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.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Alt-energy: wind and solar -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: veritas501 who wrote (26)	4/3/2011 7:03:47 PM
From: veritas501	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 40

No wonder the coal industry is trying to kill Wind Power. I took a look at the 1991 Elliott study for the Department of Energy. The 4600 TWh estimate cited by Professor MacKay is based on the most conservative deployment of Wind Turbines, covering 5.66% of the land area of the contiguous US. Assuming a less conservative deployment of 13.55% of the contiguous US, Wind Power could generate 10,800 TWh. At the time Elliott wrote his study, the maximum height assumed for a Wind Turbine was 50 meters. However, today the height of Wind Turbines is close to 80 meters. With greater height comes greater wind speed. With greater wind speed comes greater power. Consequently, both the 4600 TWh and 10,800 TWh figures underestimate the potential of Wind Power today. For a visual demonstration of the important difference between 50 meters and 80 meters, here are 2 maps showing wind speeds over the US at 50 meters and 80 meters, respectively. Notice the far greater availability of wind at 8 meters/second at 80 meter height compared to 50 meter height. 50 meter height: nrel.gov 80 meter height: windpoweringamerica.gov 80 meter map in PDF for greater clarity: windpoweringamerica.gov