Monday, 14 January 2013

Electricity from windturbines? No thanks!

A report by the UK's Department of Energy and Climate Change says a huge expansion of green energy is planned, with up to 32,000 new wind turbines and many thousands of transmission pylons as it struggles to meet greenhouse gas emissions targets.

This news report got me thinking.  Obviously it would be wonderful if Bessler's wheel could be part of the energy supply sysytem - but that is but a possibility glimpsed in the future, at this time.  So in the mean time we must have the windturbines - apparently.  So, how efficient and how green are these wind turbines?

"Passed by millions of drivers a year, it is one of England’s best known wind turbines. It is also one of its most useless. According to latest figures, the 280ft generator towering over the M4 near Reading worked at just 15 per cent of its capacity last year. And although it generated electricity worth an estimated £100,000, it had to be subsidised with £130,000 of public money.  Since it was switched on in 2005, it has been given £600,000 in public subsidies while working at an average of 17 per cent of its capacity."  Not very efficient then and certainly not cost effective.  (Daily Mail)

When we drill for oil or mine coal, the fossil fuels obtained result in a net profit to the energy companies because more energy is created than is used to obtain the fossil fuels. They make a profit because the consumer places a certain value on a gallon of gas; he pays for the fuel to drive 20 miles, instead of walking, bicycling or riding a horse.

That is not the case for wind turbines. The energy they create does not even pay for the costs of obtaining that energy, therefore they do not create energy. Each dollar represents a certain amount of energy. A 2MW turbine costs $3.5 million dollars according to wind turbine sources.  The lifespan of turbines is estimated to be about 20 years. If you financed the entire $3.5 million at 7% it would be require a payment of $330,000 per year. This does not include the cost of maintenance, transmission line or back-up conventional power plants to balance the fluctuating output.

If we construct the 2MW turbines in a favorable position it will produce about 30% of 2MW or .0.6MW over the entire year. There are 8760 hours in the year yielding a production of 5300 MW-hours. Multiply by 1,000 to convert to kWh's and the yield is 5,300,00 kWhs. Each kWh is worth about 5 cents wholesale for a total production of $262,000 per year, yet the owner will have to pay $330,000 per year to cover capital costs. A rough estimate reveals at least another $70,000 per year to cover maintenance, landowner leases, local government kickbacks, transmission lines and extra costs of conventional power plants backup. Generally there is approximately 1 full time worker for every 4 turbines. Even using the gross under-estimate of $70,000 per year of ongoing costs the investors would need to spend $400,000 per year to yield only $262,000 in electricity payments.

Where's the money?  Where is the profit?  The profit for the investors comes from Government subsidies and tax credits which ultimately means you and me!  But hey, no worries - wind turbines are green!

From a local residence point of view they are harmful to wildlife such as bats, songbirds, and raptors such as golden eagles; they ruin the views and hurt tourism; they cause noise and light pollution; and diminish real estate values.  There is also the NIMBY factor (Not In My BackYard), and I wouldn't want one in mine.

Also, many sites for wind farms are far from demand centres, requiring substantially more money to construct new transmission lines and substations.

The performance of wind mills depends on wind, weather and geography. Wind is a fluctuating, unpredictable source of energy and is not suited to meet the base load energy demand unless some form of energy storage is utilized (e.g. batteries, pumped hydro).

The manufacturing and installation of wind turbines requires heavy upfront investments – both in commercial and residential applications.

Wind energy, compared to solar panels, requires greater maintenance due to moving parts and the bearings of the turbine require changing once every 5 years.

In the process of reducing emissions, people are building sea-based windmill parks to harness energy from the wind. The question remains as to how these windmill structures, which rise out of the sea, will affect the marine ecosystem. Will seals and porpoises be disturbed by these structures? How might other parts of the marine ecosystem be affected by these windmills, and how might impacts on invertebrates and fish affect marine mammals? 

Havas and Colling (2011) wrote a paper entitled: Wind Turbines Make Waves: Why Some Residents Near Wind Turbines Become Ill. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society 31(5) 414–426.

People who live near wind turbines complain of symptoms that include some combination of the following: difficulty sleeping, fatigue, depression, irritability, aggressiveness, cognitive dysfunction, chest pain/pressure, headaches, joint pain,skin irritations, nausea, dizziness, tinnitus, and stress. 

These symptoms have been attributed to the pressure (sound) waves that wind turbines generate in the form of noise and infrasound. However, wind turbines also generate electromagnetic waves in the form of poor power quality (dirty electricity) and ground current, and these can adversely affect those who are electrically hypersensitive. Indeed, the symptoms mentioned above are consistent with electro-hypersensitivity. Sensitivity to both sound and electromagnetic waves differs among individuals and may explain why not everyone in the same home experiences similar effects. Ways to mitigate the adverse health effects of wind turbines are presented.

June 13, 2012.  For years doctors at Women’s College Hospital, in the heart of Toronto, have been diagnosing patients with environmental sensitivities that include multiple chemical sensitivity (MCS) and electromagnetic hypersensitivity (EMS). They have a long waiting list and if you sign up it will take 9 months to a year before a doctor has time to see you.  Some of these cases have been attributed to the close proximity of wind turbines.

BUT, that's not all! In China, the true cost of Britain's clean, green wind power experiment is Pollution on a disastrous scale

"A toxic lake is poisoning Chinese farmers, their children and their land. It's what's left behind after making the magnets for Britain's latest wind turbines... and is merely one of a multitude of environmental sins committed in the name of our new green Jerusalem.  On the outskirts of one of China’s most polluted cities, an old farmer stares despairingly out across an immense lake of bubbling toxic waste covered in black dust. He remembers it as fields of wheat and corn.

Vast fortunes are being amassed here in Inner Mongolia; the region has more than 90 per cent of the world’s legal reserves of rare earth metals, and specifically neodymium, the element needed to make the magnets in the most striking of green energy producers, wind turbines. But there is a distinctly dirty truth about the process used to extract neodymium: it has an appalling environmental impact that raises serious questions over the credibility of so-called green technology.

The reality is that, as Britain flaunts its environmental credentials by speckling its coastlines and unspoiled moors and mountains with thousands of wind turbines, it is contributing to a vast man-made lake of poison in northern China. This is the deadly and sinister side of the massively profitable rare-earths industry that the ‘green’ companies profiting from the demand for wind turbines would prefer you knew nothing about. Hidden out of sight behind smoke-shrouded factory complexes in the city of Baotou, and patrolled by platoons of security guards, lies a five-mile wide ‘tailing’ lake. It has killed farmland for miles around, made thousands of people ill and put one of China’s key waterways in jeopardy. This vast, hissing cauldron of chemicals is the dumping ground for seven million tons a year of mined rare earth after it has been doused in acid and chemicals and processed through red-hot furnaces to extract its components.

Rusting pipelines meander for miles from factories processing rare earths in Baotou out to the man-made lake where, mixed with water, the foul-smelling radioactive waste from this industrial process is pumped day after day. No signposts and no paved roads lead here, and as we approach security guards shoo us away and tail us. When we finally break through the cordon and climb sand dunes to reach its brim, an apocalyptic sight greets us: a giant, secret toxic dump, made bigger by every wind turbine we build.

The lake instantly assaults your senses. Stand on the black crust for just seconds and your eyes water and a powerful, acrid stench fills your lungs. For hours after our visit, my stomach lurched and my head throbbed. We were there for only one hour, but those who live in Mr Yan’s village of Dalahai, and other villages around, breathe in the same poison every day." Thanks to http://www.dailymail.co.uk and various other sources.

JC

10a2c5d26e15f6g7h10ik12l3m6n14o14r5s17tu6v5w4y4-3,’.

28 comments:

  1. Very intertesting John,..There is definitely a place for the wheel.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Thanks for posting this John.

    There is a large wind turbine about 15 miles from my house, which can be seen from a distance from my house. Putting aside the NIMBY factor, and the fact that electricity pylons cause much the same medical issues for people who live near them, do they use power to keep them spinning with friction and low wind speed? Kind of like an electric flywheel. Do you have any data on whether this is true? It would be interesting to know what percent the turbine spends generating power vs. using power.

    Another disturbing fact you brought up is the pollution from building magnets. The article you cited seems biased against wind turbines, because it doesn't mention the fact that this pollution would exist for electric motors for cars, power tools, toys, and even a gravity wheel needs a generator to produce electricity.

    Rare earth metals are running low as well, and getting more from asteroids or the moon would raise your operating costs for that wind turbine!

    -Ed

    ReplyDelete
  3. Bill_Mothershead14 January 2013 at 14:14

    John, you picked the wrong type of windmill article. You should have gone here:
    https://www.google.com/search?q=build+windmill
    and read up on what people can build, with their own money (no government money involved).
    This might be a closer example of what will happen after someone reveals how a Bessler gravity
    wheel can be built.

    Also, poorly informed people are talking nonsense about the topic of "rare earth" metals.
    Go here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rare_earths
    and read this very good/long/detailed information. Get your facts straight, people!

    ReplyDelete
  4. Bill, I picked the wind turbines for the reasons I mentioned - 32000 to be built in the UK. I have nothing to complain about as far as home built windmills go. Also the facts relating to the extraction and processing of the Neodymium for the majority of windmills here in the UK are true and come from that part of China and the pollution is real.

    Ed I don't know exactly how they operate them in low wind speeds but I'll see what I can find.

    JC

    ReplyDelete
  5. Hi John. I have just posted what I believe is proof that a wheel that is balanced at rest could still be powered by gravity. It is off topic here but I thought it might make for some interesting reading for you and your readers. Thanks Justsomeone.




    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Chris here ,
      " He shall be called a great artist who can throw a heavy thing lightly and when one pound falls a quarter it shoots up four pounds four quarters . Whoever knows this will soon perpetuate the race but whoever does not know this all his hard work shall be in vain . Yes they rise such , his things as if even no matter how many sparrows are horribly biting around on a quiet mill wheel . "

      It is too bad I suppose for certain folk 'round here ( and elsewhere ) that I AM ALREADY building it ! It might be possible that someone else is building it ... but I know who is NOT building it .

      Delete
  6. posted over at Besslerwheel.com that is. ;)

    Justsomeone

    ReplyDelete
  7. Big wind turbines (and entire parks of them) do not turn on wind; they turn on subsidies. You are absolutely right and hitting the nail on the proverbial head here. These things could be very effective on a local, small scale, but the big units are subsidy-eaters - nothing more, nothing less.

    They are built IMHO, on the assumption that conventional, hydro and nuclear electricity generation can be *artificially made* very expensive. People like Al Gore, various Gov'ts and their carbon-trading (cap-and-trade) schemes are poised to get extremely rich over it. Then the huge turbines will be profitable, as everybody will be paying top dollar for the "clean green" electricity.

    So far their scheme as not quite working, however: the CO2 lie has been exposed for what it is: a lie. Sure, there may (have been/be) some global warming but that now (correctly!) attributed to solar output. The anthropogenic global warming swindle is just that: a swindle. Even the UK Med Office has now officially admitted that they could not measure any meaningful rise in temperatures in the past 16 years, and certainly nothing that could be attributed to man-made climate changes. NASA tells the same, ditto satellite measurements. And on and on.

    The only ones trying to keep the lie alive are the multi-trillion dollar "green" industry lead by the IPCC and other pseudo-science organizations.

    Only the Bessler wheel (and some other very promising technologies about to emerge) would be real green energy. But I do not have the illusion, as some do, that real green technologies will buy or enable us to have real freedom from "the powers that be". No doubt they, as always, will find ways to tax it into oblivion as well. If they would develop engines running on tap or sea water, that water would become priceless overnight.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Bill,

    Thanks for recognizing me as "poorly informed people talking nonsense"!

    Since you're fond of Google, google Google + space + mining.

    You will find that there are a number of poorly informed rich folks investing.

    Your tone suggests you've used the chestnut "wikipedia is not always 100% factual" in other arguments, but I will play along with it being accurate for this one.

    I assume you think the shortage is b.s. because "In 2010, the United States Geological Survey (USGS) released a study which found that the United States had 13 million metric tons of rare earth elements."

    And of course, the Tree Hugger environmentalists are responsible for not developing this resource? Does that sum up your thoughts?

    The article also mentions, "The United States Geological Survey is actively surveying southern Afghanistan for rare earth deposits under the protection of United States military forces."

    But we have plenty, right?

    NIMBY doesn't only apply to viewing and hearing wind turbines.
    It also applied to harsh mining you wouldn't want in your back yard either. Even war strategies have been based on NIMBY.

    Ok Bill, I leave you to now police Andre's facts. ;-)

    -Ed


    ReplyDelete
  9. John ,
    I would like for us to be friends again . I am almost done with my design .

    Chris

    ReplyDelete
  10. John,.. here's an interesting poser.
    My most successful wheel which I put together two years ago and have now recently re-constructed,was able to turn for 30 turns from a standstill.
    It slowed down and stopped so I gave up and shelved it then.
    It only had two weights,but I'm wondering if I add another two weights it might run longer,or even be enough to excite itself for PM.
    What do you think,or is there anyone else out there that has an opinion.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yep, sounds pre-loaded (which produced movement from standstill)and was close to being balanced, except friction eventually stopped it.

      Delete
  11. Trevor, I am going to have to say your wheel did not self start but it was preloaded. Did this wheel have pendulums? Dave from BW.com posted several videos that used pendulums that he preloaded and they ran quite a while. Justsomeone

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sorry,..Even Bessler had to start his wheels and thats what excited them.
      The first wheels that started on their own were alreasdy out of balance.

      Delete
  12. Sorry,..I don't talk to nameless anonymouses anymore because I never know which one has got a sinister agenda.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Although I would prefer that anonymous commenters signed with a name, even a ficticious one as long as they were consistent in its use, I don't think there are any with a sinister agenda.

    JC

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Lol , more like a heckling agenda .

      Delete
    2. What John is asking is just to put your name/pseudonim/nikname or whatever at the end, if you are an anonymous like me.

      Charly2 <---- MY NIKNAME (capisci?)

      Delete
  14. @Justsomeone
    Could you give us a link to the videos you mentioned? Would much appreciate that.
    @Trevor
    30 turns sounds really good. Please don't be offended - but in order to give you the feedback you asked for, I have to do some guessing, and my question, of course, is also about how you "primed" your wheel. This is not meant to be negative, priming is simply the initial position which you start with - this already has a certain energy hidden within it. Obviously, if you have very little friction and a heavy weight on one side (on top), the wheel may turn for a longish time, even without any assisting mechanism. I doubt that you would make such an obvious mistake, but it would be worth scrutinising the setup for such hidden issues. If you are convinced that the movement is not just a priming effect, then it will certainly be worth while improving on your mechanism - which we can only help you with, if you give us a bit of a description. I myself have had the problem that my wheel turned too fast on the first segment, so that the mechanism was not in the optimal position to turn the next segment. I am now constructing self-synchronising mechanisms to avoid that (sort of slowing it down on the first lap). Maybe that would work for you, too.
    Cheers Mimi

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Mimi,..The clues are in the Apologia poem itself.The pendulums prime themselves for free.
      I've tried to anylize it but,the to and fro action of the wheel,including the up and down action on the pendulums,with gravity minus centrifugal force at the apex and gravity plus centrifugal force at the root gives rise to a chaotic movevement described so aptly in the poem.
      This chaotic movement in turn gives rise to an up and down bob which is blocked on the down but captured on the up.
      All that is now needed is to design the mechanism to do this just at the right moment which at the top of course.

      Delete
    2. Trevor, thanks for the additional information. How interesting - I have been looking into chaotic pendulums (driven and parametric) for a while now, too. That seems to me to be quite promising. The general equations which can be found on the web are of some help, and there are nice pendulum simulations to play with, e.g. this one: http://www.myphysicslab.com/pendulum2.html
      However, in our case, the driving force is gravity, working on the wheel at a given point (depending on our mechanisms) - so that it is maybe not so randomly chaotic, but maybe a bit more predictable. Sounds like you have a promising build, good that you did not scrap it - sometimes we have to go back and look more closely again...

      Delete
    3. I sometimes suspect that Bessler's wheel might not have been deterministic (i.e. predictable and calculable) but a partly or even completely chaotic system (i.e. not predictable at all, which would make it very much harder to re-discover). Such systems can of course still be computer modelled, but it would be very easy to miss some small detail that could make the difference between success and failure.

      In the past I have modelled a few chaotic systems, but never found any net energy gain.

      Delete
  15. Hi Mimi, Justsomeone here. Over at Besslerwheel.com in the community buzz section, look at various MT thoughts starting at around page 34. I clicked on the video links and noticed Dave has removed them. I have asked for you if they are available anywhere else.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Chris, please tell us once again how great Bessler was for coming up with the solution, and how great anyone would be, and therefore how great you must be since you also claim to have found the solution. Of course we know better, but it's still good for a laugh.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Am I the only one that sees nothing here relevant to bessler's wheels? Yeah, those windmills are annoying but not nearly as much as the stink coming out of coal power plants.

    Meanwhile, I continue to grieve for the death of this blog that happneed on jan 8th. it will be missed...

    mike

    ReplyDelete

Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.

Johann Bessler’s Perpetual Motion Mystery Solved.

The climatologists and scientists are clamouring for a new way of generating electricity because all the current method (bad pun!) of doing ...