• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Japan earthquake + tsunami + nuclear problems

r-j said:
Early turbines could do 500 homes. The monster big new ones are supposed to do 2000 homes. That is average, sometimes it's much more power, other times less.

Of course that is from wind power producers, like FPL, so they might be making it up.
Click to expand...

Source? Link?
 
Try learning to use Google. ...

Instead of demanding to be spoon fed here, spouting out one- or two-liners with each post, get up and seek some information on your own. It's not that hard, really.
 
r-j said:
Try learning to use Google. ...

Instead of demanding to be spoon fed here, spouting out one- or two-liners with each post, get up and seek some information on your own. It's not that hard, really.
Click to expand...

The problem is that I've never used that line with you, so it is pretty disingenuous of you to try "throwing it back at me." Every time I've stated something in these & related threads, I have backed up my claims with sources, so I would expect you to do the same.

Sadly, you seem to be interested only in trolling. And you wonder why most people here don't take you seriously?
 
Clearly your questioning the figure for windmill power, which is very easy to find online, wasn't you just asking a question.

Which is funny, because you are trying to paint me as a troll, and you are doing the exact thing you think I am doing.
 
Meanwhile, the suffering in poor Japan just keeps increasing. Those poor babies. And mothers. Now they fear the water they drink. And it's just starting.

The earthquake and tsunami didn't effect most of the people directly. But the radiation, that is causing so much fear and tension. If it's dangerous now, what about in a month? And nobody has any plan at all to deal with this.
 
Last edited:
r-j said:
Meanwhile, the suffering in poor Japan just keeps increasing. Those poor babies. And mothers. No they fear the water they drink. And it's just starting.
Click to expand...

Obvious concern troll is "concerned".

ETA: Your last post is an obvious and outright lie.

Didn't affect many people directly? What's the death toll again? 20 000 and rising?
 
Last edited:
More banal one liners from the "intelligent" people here. Disgusting.
 
After doing a bit of searching, I found out that r-j's claim on wind power is actually pretty reasonable.

I thought I read somewhere that 1 MW will power roughly 1000 homes, and given the power output of the biggest wind turbines, an output of 1 MW is a reasonable estimate for some of the more common, smaller ones. So the claim that one of these biggish wind turbines can power roughly 1000 homes seems to be reasonable, at least at first glance (I haven't done a very detailed analysis yet).

This, of course, assumes a steady supply of wind energy. But, under those circumstances, looks pretty nice to me. Also, does anyone have an estimate of the annual power usage per household that is better than mine?

All that said, I still think r-j is a troll. But even a broken clock is right twice a day.
 
Last edited:
r-j said:
The earthquake and tsunami didn't effect most of the people directly. But the radiation, that is causing so much fear and tension. If it's dangerous now, what about in a month? And nobody has any plan at all to deal with this.
Click to expand...

Disgusting ! You are intentionally downplaying the thousands of death from the disaster in order to peddle your fear of nuclear !
 
r-j said:
Meanwhile, the suffering in poor Japan just keeps increasing. Those poor babies. And mothers. Now they fear the water they drink. And it's just starting.

The earthquake and tsunami didn't effect most of the people directly. But the radiation, that is causing so much fear and tension. If it's dangerous now, what about in a month? And nobody has any plan at all to deal with this.
Click to expand...

Wow... just... wow :eek:
 
I'm on to your tactics buddy. I think you expect me to descend to your level of writing. It will not happen.

Ordinarily I would have simply answered the windmill question, the information is everywhere, but recently I realized that somebody who asks a stupid question is actually trolling.

Now that one person has bothered to fact check, the point about how many windmills it would take to replace nuclear power plants, or how many you could put up with a 16 billion dollar loan, that is back on the table.

Your call.
 
The tsunamis and earthquake did not kill, or maim or displace millions of people in Tokyo, much less further south. The radiation on the other hand, it is an actual problem. No matter how much people claim it isn't.
 
r-j said:
Now that one person has bothered to fact check, the point about how many windmills it would take to replace nuclear power plants, or how many you could put up with a 16 billion dollar loan, that is back on the table.

Your call.
Click to expand...

For the lurker, since the quoted poster is a concern troll:

The fact that such high yield wind turbines are available is wonderful news, and will certainly influence how large a part wind power has to play in the future of world energy.

That being said, the restrictions on materials available for the construction, some of which have been stated to be extremely rare and hard to come by, is still in effect, albeit a smaller one.

As far as I can tell, although I'm happy to be proved wrong, it is still not feasible to produce enough wind turbines in enough areas to cover a majority or even a truly significant portion of an industrialised nation's power needs. This still leaves a large gap in the needs of our world which can, at present, only be filled with either fossil fuels or gas, and in the future will still need to be filled by them to some degree.
 
MattusMaximus said:
The problem is that I've never used that line with you, so it is pretty disingenuous of you to try "throwing it back at me." Every time I've stated something in these & related threads, I have backed up my claims with sources, so I would expect you to do the same.

Sadly, you seem to be interested only in trolling. And you wonder why most people here don't take you seriously?
Click to expand...

Even more funny is that he simply copypasted what i said to him earlier here. Talk about being lazy...

Greetings,

Chris
 
r-j said:
The tsunamis and earthquake did not kill, or maim or displace millions of people in Tokyo, much less further south. The radiation on the other hand, it is an actual problem. No matter how much people claim it isn't.
Click to expand...

The radiation is not a problem for people in Tokyo, much less further south. No matter how much people claim it is.

Nobody has dies so far from radiation. If anyone eventually does (and emergency workers at the plant are the only people at significant risk on that account), the death toll will be far below the tsunami. Hell, the death toll from radiation will likely be lower than the death toll from the cold. Which the lack of sufficient electricity is exacerbating. Not enough nuclear power is a bigger threat than too much nuclear power.
 
r-j said:
What a lie. Is anyone here honest enough to call somebody on that sort of huge lie?
Click to expand...

I'm not sure it's a lie.

In fact, I'd love to see figures for this. What are the power needs for an average household per hour as an average and how much power does the most efficient turbine produce per hour as an average?

That way, we can do some simple mathematics and calculate (roughly) how many turbines we would need to power every house in a certain country, if we had a rough idea of how many houses there was.

Of course, even if they can cover housing power needs, that doesn't begin to take into account industry and other power needs.
 
MarkCorrigan said:
In fact, I'd love to see figures for this. What are the power needs for an average household per hour as an average and how much power does the most efficient turbine produce per hour as an average?
Click to expand...

While i don't have the average numbers for household consumption at hand, the German WP has a page about wind energy in Germany here (in German only, sorry). What is important is the ration between installed capacity and energy fed into the grid.

We have a total installed capacity of 27,214 MW = roundabout 27 GW. If it could run 24/7 that would result in 27 * 24 * 365 = 236.520 GWh = roundabout 237 TWh per year fed into the grid. However, the real amount fed into the grid is actually roundabout 39 TWh per year. That makes for a ratio of 237 / 39 = 6.07..., or roundabout 6. So, the turbines are running only 24 / 6 = 4 hours per day on average. That means that without a storage system, you will have 20 hours per day without electricity. Using a storage system, you need to install 6 times the capacity of what would be needed for the households if the turbines could run 24/7.

As you said, simple math. And so, no, just a wind turbine can not supply all the needed electricity for any household, unless there is a storage system involved.

That's the thing when people start to use only the wattage, and completely forget about the actual produced and used energy on average. In other words, if the load is 1 MW on average, you need to install 6 turbines with 1MW each, plus a storage system. Add some overhead for the losses due the storage system as well.

Greetings,

Chris

Edit: Of course the ratio depends on where you are. The above numbers are the average for Germany. Offshore it would probably be better, but i guess still not 24 hours per day of wind.
 
Last edited:
MarkCorrigan said:
For the lurker, since the quoted poster is a concern troll:

The fact that such high yield wind turbines are available is wonderful news, and will certainly influence how large a part wind power has to play in the future of world energy.
Click to expand...

I think everybody would agree. For the record I am not "pro-nuclear". It's just the best option we have. When we get a better one, I'll be happy to switch. But not necessarily as quickly as Java Man would. ;)
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom