Wind energy, the con and cons

[mdn2000]

I am taking the green energy supporters word that they are better educated so if they could please answer a question or two about wind turbines.

How much electricity does an idle wind farm use?

How much electricity does it take to start an idle wind farm?

I have many more questions for you educated green energy windmill supporters but I will see if you people are actually really educated before I post the rest of my questions.

 

[Screaming Eagle]

How much electricity does it take to start an idle wind farm?

If they make the windmills using electricity from windmills in China would that help?

 

[mdn2000]

So nice to be right and see my thread sit idle, I see about 20 environuts viewed and left slack-jawed

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7nSB1SdVHqQ"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7nSB1SdVHqQ[/ame]

 

[mdn2000]

An idle wind farm needs electricity, how much is not told to the public and the amount used is not included in any figures.

There are lights on top of the windmills that need to be on even when the windmills are not spinning.

The blades need to be spun to prevent warping due to the incredible weight.

The blades need to be spun so the drive shaft does not warp

The blades need to be spun so that bearings supporting the weight dont get a flat spot.

The blades need to be spun so that all those damned mechanical parts stay lubricated.

The computer that controls the wind mill must be constantly supplied with electricity,

The radio that communicates with the control room must be energized.

All the motors that contol pitch, yaw, and direction of the windmill must be energized.

Green Energy folks wont let us know how much electricity it takes.

Green Energy supporters do not have the education to answer one question about what they support.

 

[kyzr]

An idle wind farm needs electricity, how much is not told to the public and the amount used is not included in any figures.

There are lights on top of the windmills that need to be on even when the windmills are not spinning.

The blades need to be spun to prevent warping due to the incredible weight.

The blades need to be spun so the drive shaft does not warp

The blades need to be spun so that bearings supporting the weight dont get a flat spot.

The blades need to be spun so that all those damned mechanical parts stay lubricated.

The computer that controls the wind mill must be constantly supplied with electricity,

The radio that communicates with the control room must be energized.

All the motors that contol pitch, yaw, and direction of the windmill must be energized.

Green Energy folks wont let us know how much electricity it takes.

Green Energy supporters do not have the education to answer one question about what they support.

I'm not sure how much you researched wind power, but there are significant economic challenges. To answer your questions
1. the electrical power needed to support an idle wind farm is minimal.
2. rotating the blades and the shaft to keep them from warping is only a concern for the gigantic >2Mw turbines. The power needed to "bump" a blade is also minimal. You only need to rotate it a few degrees a day to keep it from developing problems.

The entire concept of wind power is dependent upon the wind speed. In order to be profitable turbines need to be placed where the average wind speed >15m/s. That eliminates most sites. If investors put turbines where they lose money, who loses but investors?
There is a 10-year tax credit to start the industry, it will either learn and succeed, or face reality and fold.

Carpe Ventum ("seize the wind")

 

[KittenKoder]

While it's impossible on a large scale, it does have a benefit to those who have the space to spare, they can typically operate when the rest of the grid is down, though at very reduced power. It would make a good back up for rural areas ... but that's about it.

 

[mdn2000]

An idle wind farm needs electricity, how much is not told to the public and the amount used is not included in any figures.

There are lights on top of the windmills that need to be on even when the windmills are not spinning.

The blades need to be spun to prevent warping due to the incredible weight.

The blades need to be spun so the drive shaft does not warp

The blades need to be spun so that bearings supporting the weight dont get a flat spot.

The blades need to be spun so that all those damned mechanical parts stay lubricated.

The computer that controls the wind mill must be constantly supplied with electricity,

The radio that communicates with the control room must be energized.

All the motors that contol pitch, yaw, and direction of the windmill must be energized.

Green Energy folks wont let us know how much electricity it takes.

Green Energy supporters do not have the education to answer one question about what they support.

I'm not sure how much you researched wind power, but there are significant economic challenges. To answer your questions
1. the electrical power needed to support an idle wind farm is minimal.
2. rotating the blades and the shaft to keep them from warping is only a concern for the gigantic >2Mw turbines. The power needed to "bump" a blade is also minimal. You only need to rotate it a few degrees a day to keep it from developing problems.

The entire concept of wind power is dependent upon the wind speed. In order to be profitable turbines need to be placed where the average wind speed >15m/s. That eliminates most sites. If investors put turbines where they lose money, who loses but investors?
There is a 10-year tax credit to start the industry, it will either learn and succeed, or face reality and fold.

Carpe Ventum ("seize the wind")

Your not sure how much I have researched wind power, this simple statement says a whole lot about KYZR, KYZR just posted in 100% Alternative energy, right under four of my posting of facts about wind energy, so to state in this thread you dont know is sloppy on KYZR's part, I understand that you posted in the other thread after this one but after reading the other thread its pretty lazy not to correct yourself here.

KYZR may of just posted and ignored everything posted in 100% Alternative energy.

I will have to repost here but as its plain to see when confronted with questions about energy the environuts must IGNORE AND HIDE from the facts.

The Environuts do not care about facts, they are elitist, they are snobs, they are self centered and full of the themselves. Environuts are so full of themselves they look down on everyone but their own kind. Anyone outside there elite circle is automatically dismissed. They wont even debate, their opinion is right and if a conservative shows a fact all they see is their hatred for anyone else but themselves, even when the environut elitist is trying to appear nice their posts are condensing, preaching, assuming, bigoted, thinly disguised insults.

The facts are always ignored and the environut relies on headlines of press releases.

Notice Chrissy and Old Crock are absent from a thread that forces them to answer a question, Where is Cold Fusion, they all hide.

And now KZYR posts that it dont take much energy to turn a 60 ton Nacelle, the turbine blades, the multi ton shaft that supports is, the multi ton generator, nope it dont take much energy at all to turn 1000 of these 270 ton monsters.

270 ton is fact, www.vesta.com

 

[mdn2000]

A 270 ton Vesta windmill is fact

Stating it dont take much to turn it is not fact, its unsubstantiated ignorant opinion.

Calling the turning of the blades a "bump" is an ignorant purposeful fabricated lie.

I can say I know how much research KYZR has done in regards to windmills, ZERO, NONE, NIL., proof, ignornant post.

 

[kyzr]

I'm not sure how much you researched wind power, but there are significant economic challenges. To answer your questions
1. the electrical power needed to support an idle wind farm is minimal.
2. rotating the blades and the shaft to keep them from warping is only a concern for the gigantic >2Mw turbines. The power needed to "bump" a blade is also minimal. You only need to rotate it a few degrees a day to keep it from developing problems.

The entire concept of wind power is dependent upon the wind speed. In order to be profitable turbines need to be placed where the average wind speed >15m/s. That eliminates most sites. If investors put turbines where they lose money, who loses but investors?
There is a 10-year tax credit to start the industry, it will either learn and succeed, or face reality and fold. Carpe Ventum ("seize the wind")

Your not sure how much I have researched wind power, this simple statement says a whole lot about KYZR, KYZR just posted in 100% Alternative energy, right under four of my posting of facts about wind energy, so to state in this thread you dont know is sloppy on KYZR's part, I understand that you posted in the other thread after this one but after reading the other thread its pretty lazy not to correct yourself here.

KYZR may of just posted and ignored everything posted in 100% Alternative energy.

I will have to repost here but as its plain to see when confronted with questions about energy the environuts must IGNORE AND HIDE from the facts.

The Environuts do not care about facts, they are elitist, they are snobs, they are self centered and full of the themselves. Environuts are so full of themselves they look down on everyone but their own kind. Anyone outside there elite circle is automatically dismissed. They wont even debate, their opinion is right and if a conservative shows a fact all they see is their hatred for anyone else but themselves, even when the environut elitist is trying to appear nice their posts are condensing, preaching, assuming, bigoted, thinly disguised insults. The facts are always ignored and the environut relies on headlines of press releases.

Notice Chrissy and Old Crock are absent from a thread that forces them to answer a question, Where is Cold Fusion, they all hide.

And now KZYR posts that it dont take much energy to turn a 60 ton Nacelle, the turbine blades, the multi ton shaft that supports is, the multi ton generator, nope it dont take much energy at all to turn 1000 of these 270 ton monsters.
270 ton is fact, www.vesta.com

Not to dismiss your research, but I don't think you designed too many wind turbines. Going back up your post in reverse order:
1. your link to "vesta" is wrong. Its Vestas.
2. The rotating blades are perfectly balanced and weigh about 20 tons, not 270
http://www.vestas.com/Files/Filer/EN/Brochures/Vestas_V_90LOW.PDF
3. Calling for reinforcements?? (Chrissy, Crock & cold fusion)
4. I assume you're an environut that you are upset about incorrect "facts"? HINT: on a forum its best to post what you really know. Not what you assume.
5. I didn't read any more than the post I corrected. If you want me to review, please cut/paste.

 

[mdn2000]

KYZR,
1. so what if my link is wrong, at least it shows I looked before I opened my mouth.
2. I never said the blades weigh 270 tons, I am refering to total weight of the fiberglass. Further as we speak Vestas is building even a lighter windmill so most likely the information I have is a bit old. 3. Calling for reinforcements, who has actually looked into this, I am giving you facts and you want to nit pic, for what reason.
4. On a forum its best to post what you really know, great, what are posting for, what are you sourcing, what are you explaining.
5. I dont care if you care to correct yourself or not, other than correcting Vesta to Vestas you have offered nothing other than showing you left out a major portion of the windmill structure.

1. the electrical power needed to support an idle wind farm is minimal.
2. rotating the blades and the shaft to keep them from warping is only a concern for the gigantic >2Mw turbines. The power needed to "bump" a blade is also minimal. You only need to rotate it a few degrees a day to keep it from developing problems.

1. Its your opinion, how much electricity is used, there is a number that is hidden from the public, to say its minimal is ignorance.

2. calling the rotating of a structure that weighs over a 100 tons a bump is again opinion and ignorance.

So which Vestas are your refering to?

The V90 I am refering of the blades alone weigh 28 tons, your figure is grossly inaccurate unless we agree on which model we are speaking of.

The Nacelle is 70 metric tons, what portion of the Nacelle is fiberglass vs steel I dont know and is not clear in the brochure.

The hub is 18 metric tons, again steel or fiberglass portion I do not know

The tower is 155 metric tons to 205 tons depending on if we speak of the 80 meter or the 95 meter tower. Portion of steel to fiberglass is once again unknown. The tower is tubular steel with a fiberglass shell.

So when I state 270 tons and we convert that to metric tons am I really that far off. Maybe but as you can see my number was based on research where as I have yet to see that you researched a thing.

But this is turning into a tit for tat where you seem to think its more important to correct vesta to vestas and offer your opinion.

The total weight of a windmill is 200 to 300 metric tons.

1 metric ton equals 1.1 US ton

So do we want to get hung up on the weight, can we state at least 100 tons of fiberglass, just for arguement sake. 100 tons of steel just for arguement sake, how many tons of copper.

I really dont care to fight and prove anyone wrong, unless its the twins, they just post through stupidity, but seriously dont you want to know what you beleive is true and accurate, dont you want to know if you support windmills as green energy you know they are really green.

So I guess I have to grab my estimate of the BTU's need to make e-glass, is it e-glass or fiberglass.
I need to find the number for the amount of energy to make steel, copper,
I need to find out the companies who supply the raw materials, who owns the mines
I need to know who is in Obama's white house, who gave him campaign money
Which politicians own stocks in these companies and are they passing law based on stock holdings

Instead I am stuck in a tit for tat because I stated Vesta instead of Vestas

Instead we are going tit for tat over the weight of rotors while you ignore the hub, the tower, the nacelle.

Have I dont more research than you. Its obvious that I have.

 

[JW Frogen]

Pro.

Fart energy has never fully been tapped.

Con.

Only genetically modified beans can produce the required amount of wind power.

 

[kyzr]

KYZR,
1. so what if my link is wrong, at least it shows I looked before I opened my mouth.
2. I never said the blades weigh 270 tons, I am refering to total weight of the fiberglass. Further as we speak Vestas is building even a lighter windmill so most likely the information I have is a bit old.

1. your link was wrong. Its a sloppy post.
2. This is your direct quote:
And now KZYR posts that it dont take much energy to turn a 60 ton Nacelle, the turbine blades, the multi ton shaft that supports is, the multi ton generator, nope it dont take much energy at all to turn 1000 of these 270 ton monsters.
The nacelle doesn't rotate, only the blades, hub, and shaft rotate, call it the "rotor". Yes the weight of the rotor is about 40Tn. However, the rotor is perfectly balanced, so the power needed to rotate it is about 50hp, for about 10-secs a day. So the cost at $0.10/Kw-hr is
1000units($0.10/kw-hr)(50hp)(0.746)(hr/60)/6=$10.36/day to rotate 1000 rotors 10-seconds a day. So what? The developers pay all overhead costs, including maintenance. The developers only get paid for the power they put on the grid. There is no "green tax" imposed that I know of to consumers for wind power. The wind farms just get a tax break for ~10-years to develop green power.

As far as fiberglass components, only the 6.7tn blades are typically fiberglass, so thats about 20tn, not 270tn.

3. Calling for reinforcements, who has actually looked into this, I am giving you facts and you want to nit pic, for what reason.
4. On a forum its best to post what you really know, great, what are posting for, what are you sourcing, what are you explaining.
5. I dont care if you care to correct yourself or not, other than correcting Vesta to Vestas you have offered nothing other than showing you left out a major portion of the windmill structure.

stop whining, start posting facts.

1. the electrical power needed to support an idle wind farm is minimal.
2. rotating the blades and the shaft to keep them from warping is only a concern for the gigantic >2Mw turbines. The power needed to "bump" a blade is also minimal. You only need to rotate it a few degrees a day to keep it from developing problems.

1. Its your opinion, how much electricity is used, there is a number that is hidden from the public, to say its minimal is ignorance.
2. calling the rotating of a structure that weighs over a 100 tons a bump is again opinion and ignorance.

1. Its not "opinion" or "ignorance", its basic engineering. Pennies a day per unit is what I call "minimal". I posted calculations, I'm waiting to see how much you think it costs to bump idle 40Tn rotors a day. Why do you think that the public pays for maintenance costs? The wind-farm developers only get paid by the Mw they put on the grid, they eat all construction costs, maintenance costs and idle costs.
2. The referenced rotor weighs about 42tns. 20Tn blades+22Tn hub. Not 100Tn. A "bump" is what they call the daily ~10-second rotation of a rotor. What do you think its called?

So which Vestas are your refering to? [V90-3Mw] pg-14/16 as linked....kyzr
The V90 I am refering of the blades alone weigh 28 tons, your figure is grossly inaccurate unless we agree on which model we are speaking of.
The Nacelle is 70 metric tons, what portion of the Nacelle is fiberglass vs steel I dont know and is not clear in the brochure.
The hub is 18 metric tons, again steel or fiberglass portion I do not know

6.7Tn x 3-blades = 20Tn for 3-blades
The nacelles and hub are steel, only the blades are fiberglass, since they need to flex so much.

The tower is 155 metric tons to 205 tons depending on if we speak of the 80 meter or the 95 meter tower. Portion of steel to fiberglass is once again unknown. The tower is tubular steel with a fiberglass shell.

The tower is "tubular steel". Where the hell do you see "with a fiberglass shell"?

So when I state 270 tons and we convert that to metric tons am I really that far off. Maybe but as you can see my number was based on research where as I have yet to see that you researched a thing.
But this is turning into a tit for tat where you seem to think its more important to correct vesta to vestas and offer your opinion.
The total weight of a windmill is 200 to 300 metric tons.
1 metric ton equals 1.1 US ton
So do we want to get hung up on the weight, can we state at least 100 tons of fiberglass, just for arguement sake. 100 tons of steel just for argument sake, how many tons of copper.

I'll agree to 20-Tns of fiberglass, not 100Tns. Only the blades are fiberglass or carbon-fiber or other expensive high strength very flexible material. I objected to your implying that there were hidden maintenance costs passed on to consumers, and that the turbines were made of ~270Tns of fiberglass. It closer to 20Tn fiberglass + 250Tn of steel.

I really dont care to fight and prove anyone wrong, unless its the twins, they just post through stupidity, but seriously dont you want to know what you beleive is true and accurate, dont you want to know if you support windmills as green energy you know they are really green.

I support self-sufficient privately owned wind power. I do not support sweetheart deals giving tax dollars to developers, especially when the wind turbine is made overseas. IMHO most wind farms are money losing feel-good green boondoggles. I prefer nuke plants.

So I guess I have to grab my estimate of the BTU's need to make e-glass, is it e-glass or fiberglass.
I need to find the number for the amount of energy to make steel, copper,
I need to find out the companies who supply the raw materials, who owns the mines
I need to know who is in Obama's white house, who gave him campaign money
Which politicians own stocks in these companies and are they passing law based on stock holdings. Instead I am stuck in a tit for tat because I stated Vesta instead of Vestas
Instead we are going tit for tat over the weight of rotors while you ignore the hub, the tower, the nacelle. Have I dont more research than you. Its obvious that I have.

You need to research the other Energy thread more. There was a post that did an excellent job of listing the costs per Gw for various fuels. There are only so many sites that would economically support wind power. What would consumers prefer electricity from nukes, or power from wind, coal, or gas that costs twice as much? Coal & gas have CO2 problems, we'd be better off using them to power cars & trucks. I think you're on the right track, but you aren't using the best arguments.

 

[uscitizen]

How much energy does it take to produce gasoline?
Consider in the drilling, transportation, refining and more transportation.

 

[mdn2000]

KYZR, nice research after the fact, your still wrong though and if you want to turn this into a tit for tat so be it, sloppy typing so its a sloppy post because I left an "S" off of Vestas, nice job showing that you are an ignonarnt closed minded fool who is back tracking and searching, learning as he goes. I know about wind mills and admit I dont know everything.

I am speaking of the Vestas V90, 28 tons for the turbine blades, not 20 tons, your off by almost 30%

The Nacelle does not turn, I did not know. I stated a 270 ton monster, these monsters actually weigh over 300 tons. The Nacelle is not pure steel, no way no how, you are not showing a source, I am, go to the brochure. The brochure and Vestas site does not state everything but it shows I am a couple of steps ahead and not stating opinion out of thin air, as you are.

source, download the brochure at Vestas | No. 1 in Modern Energy, thats the V90 brochure.

The tower is "tubular steel". Where the hell do you see "with a fiberglass shell"?

Now that is a gross error and assumption on your part, tubular steel nowwhere in the world is made to be 10' in diameter, the structure is a tubular steel, I know your thinking round but tubular steel for construction is square, so the structure is tubular steel with a fiberglass shell, that is one reason its more than 28 tons.

The nacelle doesn't rotate, only the blades, hub, and shaft rotate, call it the "rotor". Yes the weight of the rotor is about 40Tn. However, the rotor is perfectly balanced, so the power needed to rotate it is about 50hp, for about 10-secs a day

This post is actually usefull to show another of your posts bullshit, ten seconds is all they turn these, wrong again, posting opinion for what reason, lets get to the manufacturer of all the componets. All 300tons for one windmill.

Only the blades are fiberglass or carbon-fiber or other expensive high strength very flexible material

Your post I quote before this one is explicit, perfectly balanced, what happens to perfectly balanced if the blades flex in high wind. The windmill explodes. The blades are not flexible and cannot be. Need an example, if you were actually willing to think and accept facts you would of seen the windmill explode in my video I posted, thats what happens if these things get out of balance. Just showing you are being pig-headed.

So what? The developers pay all overhead costs, including maintenance. The developers only get paid for the power they put on the grid. There is no "green tax" imposed that I know of to consumers for wind power. The wind farms just get a tax break for ~10-years to develop green power.

Opinion, the developers get subsidies and tax breaks as well as they dont have to do any research, that is all subsidized. But I dont care about that con, if it was a profit making deal than massive incentives would not be needed.

You need to research the other Energy thread more. There was a post that did an excellent job of listing the costs per Gw for various fuels

I dont need to research other forms of energy, I will just go to work on a 200 ' tall heat exchanger and look down at the Exxon Mobile hydro-cracker in Beaumont Texas I will be working on, of course I contemplate other forms of energy, I did this as I sat in New Stanton, Pa. working on the site of the first commercial nuclear reactor, Waltz Mill owned by Westinghouse, of course this reactor is off line, it was also the first to melt down in the USA. I contemplate other forms of energy as I walk by the miles of 48" pipes in Calipatria California, as I see asparagus fields contaminated by scalding hot brine that has ate through and exploded the pipes. I also know the weight of steel as I have worked in structural steel thats why I know your full of shit if you think the tower of one of these monstrous windmills is made of one big tube of steel, a tube that big would most likely weigh in at about 10 tons for every inch, I am guessing based on the weight of tubular steel, pipes and I-beams which are hundreds pounds per foot, the big stuff is over a ton a foot.

100 metric tons of fiberglass at the least per windmill.

That blades are turned more than ten seconds a day and your figure is a gross example of ignorance. But enough for now.

 

[kyzr]

KYZR, nice research after the fact, your still wrong though and if you want to turn this into a tit for tat so be it, sloppy typing so its a sloppy post because I left an "S" off of Vestas, nice job showing that you are an ignonarnt closed minded fool who is back tracking and searching, learning as he goes. I know about wind mills and admit I dont know everything. I am speaking of the Vestas V90, 28 tons for the turbine blades, not 20 tons, your off by almost 30%

The Nacelle does not turn, I did not know. I stated a 270 ton monster, these monsters actually weigh over 300 tons. The Nacelle is not pure steel, no way no how, you are not showing a source, I am, go to the brochure. The brochure and Vestas site does not state everything but it shows I am a couple of steps ahead and not stating opinion out of thin air, as you are.

Stop whining. Your grammar sucks too, but I won't point those goofs out. Here is a link showing why fiberglass is used. Its light, strong, and flexible. Its also expensive, which is why its only used on the blades. Thats three blades at 6,700kg each or 6.7Tn/ea or 20Tn TOTAL. Thats it, all she wrote, no mas, balls to the wall, 20Tn of fiberglass, just the blades, period.
Testing Wind Turbine Rotor Blades

The tower is "tubular steel". Where the hell do you see "with a fiberglass shell"?

Now that is a gross error and assumption on your part, tubular steel nowwhere in the world is made to be 10' in diameter, the structure is a tubular steel, I know your thinking round but tubular steel for construction is square, so the structure is tubular steel with a fiberglass shell, that is one reason its more than 28 tons.

Steel towers are rolled and welded. If you can show me where you think they have fiberglass, fine. But they are 200Tn for 90m to 255Tn for 105m towers. Thats a lot of steel. Here are a few links that show steel fabrication.
Wind Tower Manufacturers | Wind Tower Fabricators | Northstar Wind Towers
ESAB meets the welding needs of wind turbine tower manufacturers

The nacelle doesn't rotate, only the blades, hub, and shaft rotate, call it the "rotor". Yes the weight of the rotor is about 40Tn. However, the rotor is perfectly balanced, so the power needed to rotate it is about 50hp, for about 10-secs a day

This post is actually usefull to show another of your posts bullshit, ten seconds is all they turn these, wrong again, posting opinion for what reason, lets get to the manufacturer of all the componets. All 300tons for one windmill.

If a turbine is off-line for an extended period, YOU need to prove why it needs to be rotated more than an average 10-seconds a day. You started this discussion with a bullshit argument that wind turbines use large amounts of electricity when off-line. What happened to that position? It was wrong. Bluster won't change that simple fact.

Your post I quote before this one is explicit, perfectly balanced, what happens to perfectly balanced if the blades flex in high wind. The windmill explodes. The blades are not flexible and cannot be. Need an example, if you were actually willing to think and accept facts you would of seen the windmill explode in my video I posted, thats what happens if these things get out of balance. Just showing you are being pig-headed.

What does that have to do with anything? It doesn't.

So what? The developers pay all overhead costs, including maintenance. The developers only get paid for the power they put on the grid. There is no "green tax" imposed that I know of to consumers for wind power. The wind farms just get a tax break for ~10-years to develop green power.

Opinion, the developers get subsidies and tax breaks as well as they dont have to do any research, that is all subsidized. But I dont care about that con, if it was a profit making deal than massive incentives would not be needed.

Here is a government link that shows how to finance a wind turbine. Just join then login. Input a theoretical wind turbine installation and see how unprofitable it is.
WindFinance
Wind and Hydropower Technologies Program: Wind Powering America

You need to research the other Energy thread more. There was a post that did an excellent job of listing the costs per Gw for various fuels

I dont need to research other forms of energy, I will just go to work on a 200 ' tall heat exchanger and look down at the Exxon Mobile hydro-cracker in Beaumont Texas I will be working on, of course I contemplate other forms of energy, I did this as I sat in New Stanton, Pa. working on the site of the first commercial nuclear reactor, Waltz Mill owned by Westinghouse, of course this reactor is off line, it was also the first to melt down in the USA. I contemplate other forms of energy as I walk by the miles of 48" pipes in Calipatria California, as I see asparagus fields contaminated by scalding hot brine that has ate through and exploded the pipes. I also know the weight of steel as I have worked in structural steel thats why I know your full of shit if you think the tower of one of these monstrous windmills is made of one big tube of steel, a tube that big would most likely weigh in at about 10 tons for every inch, I am guessing based on the weight of tubular steel, pipes and I-beams which are hundreds pounds per foot, the big stuff is over a ton a foot.

100 metric tons of fiberglass at the least per windmill.

That blades are turned more than ten seconds a day and your figure is a gross example of ignorance. But enough for now.

Okay, so you're not an expert in the wind-turbine field. When I point out certain facts that contradict your statements its not intended to be an insult, its just a different opinion, one that is from a self-proclaimed expert in the field. The towers at 255Tn for 105m is an average 415 PLF.

Sorry, but its only 20Tn of fiberglass for the 3.0 Mw wind turbine we're discussing. Just the 3-blades.

 

[mdn2000]

We will never agree on the covering of the nacelle, the hub, and the tower, you think what you like, its as simple as that, further your estimation of running a 100, 50hp motor drawing 60amps at 400volt does not equal pie, if you cannot get the hint of what I just stated you know nothing, I just stated a very basic electrical fact, a bit hidden if you know nothing but more than obvious to anyone who knows the basic of electricity.

a 100 tons of fiberglass, vestas is specific, the nacelle is not all steel, the covering is fiberglass, the tower is wrapped in fiberglass, and the hub is fiber glass, 100 tons, pure and simple.

So pick up the hint I show you know something about electricity. You are merely here as a blind supporter of a windmill for whatever ignorant reason you have. you have not provided any proof that its not a 100 tons or more of fiberglass.

Your link points to northstar, not vestas, great, that is a new debate.

Your second link speaks of welding, I dont get this one.

I would be more than happy to concede that the tower is made of steel, steel would be much more expensive and weigh around 500 tons just for the tower.

As far as my grammer as I type at a rate that is pretty good by your standards I love grammer lessons, but dont mistake a letter or tow mis-typed or left off for bad grammer, I know I need to go to another english class and I love when someone can correct my grammer, you seem to think a mistake in grammer is something to grasp onto which in the abscence of you providing fact is all you got.

Your links pretty much sucked, not relevant to Vestas and show nothing of tower construction.

Pure steel, sounds like a great lightening rod.

I will get back on a point or two but until you get off the grossly underestimated amount of fiberglass used than we will never have a point to move on from. Of course steel is more expensive and energy intensive so you make my arguement by argueing only 20 metric tons of fiberglass.

Talk about being technically stupid, you are quoting tons when its metric tons, maybe that is where you are getting lost. Everything in a windmill is pure steel, great, 20 tons minus 350 tons means 330 tons of steel.

330 tons of steel, how much energy and which types of energy does it take to produce one ton of steel.

Old Crock all ready showed us it takes electrical energy and natural gas, he posted the source, now we have something to go on. How many tons of CO2 for one windmill, how is a windmill saving the environment when one wind farm uses tens of thousands of tons of steel, enough to build reactors to last the USA for over five hundred years.

Your arguement is bullshit.

50hp electical motor does not require a few pennies to operate, your calculation is pure fantasy, care to reconsider, I am going to get an actual tech spec to post than show the real math required to operate.

Why do you have to rotate a 100 ton structure, its simple, same reason a prop in a ship is kept turning while in harbor, to prevent warping, cant have the shaft sit idle, all that weight on the bearing is bad as well, they will get a flat spot. How long do they turn them, good question and an industry secret, I have happened to be at pickering nuclear station in guelph ontario, the windmill outside there turns all the time, do a search, most likely you will find this to be true. it turns because it needs to.

Vestas V90 is the biggest turbine in the world, could of changedin the last second, but I choose the biggest which may not be a fair arguement but at least I picked something not like anyone else that did not choose any reference to discuss.

Your electrical requirement is so easily shown false, as easy as pie.

fix it, admit the tower is shrowded in fiberglass, the nacelle is steel and fiberglass, the hub is fiberglass, go ahead, your pro nuke anyhow, right, go ahead and just admit it, to not admit this is to state windmills are even more expensive and polluting, fiberglass is cheaper than steel.

you made another point about something that went over your head, the point that the blades are very flexible, which is bullshit, throws the windmill out of balance hence my little video, point I made is you are just throwing shit up at the fan and seeing what sticks or gets thrown back.

 

[mdn2000]

grammer, if your could type you would most likely make as many errors as I do, sorry, if its grammer go ahead and point it out, I love to learn and will take anything you say to heart, like when you said the Nacelle did not spin, you did not see me argue, I admitted I did not know. You on the other hand know everything right. Your not looking things up and doing research, easy as PIE for you.

another clue, lets see if you can figure out why your electrical motor calculation is so wrong when its as easy as pie.

hopefully some other person dont fix it for you first.

 

[mdn2000]

Just the blades, not the covering for the Nacelle, Vestas disagrees with you. If this point so easily falls, what about the rest of your arguement.

Thats it, all she wrote, no mas, balls to the wall, 20Tn of fiberglass, just the blades, period.

http://www.mercer.k12.pa.us/highschool1/teacher/bchess/General%20Science/V90%203.0%20MW.pdf

making the nacelle 30 cm shorter
than the nacelle in the previous
V80-2.0 MW turbine. The weight
compared to the V80-2.0 MW turbine
is almost the same,” continues
Christensen.
Changes in dimensions are not
the only advantage. Obviously the
more space the individual components
require, the greater the
demands on the bed plate. This
means that the steel bed plate will
also naturally grow in proportion
to the size of the components—
and so will the fiberglass cabin (the
nacelle’s covering) and ultimately
the total cost of the turbine. But
again, this is not the case with the
V90-3.0 MW.

Constant lubrication, you think they mean by magic or just when the shaft is turning, seems like the shaft woud be dry after only turning ten seconds a day (which is bullshit, much more than ten seconds), I think constant means constant, dont you, it cannot be magic lubrication so it must be pumped, maybe a pump ran with the magic green energy, It could not be an electrical pump constantly lubricating a multi ton shaft, could it, maybe its mice or hamsters, I am not sure and I have to find a link and a source otherwise this pump is magic until I am able to prove every point

New gearbox
lubrication system
The gearbox’s lubrication system
is also a new development. By
mounting pressure feed lubricators
on the gearbox’s vital parts, constant
lubrication with exactly the
right amount of oil is achieved.
Third party experts have reviewed
the new gearbox design and several
extensive tests have demonstrated
the efficiency of the new design.
In addition, Vestas’ own research
lab is performing “life cycle tests”
on the gearboxes.

 

[mdn2000]

According to this document it looks like the tower is steel, I still say no, seems like an awful amount of steel, but either way steel is better, much more expensive, much more polluting, much more wasteful.

I will look a bit more.

Of course this document also states the Nacelle is fiberglass and from what I have posted and found out the Nacelle only has a fiberglass covering, this document states the opposite, simply the Nacelle is fiberglass.

Lets see if you can admit when your wrong as easily as I admit when I am wrong.

I will type the info, dont seem to know how to cut/paste on this paticular pdf

http://www.windturbinewarehouse.com/pdfs/vestas/Vestas_V90_SAC_DSM_3_20_07.pdf

7.16 Nacelle
Material Fiberglass

Just below this section it states the tower is S355 steel, did you know the number in steel such as this represent the other materials in the steel, like magnisium or cobalt or carbon or other stuff, I should look it up to sound so much better educated but the numbers represent the .03 percent material used, second number being another material of .05 percent and the last the same, I could be wrong on percentage but doubtful. I should know but once you learn this you never use this fact again in my business.

Anyhow the tower cannot be pure steel as this brochure states just as we know the Nacelle is not pure fiberglass as this brochure states

 

[mdn2000]

I have to concede the towers are steel, oops, still the Nacelle and the Hub are fiberglass, around a 100 tons, of course I could be wrong, it definately is not twenty tons, much closer to the one hundred ton mark.

http://www.windturbinewarehouse.com/pdfs/vestas/Vestas_V90_SAC_DSM_3_20_07.pdf

I have to figure out how to cut and paste from a pdf file, this pdf has some great construction photos and a bit more detail than the Vestas brochure I was using as my soul reference.