Wind and solar power

[slick7]

WOW I'm really surprised to see this many responses. Thanks everyone. I guess more people think about taking care of this planet than I thought. I truly feel if we don't do something , Mother Nature will kick us out! As for the cost for power companies, I really don't care. They have had a monopoly in their respective regions for a very long time. The only time they lose money is when a storm takes out their equipment and they have to repair it. It's not like we have a choice on what power provider we can use. If I wasn't such a poor schmuck living paycheck to paycheck at the moment, I would take 5,000 and have them erect a wind turbine in the back yard, and wait for the power company to start sending me checks back in the mail. Maybe I could get a equity loan to pay for it and factor it back in to my house payments. Then of course, submit my idea to my Nazi run homeowners association. Thanks again to everyone who responded, it really made my day today to know that all of you care. :thumb:

Please Cin, find out about the coal warming process, I think we should quit burning coal altogether and allow the miners to be trained to erect the wind turbines. It has got to be safer than their current jobs.

[His Wife]

Did anyone else see that show on public TV about wind power? It said that the state of South Dakota could provide enough wind to power this WHOLE country. I realize it would cost alot of $ to get this harnessed wind power distributed to all the states of this country. But if we can come up with billions of dollars to fight over seas, why not this? I also saw an episode of Bill Mahrer last year that had an english actor who said that all new homes in England are being outfitted with new solar panels that provide more than enough power to supply the house and the extra is sold back to the power company. If they can get enough sun in England for these solar panels, why not us? Cost is a lame excuse. Am I the only one who is concerned that all we do as a country is consume, consume, consume? Can any of our English, or Americans living in England, fellow Broncomaniacs, verify that fact for me? When I hear that 90% of our oceans fish are gone and this planet keeps getting hotter and hotter I can't help but wonder how this will affect all of those who will come after us. I don't mean to get political on everyone, I just wanted to know people's feelings on this subject. I just get so frustrated sometimes because I feel like we as a people, and our goverment could do more in this whole area. Anyone else tired of being a slave to oil companies, power companies, and the rest of the monoplies in the USA? Maybe I'm using the wrong forum to pose this question, if so then, Mods, I apoligize.

Nice thread! Enjoyed reading what and how members looked at our energy in a thoughtful way.

[slick7]

Politicians suck!

We could elect porn starts....You'll still get sc...ed, but at least they might improve foreign relations.

Its just too easy to bash Bush. I really wanted to keep this non-political, because it needs to be talked about. Funny thought about the porn stars though.

[stnzed]

Its just too easy to bash Bush. I really wanted to keep this non-political, because it needs to be talked about. Funny thought about the porn stars though.

O.K no more high jacking your thread!!

[slick7]

Nice thread! Enjoyed reading what and how members looked at our energy in a thoughtful way.

Thanks HW. I was just kind of thinking out loud on the subject and thought I'd throw it out there for discussion. I usually read more than I post on the B-Mania boards, it seems like when I get into football discussions, sometimes I get ripped to shreds by some of the posters. Maybe I should check the ABF Threads a little more often, stop by the cafe sometime.

[His Wife]

Thanks HW. I was just kind of thinking out loud on the subject and thought I'd throw it out there for discussion. I usually read more than I post on the B-Mania boards, it seems like when I get into football discussions, sometimes I get ripped to shreds by some of the posters. Maybe I should check the ABF Threads a little more often, stop by the cafe sometime.

I wouldn't stop posting in the GD forum, SD7 (that's your new nickname, okay?)...
But I would definitely make a point of posting in this forum, as it's a whole lot of fun over here. Easier to be over here, a whole lot more receptive. If you feel like a good debate or argument...the GD forum is the choice forum! Every once in awhile....I put my 2-cents in though. Feedback is another forum that you can air your "concerns". Don't be shy...it's your board too. Nice to have you on board!
And you should come away with making quite a few friends too....I can tell by your style.

[slick7]

I wouldn't stop posting in the GD forum, SD7 (that's your new nickname, okay?)...
But I would definitely make a point of posting in this forum, as it's a whole lot of fun over here. Easier to be over here, a whole lot more receptive. If you feel like a good debate or argument...the GD forum is the choice forum! Every once in awhile....I put my 2-cents in though. Feedback is another forum that you can air your "concerns". Don't be shy...it's your board too. Nice to have you on board!
And you should come away with making quite a few friends too....I can tell by your style.

Thanks HW. I appreciate the pep talk. I hope this topic can come to the forefront of our society more often. SD7 works for me. Who doesnt like nick names?

[slick7]

*** bump *** Just looking for more response on this subject.

[Davii]

did write a paper about this. The topic is so interesting that I like talking about it. It is also true that windpower would be cheaper, I don't remember the price comparison, but it was much cheaper.

Well, I will give you a couple of reasons why this isn't happening, even though most people (including me) would like it to happen.

Well, first is the transaction costs. All those energy plants that companies built during the years would not be used to their full potential, and they would have to spend more money on those wind energy systems. It would require a lot of windmills to build for all the US. Im not sure how many, but I would guess it would be a large 6 figure number of units.

Also, since the cost of bringing this energy to houses would be lower, the companies would lose profit (that's why many of them refuse to do it, because it would not only cost them to build the system, but they would probably earn less income). Now, if you would own a company, we would all try to get the most profit, people tend to accuse the companies as selfish, but honestly, why would someone want to stop making profit and instead lose money in their business after working so hard to get there. I doubt any human being would, even the ones who say they would.

Also, these forms of energy are not as effective yet. Honestly, I like solar energy systems, because they cost more to build than the payoff you would get, and to build those solar energy panels you waste a lot of energy. I would only use wind energy, which may be more effective in the future. Companies are regulated to make this transition and have a percentage of the energy they sell to be wind or solar energy. It will take a lot of years for this transition, but it should happen in the future

Quite the contrary on the price. Yes, wind energy in the long run is less expensive. That's why California has so much wind power. Here's how it works, right outside of Palm Springs is California's largest wind farm, it's simply massive. This wind farm produces 162 MW of power (tied for fifth largest in the country) this is enough electricty to supply 162,000 average homes with their electricity. The entire state of California produces enough wind power for just over 2,000,000 homes.

Now, this could be increased an extraordinary amount, but it is not without drawbacks. First and foremost the turbines HAVE to be placed in high wind areas, otherwise you are losing a ton of money when they are not turning and possibly overburdening your regular power plants (ask anyone in the Palms Springs area about rolling blackouts in the summer).

Back to the point though, yes wind energy is cheaper. The delivery costs remain the same, it is still the same power lines that electricity flows over, so claiming a change in delivery cost is ridiculous. The electric companies buy this electricty from private parties/industry that owns the windfarms at a price cheaper than it costs for coal or other natural fuel plants, then sells it to the consumer at the same price they sell the rest of their electricity.

The result? Higher profit margins. Electric companies want wind power, what they don't want is mandated solar roofs.

There are companies that make shingles that act as solar panels. You can make your entire roof out of them, create enough electric for your average household (more needed in summer or during inclement weather), and at times send some power back to the grid to be purchased by the electric company (in reality it just spins your meter backward, they don't send you a cent, you just build credit) There have been laws made recently in some states (Ca included) that certain percentages of new homes MUST be built with this type of roofing installed. The percentages are set to increase every year until most new homes have solar roofs.

This coupled with the addition of more and more wind farms being developed by private venture will make it possible for fuel burning plants to be taken offline in the future.

[slick7]

Quite the contrary on the price. Yes, wind energy in the long run is less expensive. That's why California has so much wind power. Here's how it works, right outside of Palm Springs is California's largest wind farm, it's simply massive. This wind farm produces 162 MW of power (tied for fifth largest in the country) this is enough electricty to supply 162,000 average homes with their electricity. The entire state of California produces enough wind power for just over 2,000,000 homes.

Now, this could be increased an extraordinary amount, but it is not without drawbacks. First and foremost the turbines HAVE to be placed in high wind areas, otherwise you are losing a ton of money when they are not turning and possibly overburdening your regular power plants (ask anyone in the Palms Springs area about rolling blackouts in the summer).

Back to the point though, yes wind energy is cheaper. The delivery costs remain the same, it is still the same power lines that electricity flows over, so claiming a change in delivery cost is ridiculous. The electric companies buy this electricty from private parties/industry that owns the windfarms at a price cheaper than it costs for coal or other natural fuel plants, then sells it to the consumer at the same price they sell the rest of their electricity.

The result? Higher profit margins. Electric companies want wind power, what they don't want is mandated solar roofs.

There are companies that make shingles that act as solar panels. You can make your entire roof out of them, create enough electric for your average household (more needed in summer or during inclement weather), and at times send some power back to the grid to be purchased by the electric company (in reality it just spins your meter backward, they don't send you a cent, you just build credit) There have been laws made recently in some states (Ca included) that certain percentages of new homes MUST be built with this type of roofing installed. The percentages are set to increase every year until most new homes have solar roofs.

This coupled with the addition of more and more wind farms being developed by private venture will make it possible for fuel burning plants to be taken offline in the future.

Interesting stuff. Thanks for chiming in on the subject. :thumb:

[BroncoFanCam]

Quite the contrary on the price. Yes, wind energy in the long run is less expensive. That's why California has so much wind power. Here's how it works, right outside of Palm Springs is California's largest wind farm, it's simply massive. This wind farm produces 162 MW of power (tied for fifth largest in the country) this is enough electricty to supply 162,000 average homes with their electricity. The entire state of California produces enough wind power for just over 2,000,000 homes.

Now, this could be increased an extraordinary amount, but it is not without drawbacks. First and foremost the turbines HAVE to be placed in high wind areas, otherwise you are losing a ton of money when they are not turning and possibly overburdening your regular power plants (ask anyone in the Palms Springs area about rolling blackouts in the summer).

Back to the point though, yes wind energy is cheaper. The delivery costs remain the same, it is still the same power lines that electricity flows over, so claiming a change in delivery cost is ridiculous. The electric companies buy this electricty from private parties/industry that owns the windfarms at a price cheaper than it costs for coal or other natural fuel plants, then sells it to the consumer at the same price they sell the rest of their electricity.

The result? Higher profit margins. Electric companies want wind power, what they don't want is mandated solar roofs.

There are companies that make shingles that act as solar panels. You can make your entire roof out of them, create enough electric for your average household (more needed in summer or during inclement weather), and at times send some power back to the grid to be purchased by the electric company (in reality it just spins your meter backward, they don't send you a cent, you just build credit) There have been laws made recently in some states (Ca included) that certain percentages of new homes MUST be built with this type of roofing installed. The percentages are set to increase every year until most new homes have solar roofs.

This coupled with the addition of more and more wind farms being developed by private venture will make it possible for fuel burning plants to be taken offline in the future.

Very good read and very necesary stuff, both the solar and the wind power.

[Davii]

Very good read and very necesary stuff, both the solar and the wind power.

EXTREMELY necessary stuff. Although the United States accounts for only 5% of the people in the world we are responsible for a little over 25% of the fuel consumption worldwide.

This is completely unacceptable. Our standard of living and massive trucks and SUV's aren't going anywhere, so we have to change the way we keep that standard.

Renewable energy is the only way to go. Wind, solar, Hydro, and yes, Nuclear energy are the technologies that will keep the US in the forefront of the global economy.

Imagine the day when we don't have to rely on outside sources to keep our way of life and massive infrastructure sustained. American dollars paying for american goods for american people.

Massive electricity plants that spew tons of waste and burn ridiculous amounts of fossil fuels are first. Your big SUV is next.

hydrogen cars? electric cars? Who knows, all I know is the time is now, we can't afford to wait any longer.