Wind Farm for Moreton Bay

[blairv70]

We all know it's getting hotter and that everyone is looking for cleaner ways to produce energy - so what would you think about a wind farm in Moreton Bay?

Not saying this is happening or anything but mainly wanted to get people's thoughts on the subject

I myself would be for it - the less coal we burn making power the better!

Keen to hear what the group thinks

[castlemaine]

I have a cousin that does logistics for wind farms, etc overseas. When the sails take the energy of the wind it changes the environment behind the windmill. Imagine the plants, etc that depend on the wind and the temperature also goes up. I only had a brief talk to him so, I'm no expert.
For every action there's a reaction, so I guess it up to us to find one that has the least impact on the environment and provide us with us with clean energy.
Having said that, I'm up for it. Straddie sounds good :-X;D

[aussiebasser]

From my research in Wind Generated power I found they are similar to a Toyota Prius in that they can never repay the carbon that is produced during their manufacture.
A wind turbine generator is made up mainly of three major parts. Blades, Tower and Base. The Blades are fibreglass which are produced using a process that generates quite a lot of carbon. The Tower is made from steel which is produced by burning lots and lots of coking coal in great big iron ore refineries. The Base is made from concrete which sets using a chemical reaction process that produces carbon dioxide.
Here's one story about them.

Wind turbines are not just big simple windmills – they are massive complex machines whose
manufacture and construction consume much energy and many expensive materials. These
include steel for the tower, concrete for the footings, fibre glass for the nacelle, rare metals for the
electro-magnets, steel and copper for the machinery, high quality lubricating oils for the gears, fibre
glass or aluminium for the blades, titanium and other materials for weather-proof paints, copper,
aluminium and steel for the transmission lines and support towers, and gravel for the access roads.
There is a long production chain for each of these materials. Mining and mineral extraction rely on
diesel power for mobile equipment and electrical power for haulage, hoisting, crushing, grinding,
milling, smelting, refining. These processes need 24/7 reliable electric power which, in Australia, is
most likely to come from coal.
These raw materials then have to be transported to many specialised manufacturing plants, again
using large quantities of energy, generating more carbon dioxide.
Then comes the construction phase, starting with building a network of access roads, clearance of
transmission routes, and excavation of the massive footings for the towers. Have a look here at the
massive amount of steel, concrete and energy consumed in constructing the foundations for just
one tower.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KX0RhjeLlCs
Not one tonne of steel or concrete can be produced without releasing carbon dioxide in the process.
Almost all of the energy used during construction will come from diesel fuel, with increased
production of carbon dioxide.



Moreover, every bit of land cleared results in the production of carbon dioxide as the plant material
dozed out of the way rots or is burnt, and the exposed soil loses its humus to oxidation.
Once the turbine starts operating the many towers, transmission lines and access roads need more
maintenance and repair than a traditional power plant that produces concentrated energy from one
small plot of land using a small number of huge, well-tested, well protected machines. Turbines
usually operate in windy, exposed, isolated locations. Blades need to be cleaned using large
specialised cranes; towers and machinery need regular inspection and maintenance; and mobile
equipment and manpower needs to be on standby for lightning strikes, fires or accidents. All of
these activities require diesel powered equipment which produces more carbon dioxide.
Even when they do produce energy, wind towers often produce it at times when demand is low - at
night for example. There is no benefit in this unwanted production, but it is usually counted as
saving carbon fuels.
Every wind farm also needs backup power to cover the 65%-plus of wind generating capacity that is
lost because the wind is not blowing, or blowing such a gale that the turbines have to shut down.
In Australia, most backup is provided by coal or gas plants which are forced to operate intermittently
to offset the erratic winds. Coal plants and many gas plants cannot switch on and off quickly but
must maintain steam pressure and “spinning reserve” in order to swing in quickly when the fickle
wind drops. This causes grid instability and increases the carbon dioxide produced per unit of
electricity. This waste should be debited to the wind farm that caused it.
Wind turbines also consume energy from the grid when they are idle - for lubrication, heating,
cooling, lights, metering, hydraulic brakes, energising the electro-magnets, even to keep the blades
turning lazily (to prevent warping) and to maintain line voltage when there is no wind. A one-month
study of the Wonthaggi wind farm in Australia found that the facility consumed more electricity than
it produced for 16% of the period studied. A detailed study in USA showed that 8.3% of total wind
energy produced was consumed by the towers themselves. This is not usually counted in the
carbon equation.
The service life of wind towers is far shorter than traditional power plants. Already many European
wind farms have reached the end of their life and contractors are now gearing up for a new boom in
the wind farm demolition and scrap removal business. This phase is likely to pose dangers for the
environment and require much diesel powered equipment producing yet more carbon dioxide.



http://carbon-sense.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/parasitic-power-producers.pdf

[scottar]

Getting the real information on wind farms seems almost impossible. Those for it (a lot of whom seem to have a wheelbarrow to push) will tell you it is cost effective, those against (some of whom also have a agenda but not all) will present a range of arguments. Personally I tend to believe the against and coupled with the current political world climate, I suspect that if something like a wind farm was to go in, the area it is in would be off limits to the general public - I don't want to be locked out of more of Moreton Bay. It also doesn't make sense IMO to put electricity generating equipment into the environment that is most inhospitable to it - even more so when when we have land based areas that could be used that will be far less costly for installation and maintenance access.

[Triple]

I think fish friendly tidal helical units may be a better idea.. and wave pumps cause they'd make great fad's.

[grinner2]

Great idea , I always eat a lot of baked beans when Iam out in the bay fishing & the amount of wind I produce is significant ............

[Crunchy]

More pilons to go around I guess

[Volvo]

From my research in Wind Generated power I found they are similar to a Toyota Prius in that they can never repay the carbon that is produced during their manufacture.
A wind turbine generator is made up mainly of three major parts. Blades, Tower and Base. The Blades are fibreglass which are produced using a process that generates quite a lot of carbon. The Tower is made from steel which is produced by burning lots and lots of coking coal in great big iron ore refineries. The Base is made from concrete which sets using a chemical reaction process that produces carbon dioxide.
Here's one story about them.


http://carbon-sense.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/parasitic-power-producers.pdf
[/SIZE][/FONT][/SIZE][/FONT]

Good post :)

Till research finds a more friendly power producing method ide say keep the Coal Fired Stations running ..Been a lot of $$ spent over the years to make them burn cleaner so why lose that??.. Nothing is perfect in out little World and when you think of it , its because of us the people that the so called polution is being caused FOR!!..

[PROS]

Watched a documentary the other day about how insignificant is green house gasses created by vehicles; cars, boats, aircrafts, etc.... compared to dairy/meat industry.
Being able to eat meat, hence the work of growing and feeding cattle apparently produces somewhere just over %50 of the green house gasses in the world, mainly in the form of fart.
Cows are farting machines basically which is methane.
Even all the carbon emissions created by coal power stations in the world was quoted to be around %20.

Another interesting point was that humans make more food to feed animals - dairy/meet/poultry industry - than there is available food for humans.
Basically we create enough food to stop all the hunger in the world instantly however we choose to feed the animals instead.

I guess I would miss a juicy steak too much if I go vegetarian.

[aussiebasser]

I know it scares most people, but Nuclear is probably the cleanest, most efficient and most environmentally friendly power generator there is.

[scottar]

It's not nulclear power as such that scares me. It's the Australian Government (don't care what flavour) presiding over nuclear power - FFS we can't get insulation into a few roofs without creating a shit storm.

[hainsofast]

I know it scares most people, but Nuclear is probably the cleanest, most efficient and most environmentally friendly power generator there is. take away the environmentally friendly part and you are on the money, takes heaps of fuel to mine and purify it, then you have the nuclear waste to deal with.

[shakey55]

IMO placing towers in Morton Bay will change the water patterns of the ocean (water being forced around the towers) which will cause a change. The exact change being unknown.

Back in the early 70's the Sydney airport runway was built and extended out into Botany Bay. There were many test etc produced to show that it would cause no problems to Botany Bay.

Well living in the area all my life I can tell you the shape of Botany Bay has changed, the local council and state government have spent a lot of money building groins into the bay to reduce all these changes. It is to late.

So if not prepared to introduce nuclear power, leave things as they are and continue to invent things to make coal powered electricity cleaner and more environmentally friendly.

Just my view and thoughts


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Rodman]

If it ever comes true u can bet there will be an exclusion zone around each pylon

Rodman

[scottar]

If it ever comes true u can bet there will be an exclusion zone around each pylon

Rodman

I suspect it would cover the entire field - not just around each pylon and there would be a large area of "no anchoring" zone to provide access for cabling as well

[Mike Delisser]

So many of these around Europe now. I tried counting the number of wind turbines in a French field as we passed but I lost count around 50, though that may have been because the train was doing 320k per hour. The one's in the sea off Felixstowe were so far off shore they could only be seen with good binoculars.

[gr hilly]

I recon every home buyer should be forced to have a solar system on the roof these have really been made cheap already for so bloody long by the gov,and soon the battery back up system is just about ready,it is not dear to buy when you look at the bloody bill you would get without solar and to be selling back to the grid with your own bat packs is going to be magic my solar on my roof paid for itself in 3 years.
cheers G.R.Hilly.

[rayken1938]

If it ever comes true u can bet there will be an exclusion zone around each pylon

Rodman
We already have exclusion zones
They are called green zones.
In reality I doubt that we have enough continual wind in the bay to make them economically viable.
Cheers
Ray

[TheRealPoMo]

They don't pay what they used to for surplus power gr hilly. I was lucky to get my forms in early and get 50+ cents per kwh. That ship sailed.

[aussiebasser]

If every house in your street has solar you won't put anything back into the system

[sparkyice]

this has been a hot topic for some years now in my area of the states. if you're bored, here is a thread about it from our lake Ontario fishing forum. I don't think you need to register with the forum to read it, but it's a good forum much like this one

.http://www.lakeontariounited.com/fishing-hunting/topic/13341-wind-turbines-on-lake-Ontario/

cheers,
joe

[Feral]

No, solar is the king, prices for solar power overseas are down around 4c a Kwatt. 1/4 of the price of coal produced power. Also the wind is no where consistent enough around the bay to make wind viable.

I would hate to have a job in the coal industry, because you wont be having it for long.

[gr hilly]

Ionly get 6 c but i save $450 per quarter and a $46 rebait it will be handy once the battery is in no elec bill at all i love that idea i have paid the bloody bill for 46 years to be self suff will be awesome.
cheers G.R.Hilly.

[TheRealPoMo]

If every house in your street has solar you won't put anything back into the system
Not if they all have kids like mine....

[Dignity]

Last year scientists in turkey developed wind towers without blades, basically a tower with the top shaped like a diagonal slice, it doesn't require blades and is supposed to be quite efficient and probably change some of the figures quoted to maintain wind towers in the future. Just like Mike Delissers post I lost count of the number of wind farms all through Europe and the British coast line, certainly becomes quite common and an eyesore.

[3rd degree]

I don't think you want wind farms in the bay as they create a noise that may interfere with the fish...

Cheers

jim

[chris69]

Thats a great idea they can put them all in the southen part of the bay, they have most of the artifical reefs so they can have the wind farms too.

[tunaticer]

Whilst there is a cost on every aspect of every thing we do, there is still a need to be satisfied.

Your attached story can be applied exactly the same way to your daily use of toilet paper.

When there are projects underway, whatever they are, there are costs but also deliver employment and trade which today's society depends upon 100%.

Imagine if the computer was never invented.......how much plastic would not have been used??? How much electricity would not have been required??? How many levels of environmental impact would there have been?

What is the solution?

Reduce the need for more.

[Lovey80]

No, solar is the king, prices for solar power overseas are down around 4c a Kwatt. 1/4 of the price of coal produced power. Also the wind is no where consistent enough around the bay to make wind viable.

I would hate to have a job in the coal industry, because you wont be having it for long.

I smell bullshit on that solar price. No way on earth solar stacks up on its own at 4c/kW especially in Europe.

[Dezzer]

Watched a documentary the other day about how insignificant is green house gasses created by vehicles; cars, boats, aircrafts, etc.... compared to dairy/meat industry.
Being able to eat meat, hence the work of growing and feeding cattle apparently produces somewhere just over %50 of the green house gasses in the world, mainly in the form of fart.
Cows are farting machines basically which is methane.
Even all the carbon emissions created by coal power stations in the world was quoted to be around %20.

Another interesting point was that humans make more food to feed animals - dairy/meet/poultry industry - than there is available food for humans.
Basically we create enough food to stop all the hunger in the world instantly however we choose to feed the animals instead.

I guess I would miss a juicy steak too much if I go vegetarian.
It's always interesting to hear people say what a blight coal mines are on our environment and landscape. It comes to mind during my weekly flights over the Central Qld coalfield's as you look down on mines that are a tiny dot on a massive canvas of tree clearing as far as the eye can see.

Sent from my ZTE Blade V580 using Tapatalk