Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sioux Nation -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TigerPaw who wrote (6613)	2/5/2005 1:54:19 PM
From: cosmicforce	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 361345

Couldn't agree more. When I was in Scotland they were using below surface turbines that floated off the bottom producing very little environmental impact. I don't think we've come close to tapping the available electrical power. I've even proposed self-flying lift systems (could be off-shore as you say) to get the turbines into the higher speed (and less turbulent) prevailing winds. There is a cube function with height because of the "channel roughness" aspects of fluid flow over the surface. Certainly there are engineering challenges for any off-shore system, but we'd only solve those by building prototypes. This is a legitimate role of government - to fund research that would be too risky for a business to embark upon. I was surprised how anti-windmill they were in Scotland. They were considered aesthetically unpleasing. I have windmills near my house and feel really good about it. The eagle deaths have ended because they now engineer for how the raptors approach the towers: from down wind. If you put a perch down wind on a cantilever, bird deaths go to nearly zero.