 global warming front hits, I’ll be warmer!
There was a time in the early '00s that I actually looked into taking a year off the job to go up north for the Canadian seal harvest.
Oh, to be middle-aged again.
Trains are just one of petroleum energy needed for the Wind Turbine to come to fruition , but also don't forget the energy needed and used to get the Blades and Generators here by Marine Freighter's across Ocean, and the massive Cranes to move Blades and Generators once off the Vessels at the Port facilities , The flatbed Semi Trucks to haul and move all across the US continent to erect at the construction area's .
Plus all the petroleum powered heavy Excavation equipment for ground work and foundation pours . Then all the petroleum needed and used at the construction site's by workers and vehicles for each individual erection of wind blade generators .
.
- Nov 3, 2010
- 9,730
- 20,531
Lest we not forget all the machinery needed to strip mine the shit out of the earth to gather precious metals. Oh wait, that leads me to say, don’t forget about the displaced animals cause by the strip mining or don’t forget about the erosion factor after all to soil and vegetation is take away. Wait a minute, is this all connected in some strange strange way? Fuck, I’m confused. Ok back to my padded room.
I'm guessing the copper fairy didn't make the copper either.
R
R
- Nov 3, 2010
- 9,730
- 20,531
but my tesla is so good for the environment. It runs on batteries, not fossil fuel, why can’t you guys see that
After posting this an error 414 battery not found light appeared on the teslas tv sized console display just before the auto pilot failed to recognize the white 18 wheeler trailer as not being the road to infinity and beyond...
- Nov 3, 2010
- 9,730
- 20,531
Stupid ass eco hating semi trucks shouldn’t be on the road in the first place
In a twist of irony, the semi hit was hauling a load of new tesla batteries.
- Nov 3, 2010
- 9,730
- 20,531
Fuck, there goes my fast change battery station of the future. Cant even have a pretend conversation without it getting ruined
He was being helpful to the retarded (me). I think I'm a fairly sharpe person (like most retards), but somehow didn't understand the photos...Good news, Lieutenant Obvious.
You have been promoted.
Back to the use of petroleum and its by-products, practically every part of that turbine required oil to make it. Damn near everything we use would cease to exist if we stopped using oil, coal and natural gas.
And don't forget the 150+ tons of coal needed to make each wind turbine, as well as all the rare earth minerals used in the generator, as well as the iron ore for the steel.
All needing to be mined out of the ground and processed.
All needing to be mined out of the ground and processed.
Park by one and good chance your vehicle gets covered with grease/oil. Seals leak and sh#t runs down the edge of the blade...flings grease/oil all over the place. Got to park perpendicular to the blade rotation.
Blades have a certain operating life, wear out. Stacks of old blades all over west Texas. Blades are composite, fiberglass and carbon fiber. No secondary market or recycling. So they just stack 100s of them up and put a fence around them.
Blades have a certain operating life, wear out. Stacks of old blades all over west Texas. Blades are composite, fiberglass and carbon fiber. No secondary market or recycling. So they just stack 100s of them up and put a fence around them.
On the wind front a few years ago I actually saw small turbines that might be useful, not sure it they got it squared away.
form factor looked like a DNA helix
they were small from 55 gallon drum size to 20’ long
supposedly the shape was self speed limiting so there was less risk of run away
and the “best” part was it works with wind from any direction, the prop doesn’t need to be into the wind
They were thinking these smaller units could be placed around cities and buildings where the construction creates wind tunnels etc.
And they were small enough that you don’t need a a 10 mile long piece of land.
Made of stainless so it wouldn’t disintegrate in the sun.
seems like a decent idea just because of the sheer amount that could be placed anywhere and everywhere
forgot...I think the trial was in Chicago
form factor looked like a DNA helix
they were small from 55 gallon drum size to 20’ long
supposedly the shape was self speed limiting so there was less risk of run away
and the “best” part was it works with wind from any direction, the prop doesn’t need to be into the wind
They were thinking these smaller units could be placed around cities and buildings where the construction creates wind tunnels etc.
And they were small enough that you don’t need a a 10 mile long piece of land.
Made of stainless so it wouldn’t disintegrate in the sun.
seems like a decent idea just because of the sheer amount that could be placed anywhere and everywhere
forgot...I think the trial was in Chicago
They can at least stay the fuck out of the left lane on the interstate along with anyone else that doesn’t understand the left lane is for warp 7 passing ONLY.
A Darrieus “egg beater” design variant. See link below. I looked into small turbs recently and well built turbines are expensive and hard to find. If I were in my 30’s and had the coin, it might be a good long term investment. At my age now...I would not recoup my investment. Notice source of second link
A historical review of vertical axis wind turbines rated 100 kW and above
This paper summarizes and introduces all vertical axis wind turbine (VAWT) projects where 100 kW or larger turbines have been installed. The basis for…
www.sciencedirect.com
:max_bytes(150000):strip_icc()/__opt__aboutcom__coeus__resources__content_migration__treehugger__images__2012__10__harvistorDARWIND5-a478865044a8470c8df4b213b5431651.jpg)
New Eggbeater VAWT Design Claims 35% More Power Than Competitors
One company's newest small wind turbine design is said to produce 35% more power, at a 25% lower mounting point, than other similar turbines.
Wind turbines and solar farms are crony capitalism and rent seeking at its worst. Corporations and government have convinced the SJW's around the world they are good for the environment while enriching themselves. There is nothing environmentally friendly about them. They require large land mass areas and in the process destroy habitat and kill millions of birds. The amount of materials and transportation costs associated with them require large scale mining and massive amounts of energy. They have a short service life and are not recyclable. Gas fired turbines are very efficient, work regardless of the weather and have a small footprint with a long service life.
Natural gas is currently cheap, and relatively clean burning. Why we are not using it more now is baffling.
One more link that looks at this historically...
law.stanford.edu
One more link that looks at this historically...
The Unlikely Birth of Modern Renewable Energy On A Mountain Top in Vermont – 75 Years Ago Today | Stanford Law School
Return to the Stanford Lawyer homepage Seventy-five years ago today, at 6:56 PM, the modern renewable-energy era began. On a mountain in Vermont calle
law.stanford.edu
I agree with you on many points. Governmental investment in wind energy has had some bad effects (short cuts always have a price). The biggest, IMHO, has been to cloud clear thinking on how to meet our national energy requirements for the long term. Propping up green energy is likely to have unforeseen consequences. Investing in research is one thing, but to ignoring strategic realities is dangerous. We need diversity in power production in order to ensure safety. But we slit our own throats when we destroy our energy infrastructure to promote political support!
Green energy is not capable of meeting our strategic needs at this time, and is being pushed at the wrong scale (ie, regional rather than household or community level). Advanced fossil fueled and hydroelectric plants will be required to meet our strategic national needs for the foreseeable future (mature systems). Current green energy plans are economically wasteful, and could put our country in real danger.
Im all for fossil fuelsNatural gas is currently cheap, and relatively clean burning. Why we are not using it more now is baffling.
One more link that looks at this historically...
The Unlikely Birth of Modern Renewable Energy On A Mountain Top in Vermont – 75 Years Ago Today | Stanford Law School
Return to the Stanford Lawyer homepage Seventy-five years ago today, at 6:56 PM, the modern renewable-energy era began. On a mountain in Vermont calle
Until the rest of the world plays ball we shouldn’t handicap ourselves. We will keep our land clean...let them pollute and kill their own population.
I haven’t kept up to speed but I do know the chems used for fracking are some nasty stuff and have the possibility of poisoning ground water.
getting those chems not heavy metals out of water is not easy or cheap.
I remember watching one show years ago 15-20 (wasn’t for or against fracking back then) but the guy had a really nice home.
they started fracking nearby and in a couple of months his water turned to poison. He started trucking in water.
he opened the hose bib and put a match to it...lit like a gas grill.
"Green" energy will never, ever be capable of meeting our ever growing need for electricity. Not in 20 years, not in 200 years.
Fossil fueled and hydroelectric plants are unacceptable for the guaranteed environmental damage they create.
The only viable short term answer is nuclear fission. The only viable long term answer is nuclear fusion.
This is what I was trying to say. Shifting energy supply systems is a slow process, and we tend to live with what we have while trying to figure out the practical way forward. Impetuous moves can often be costly in both time and resources.
I disagree to some extent with the impact of existing fossil fuel and hydroelectric production while trying to advance nuclear production. I like nuclear, but governments suck at the execution (our history of accidents backs this up; the three biggest nuclear accidents will still be a problem, and expense, for a long time). So we have to reply on what we have while we develop new sources. I think nuclear could work well, if done with better thinking prior to building (site the plants carefully, build them to last, etc). But the game is advanced by exploring new technological advances as they occur.
At least that was the point I was trying to make.
The US Navy and the French government (which is the majority owner in Electricite de France) know how to do it.
Similar threads
