Posted by bealiba on February 5, 2008, 6:59 am
Well, it is Uluru, and has been for something like 100,000 years, It's
been Ayers Rock for less than 200 years.
No one remembers what it was called when Mungo Man lived here.
White man's reality, Australia was discovered by the British.
Black man's reality, Australia was stolen by white men.
Posted by Anthony Matonak on February 4, 2008, 4:40 am
No problem, mistakes happen. :) Still, there are a few nits to pick
in your assumptions.
A 2MW wind turbine produces more like 12 to 20 MWh/day, not 10.
New wind turbines are up to 6MW, not 2MW and are taller so they
will have better wind and produce more power per swept area.
While the United States may use 200 kWh/day/person the rest of the
world uses a lot less. Even in the United States, conservation,
better farming, more efficient transportation, etc. could cut that
number down significantly.
You disregard the use of alternative sources of energy and place the
entire burden of civilization on wind turbines.
Certainly switching over the entire world to an entirely different
source of energy wouldn't be any piece of cake, no matter what form
that takes. This doesn't make wind any less viable or useful.
For comparison, over 70 million cars are produced every year globally.
While a car is much smaller than a MW wind turbine, it does show that
a lot of stuff can be built very quickly on a global scale.
Posted by klonq on February 4, 2008, 7:46 am
This type of thinking got us into trouble in the first place, in your
last post you said you had a cheap alternative. Short of shooting
everybody that was reluctant to reduce carbon emissions I don't see
too many alternatives.
The facts you quote (true or false) are based on past energy usage,
which you have found to be an unattainable rate of consumption. So
what you are really writing is that 130 million wind turbines would be
enough for everybody to leave their lights on all night - and it can
be done. There is certainly enough room on planet earth for this
number of wind turbines (probably not enough wind, but certainly
Weather you want to use solar, wind, nuclear or whatever the question
you're really asking is how much do I want to pay to leave my lights
on all night?
Posted by Just_a_fan on March 3, 2008, 8:23 pm
One more correction in order.
kw-hrs per day????????????
What IS that?
Killowatt hours per 24 hours?
Does that make sense to anyone but you?
On Sun, 3 Feb 2008 17:10:08 -0800 (PST), in alt.solar.photovoltaic
Posted by David French on March 3, 2008, 11:27 pm
No correction is needed....
'Kilowatt hours per day' makes perfect sense.
If the wind blows for, say, 7 hours today, and your
system generates an average of 2kW then you will
produce a total of 14 Kilowatt hours of energy today.
That is 14 Kilowatt Hours - in a 24 hour period (day).