Wind Turbines
Here’s a good investment of six minutes of your time; it’s a video on how wind turbines are made.
What I didn’t understand until just now is the technology and workmanship that goes into creating the foundation such that the concrete doesn’t crack when all the stress associated with a tall structure’s receiving the force of heavy winds.
The video also gives one a window into the sheer tonnage of materials that go into a single turbine that will generate just a few megawatts; it makes one wonder if it’s all worth the cost. What about all the energy involved in extracting the raw material, doing the manufacturing, the transportation, installation and maintenance? The CO2 from the concrete?
Fortunately, the answer is more than satisfactory; all in, the EROI (energy return on investment) is somewhere between 15 and 30:1.
Enjoy.
Craig,
Interesting video. thank you for posting.
You write a very sensible observation:
“sheer tonnage of materials that go into a single turbine will generate just a few megawatts; it makes one wonder if it’s all worth the cost. What about all the energy involved in extracting the raw material, doing the manufacturing, the transportation, installation and maintenance? The CO2 from the concrete?”
Then you spoil the objectivity of your observation by adding:
“Fortunately, the answer is more than satisfactory; all in, the EROI (energy return on investment) is somewhere between 15 and 30:1.”
Wait a minute, how did you arrive at that conclusion? Is this just some article of faith, a guess, or just a hope?
I doubt whether anyone, let alone a single individual, could accurately work out the environmental supply chain logistics involved in the manufacture of a Wind Turbine.
Ah ha, but although that’s what you meant, it’s not what what you wrote, is it?
What you wrote was deliberately deceptive! By only considering the financial calculation EROI, you subtly switched to compare apples with oranges.
Even so, how do you arrive at a figure of between 15-30:1?
Again this seemingly precise and authoritative figure is just an invention.
What evidence do you have backed by a proper verified study to substantiate such a figure? (apart from the manufacturer’s estimate)
No, you can’t? Why not? Because none exist!
The truth is Wind Turbines like the entire industry are a gigantic mistake! These giant white elephants were created by an industry totally dependent on taxpayer/consumer subsidies and with a few exceptional locations have proved an enormous failure.
The technology may be awesome and the engineering may be much admired, but so were steam locomotives and Zeppelins!
But, as I always say, so me irrefutable evidence either of the environmental benefits, or even financial, I will happily retract my statement.
But you can’t, and Europe the doubts are growing. The problem is the industry is now so huge and employs so many, along with the problem of what to do about the enormous cost of removing thousands of old turbines with massive reinforced concrete foundations, we may soon be stuck with another industry to big to fail!
Again, I offer you the challenge, provide your best sources, and compare them with mine. Let’s have a ‘Benjamin Franklin”
comparison?
It’s a little unfair I know, because just as there are no rental vehicles in Bermuda, there is no real data to support this latest claim.
Craig,
Hmmmm,…. very disappointing, I was sure you could would seize the opportunity to answer a critic with a crushing, rational argument, full of verifiable information for your passionate claims in support of Wind Turbines.
That’s the problem advocates often discover when engaging in meaningful debate, they might get asked real questions and become exposed when their answers are proved erroneous, inaccurate or just plain b/s.
It’s always embarrassing to be forced admit that what you want to be true, what you believe should be true, isn’t true at all!
There are always three methods of dealing with such an awkward situation, admit error and move on, or remain silent and wait for another opportunity to repeat the false narrative to a more gullible audience.
The third method is to keep shouting the error loud enough and long enough, in the hopes of getting the lie accepted.
It’s your choice……..
Here’s a meta-analysis that came up with an EROI of 25.2. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/222703134_Meta-Analysis_of_Net_Energy_Return_for_Wind_Power_Systems
Here’s the Wikipedia article that puts at at somewhere between 20 and 50, depending on a number of factors. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_returned_on_energy_invested
These are the first two of the 398,000 results from Googling “EROI Wind Energy.”
This will be my last comment on this subject.