Thread: 1/4 ounce bat shuts down 35 wind turbines

Originally Posted by Evil_inKarlate

They are in no way bad at all. (Well, except that they apparently kill endangered bats...)

Every technology has negative effects on environment. Wind power has relatively little however compared to alternatives. The Bird/bats argument is a commonly quoted one, ignoring the fact that among the various sources of energy production, wind power belongs to those killing the least of birds, alongside nuclear power. Still if there are endangered birds or bats somewhere this shall be and it is a matter in the environmental assessment prior to potential construction of new plants.

Please let us know when they've been developed! ( Rather than 'created' by heavily biased tax policy... )

You want a level playing field in an area that deeply affects national security? Sounds rather dumb and therefore isn't what you have in the US either. But if you want it, fine. But don't stop at the taxes but include the subsidies. Fossil fuel are heavily subsidized with coal being 3 times more subsidized than wind power in Germany and you can't tell me that this is totally reverted by some tax biases. Subsidies and hidden costs for the public are even more obscene for nuclear power.

Windpower is already commercially viable.

It might not be the most profitable form of energy production for huge utilities... but that doesn't mean it's not profitable at all.
Just because traditional energy producers can not integrate a technology into their buisness model doesn't mean it's not great.
It's like saying, the car offers no profitable methode of transportation because it doesn't use tracks!

In reality wind power is cheap for every community that chooses energy autonomy.

Just get this:
The 4th generation windturbine E-126 costs about 9 million Euros.
It's a massive structure that has a capacity of 7,5 MW. Lifetime, well over 25 years.
Each produces about 18-26 million kWh every year.


Let's look at the price per kWh for 20 million kWh per year:
9€ million installation cost + 20% operational costs = 11€ mil. Euro
Payoff period 15 years:
11 million / 300 million kWh => 3,6 cent per kWh.

20 million kWh is enough electricity for 2000-4000 american households.

Of course it is a little more complex than that...
But so is the conventional energy system. The price of coal power doesn't determine your electricity bill. That's because the energy requires a mix of coal/nuclear, gas, hydro and so on to deliver power on demand.
So, renewables also require a smart mix of technologies (wind, abit solar, biomass & biogas, energy efficency,...).
When they utilize the synergy effects of renewables it is possible to produce cheap energy locally.
Cheaper than delivering centralized produced power over hundreds of miles of transmission lines (30-40% of electricity prices).

Unlike the conventional energy system, it is possible for every local community to fund, build and operate the renewable energy system.
The problem with the American renewable energy market is that citizens can't imagine that they could become energy producers themself.
There is far too little urge for seeking energy independence... the spark of free minded pioneers and libtery loving communities is missing.
Empowered citizens who prefer being self-reliant are missing.


P.S:
With Enercon having increased production capability for the E-126 significantly and continuing to do so due to demand, the price is proably already lower than 9€ Million per unit.