Hum Posted November 5, 2011 Share Posted November 5, 2011 Wind farms, along with solar power and other alternative energy sources, are supposed to produce the energy of tomorrow. Evidence indicates that their countless whirring fan blades produce something else: "blank spots" that distort radar readings. Now government agencies that depend on radar -- such as the Department of Defense and the National Weather Service -- are spending millions in a scramble to preserve their detection capabilities. A four-star Air Force general recently spelled out the problem to Dave Beloite, the director of the Department of Defense?s Energy Siting Clearinghouse. Spinning wind turbines make it hard to detect incoming planes. To avoid that problem, military officials have blocked wind farm construction near their radars -- and in some cases later allowed them after politicians protested. Shepherd?s Flat, a wind farm under construction in Oregon, was initially held up by a government notice that the farm would ?seriously impair the ability of the (DoD) to detect, monitor and safely conduct air operations." The fix the MIT scientists came up with tells the radar not to pay attention to signals in a very small area. ?You just tell the radar processor, ?you're going to have clutter here. Don't display it.? You create a tiny blank spot [in the radar map] directly above the turbine.? full story Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DocM Posted November 6, 2011 Share Posted November 6, 2011 Yup, just one more reason why wind power isn't ready for prime time. RUD (rapid unscheduled disassembly) if the brakes/governor fails Kills birds & bats - some endangered Noise levels - try sleeping through whoop-whoop-whoop x 50-100 Infrasound can cause some to fall ill Isn't constant - many have an up-time of <30% Storage batteries to smooth inconstant supply are $$$$ High maintenance Radar interference Etc etc etc Maybe some day a lot of these will be solved, but that day's not today. Gonernor/brake failure. Pieces were found 1/2 mile away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P!P Posted November 6, 2011 Share Posted November 6, 2011 I'm not pro-wind exactly but I disagree with some of your statements. RUD (rapid unscheduled disassembly) if the brakes/governor fails - Every kind of energy production has risk. Is there evidence to support windspread brake failures? Kills birds & bats - some endangered - Alright. I'm sure it does kill some birds but is that really that big of a deal? I've been through several large wind farms and I don't see dead birds everywhere. Noise levels - try sleeping through whoop-whoop-whoop x 50-100 - Again, I've been to several. All of which are in fairly rural areas away from homes. I don't see how noise is an issue. Infrasound can cause some to fall ill Isn't constant - many have an up-time of <40%, or less Storage batteries to smooth inconstant supply are $$$$ High maintenance Radar interference - The OP's article said this can fixed through radar processing. No big deal. Tall objects have existed for a long time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Japlabot Posted November 6, 2011 Share Posted November 6, 2011 Yes it has it's issues but I'm sure that the anti-climate change lobby is making it out to be more than what those actual issues are. The Article mentions solar energy when this issue is clearly nothing to do with Solar. In this particular issue, it seems that the Radar systems exclusion of very specific spots where the turbine is, does adequately resolve the issue as there would still be complete radar coverage around the turbine so anything could be picked up before it gets there. Really it is just blanking out the spots that are likely to distract the operator from what they are really looking for Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DocM Posted November 6, 2011 Share Posted November 6, 2011 Telling the radar to ignore stationary sources is only part of the problem, and actually makes for worse ones in inclement weather when signals get muddied to start with - it leaves holes in the radar coverage. Using stealth technologies in the blades and towers could help, but that raises costs in an industry that's already facing cost issues. One of the major costs of maintaining stealth aircraft is refurbing the coatings and surfaces, now imagine that in climates where salt, ice, and hail are features.. As to the rest - PhysOrg noise article.... Audiology Today article (PDF).... Bird deaths (USA Today).... Bat deaths (USGS).... Gearbox reliability (Renewable Energy website).... Cape Cod failures.... The lightning issue (Japan).... According to the New Energy and Industrial Technology Development Organization (NEDO) and the Central Research Institute of Electric Power Industry, there were 795 windmill breakdowns between 2004 and 2009, and lightning accounted for 197, including 33 in Hokkaido. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jakem1 Posted November 6, 2011 Share Posted November 6, 2011 Meh, I'd rather have wind power than radar. Let the radar people sort their problems out but I suspect this is just more hysteria from the usual anti-renewables suspects. Raa 1 Share Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DocM Posted November 6, 2011 Share Posted November 6, 2011 Doppler radar is pretty important - not just military but also storm & tornado forecasting and tracling. Here in tornado alley that matters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jakem1 Posted November 6, 2011 Share Posted November 6, 2011 Doppler radar is pretty important - not just military but also storm & tornado forecasting and tracling. Here in tornado alley that matters. Well that's just a regional problem that can be easily overcome by locating wind farms in a part of the country that's not threatened by tornados. For instance, planning permission for a wind farm in Scotland was recently denied because the proposed farm was sited too close to a military facility that operates sensitive equipment that's used to detect earthquakes or nuclear tests. The equipment is apparently so sensitive that it would have detected vibrations caused by the wind turbines. Although disappointed that they couldn't proceed on the land they had originally intended to use, the energy company just chose a different site for their farm. On a larger scale, a pan-European organisation is about to start work on a massive solar collector in Morocco. Although the plant will be based in North Africa, the energy it generates will be used in Northern Europe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DocM Posted November 6, 2011 Share Posted November 6, 2011 There's a big controversy in Michigan over wind turbines. The plan us to put up to 200 in the near-shore Lake Michigan waters around Ludington - half way up the mitten. The locals are not happy as it's a tourist area known for its beach views & sunsets, fishing and pleasure boating. Any exclusion zones eould not sit well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Growled Member Posted November 7, 2011 Member Share Posted November 7, 2011 Is this something terrorists could use? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DocM Posted November 7, 2011 Share Posted November 7, 2011 If they knew where the black zones were. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pam14160 Posted November 7, 2011 Share Posted November 7, 2011 The only thing that bothers me is they can turn a beautiful landscape ugly. . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spudtrooper Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 There is more radar intereference from wireless systems sharing the same band as TDWR systems than every wind farm in the world. Not to mention that modern radar system don't have a problem with wind farms because the DSP processing can take out the noise they create. We could also solve the problem much better by requiring transponders when flying above wind farms by changing their designated airspace. Not to mention wind is just another form of solar energy, we should be doing directly after that with molten salt storage facilities like they use in California. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crisp Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 Why not build them out at sea? like other countried are doing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jakem1 Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 The only thing that bothers me is they can turn a beautiful landscape ugly. . . Unlike a traditional power station? Personally, I think they look quite lovely and I've seen them in lots of different locations such as mountains, out at sea, along hills, etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teebor Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 I have an idea, we build more wind farms and build radar stations higher up so that the windfarms are below the radar. Although this creates more black spots at lower altitude who is going to be stupid enough to fly through massive windmills to try and do something bad? :) ok troll science over with No matter what you try to do there will be people opposing it because it makes the area look untidy, spoils the view, bad for the environment etc. Until we can genuinely build something that is safe and can be built out of sight (underground?) not everyone will be happy, and even then you will probably find people who will be outspoken about whatever it is you are trying to do Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lexcyn Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 Just stick these in the middle of no where? I mean really, wind energy is one way we are going to end our reliance on fossil fuels. I am all for wind farms. I realize they do have issues, but people will complain about anything and everything if they get the chance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DocM Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 Instead of uglifying millions of acres with giant propellors and toxic to produce & heavy metal containing solar panels we should be going full-in developing liquid salt thorium reactors. There's enough thorium for millennia, it produces far less waste at low levels & with short half-lives, and since it's already a liquid meltdown is a non-issue. You can even build them underground. China and others are going that way, and so should we. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crisp Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 What about Pelamis? These seem to work well. They have large hydrolics that capture wave energy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DocM Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 Wave power's fine, unless you're in Kansas City or some other mid-continent locale. Granted superconducting transmission lines could help, but they're a ways off. Also, I've not seen a full environmental analysis on what large scale wave power installations could do to coastal currents and ecosystems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
webdev511 Posted November 8, 2011 Share Posted November 8, 2011 The only thing that bothers me is they can turn a beautiful landscape ugly. . . I've never been there, but from what I've heard, Fukushima Prefecture also used to have a beautiful landscape. Of course radar is the subject at hand here and since there have been zero improvements in radar technology since it was invented, there's no reason to hope that anyone will be able to figure out how to address this issue either. What I can't figure out to this day is why we didn't ramp up renewable energy or even a hydrogen based system in the 1970's. Not because it's green or environmentally friendly, but because if we had, it would have completely marginalized the middle east and everyone else that uses oil as a bargaining chip. "Oh you have oil? That's nice we don't need much more than what we produce, but would you like to buy some solar panels or a new hydrogen based power plant?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hum Posted November 8, 2011 Author Share Posted November 8, 2011 Yup, just one more reason why wind power isn't ready for prime time. RUD (rapid unscheduled disassembly) if the brakes/governor fails Kills birds & bats - some endangered Noise levels - try sleeping through whoop-whoop-whoop x 50-100 Infrasound can cause some to fall ill Isn't constant - many have an up-time of <30% Storage batteries to smooth inconstant supply are $$$$ High maintenance Radar interference Etc etc etc Sounds like the ex-wife :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts