Wind Turbines Could Theoretically Power the Entire World, and Then Some | Good News Wednesday

Your wish they hope is in demand:

Honeywell Wind Turbine to be Sold at Ace Hardware Stores for $4,500

EarthTronics' Home Wind Turbine Coming to Ace Hardware This Fall

Most small wind turbines sold never even pay for their cost to purchase. We do a lot of work to make sure that our customers (we are wind turbine dealers) live in an area that has wind at least 30% of the time. Most places do not qualify. Other than the Southwest and south of this country, solar panels barely pay for the energy that it took to make them.

How is overselling these technologies green?

Stories like these turn off the general public IMO.
You hear every other day about this and that can supply all our needs for ages.
Problem is it is alwasy "theorectical" and in a "perfect world"

sure their si enough wind energy and enough solar energy and NO I AM NOT attacking wind power.
I'm just attacking the article.

The problem is we will never ever harvest all the energy from the wind
there are places too hard and too expensive to do it.,
And lets say we could. IF you could actually harvest all the wind energy there wouldnt be much wind(there would be new wind generated by the motion of the earth but it would quickly go away as we harvested the energy used to move the air molecules).. and that would change the climate dramatically.

PNB

Thats the cost of the turbine only. I hate it when someboby throws out a number and says thats all it costs. The turbine is the minimal cost of a wind system. Instaltion and dc conversion and storage unit could bring the cost to over $20,000.00. That $20,000.. would allow me to pay my electricity bill for about 15 years. The turbine also is meant to produce electricity for your home and yours alone you will not be allowed access to the grid to sell your excess you will just have to shut down your turbine. Get the whole story before you paint a picture so grandiose. Get all the story please get all the story.

the issue is that we tend to present these things as an all or nothing venture. It will not be all wind, or solr, or tidal or geothermal. Each state and even several places in each state will have a best type of renewable resource to tap and it willb e the combination of types and technology that will allow us to make the changeover.

The argument against new technology costing too much is not valid for any green solution. Every new technology costs too much until someone starts using it. Then the costs come down as new suppliers find less expensive sources. If you add the extra burden placed on new wind technology by the government in the past, and it's no wonder the technology is still not paying for itself.

Most small wind turbines sold never even pay for their cost to purchase.

Based on today's prices. If you increase demand, and more companies follow suit, the market competition will drastically reduce prices.

Based on today's prices. If you increase demand, and more companies follow suit, the market competition will drastically reduce prices.

There are certain fundamental costs associated with manufacturing wind turbines, as well as mounting them on towers, connecting them up, that are not that amenable to "drastic" cuts in price. The turbine is only a percentage of the cost of the system.

igoforo

I didnt' position this as the solution to energy needs. Just pointed to two links that show home wind generation is coming to our local hardware stores. Alternative Energy produced from Wind is not theoretical anymore, it's reality. These are like the Ford Model T, people want something as an alternative to the horse and buggy, this is the first truely commercial offering found at a hardware store and something to keep an eye on.

If you can't afford the price tag, that doesn't mean others can't or won't.
If we follow your reasoning, people wouldn't progress and try...

I think the point SG is trying to make (and it's a valid one) is that all decisions are predicated on a financial incentive to make change. Promising that prices will improve as demand increases does not answer the question of who wants to buy it now.

Think of it in these terms: I'm telling you to run out and get an iPhone 3G now because doing so will cause the demand to increase and lead to more improvements and reduce costs through scale of economies in manufacturing. This will make the price more achievable by people with less economic resources at their disposal. Given that I have provided you, personally, no incentive to do it, why would you?

Except, Jay, that isn't the incentive for using wind power.

For the average person, Monica, it is. People (for the most part) make decisions that they feel directly benefit them. Yes, we can explain global warming until we're blue in the face, but getting the masses to go with the flow requires incentive to make changes (or disencentives not to).

I do agree on a basic level, Jay. And without the stimulus package, I doubt we would make the changes for many years to come (which might explain the onslaught of negative PR Obama is receiving for it).

But if you look at the growth of green products, especially organic produce and other organically grown food, I think there are a lot of people who are willing to pay the extra to make a difference. If they can also have a modest benefit, they will choose green. The fair trade industries are another example of people choosing to use their money for social activism. If what I am saying isn't true, then please explain the public relations campaigns of all the major industries which pollute the environment?

A neighbor of mine purchased a weather monitoring station, around $500 dollars. He's collecting data on weather patterns for our neighborhood. The eventual goal will be to put some form of wind generation up. Realistically though, that time comes when the power company or government pays the up front costs, and we can pay them back over time while reduing our energy foot print.

Meanwhile nearly all of my neighbors are working on our homes, weatherproofing, adding insulation, adding insulated paint to the outside, caulking window and door frames, putting in energy efficient appliances (with government tax breaks). This we can do on our budgets today as we prepare for future technologies.

Excellent post, PNB. It's true that there are literally dozens of other things we can do to reduce our energy costs and dependencies. Simple, cost-effective, and critical to our planet's future.

PNB

Those are great things. However, to think that wind and solar are going to be able to supply all of our energy needs is not not understand what our energy needs are.

Indeed, Jay, there are so many simple, quick and inexpensive things we can do that have an immediate return - switching to CFLs, programmable thermostats, insulation, even window coverings that keep out the sun in the summer and the cold in the winter.

I see people touting solar panels and the like in new construction, but there are other less expensive ways to save during construction.

I had my last house custom built in the California Central Valley, which, as anyone who lives here knows, can get brutally hot for months in the summer.

When I researched solar panels, the net estimate was that if my energy bills were zero, it would take just over nine years to recoup the cost. (Based on actual figures collected since then, the payback would have been a bit longer.)

Instead, I opted for a whole house fan ($1,000), a dual-zoned HVAC system (an additional $700, now standard here on new construction), and some other no-additional-cost items such as a white tile roof, eliminating all but one window from the south and west sides of the house, and orienting the house such that the majority of the western exposure consisted of garage space.

My neighbor has a similar home but with the standard black roof, standard HVAC, no house fan, and the standard location of windows. We both keep our A/C at about 78F.

The first really hot month, my utility bill was about $120. His was just under $400.

I figure my investment paid off during that first summer.

Two different people, two different posts both claiming I said wind be able to supply all of our energy? What blog are you guys reading? I haven't stated that, sheesh. Wind using Ace hardware supplied wind generators will help reduce our foot print, not replace it. Until there's more effiency with systems and we have a realistic, compact energy storage solution (not an entire garage filled with batteries) wind for most homes is a supplement and helps reduce the energy consumption for the grid for our areas. Same applies to Solar, we still need an energy storage system for off hours and low winds. The only thing that in my view could change that equation tomorrow, would be a World Wide Energy Grid, e.g. where power in Australia feeds the U.S and Asia, where power in the U.S. feeds the nighttime needs in Europe, et.

Solar and wind make sense for someone who wants to live far off the grid. Reportedly, coal-fired electricity is subsidized at 30 cents per Kw / hr, and wind-generated electricity at $ 28 per Kw / hr. Without huge gov't subsidies, we wouldn't have wind-generated power at all.

Coal, nuclear, and oil are increasingly off-the-table for electricity generation, with higher costs not far behind. France generates 80% of it's electricity via nuclear plants. Spain is big into the Green thing, and for every new job, loses two jobs.