Posted by Erdemal on April 8, 2007, 12:13 pm
I say :)
Power of a moving fluid
kinetic energy m * v * v / 2
mass per second m = v * area * density
P = k * v * v * v (= cube)
m mass, v = speed, P = power
You could argue too that average wind speed is much higher
at 60 meter height that at ground level.
The fan is very probably optimized for a lower speed?
I just want to point out that the annouced power was for
a 'high' wind speed. It's true too that my approximation
was not fair :)
Posted by Alex Terrell on April 8, 2007, 11:34 am
On 7 Apr, 23:07, "Hysterical leftwing global warmers must DIE"
40,000 x 5 MW x 40% = 80 GW.
That's enough electricity for 80 million people. Throw in electric
transport and heating, and you could probably do a City of 30
Posted by Invasion of the Crackpots on April 7, 2007, 10:25 pm
Posted by cyril on April 8, 2007, 11:45 am
On 7 Apr 2007 14:30:57 -0700, "firstname.lastname@example.org"
You used PV technology for you projections. For centralized power
generation, solar thermal technology is much better : higer effiency
(more the 20%, reducing the needed area by almost a factor 3),
cheaper, using only conventionnal technology and not needing rare
Posted by Solar Flaire on June 8, 2007, 4:15 pm
No one solution will be the answer. When the sun doesn't shine, you
have a problem. We need many duplicate systems to cut down on fossil
fuel consumption so we have it when the sun doesn't shine and the wind
doesn't blow and the hydrogen mines close down.