oh my god!!!!
thermodynamics!!!!!

PANIK!

1. Local warming is not global warming

2. The warming could hurt local farmers, who have already suffered through a killer drought over the past few years = dumbass writer is dumbass.

3. What is the relative impact on enviroment of a wind farm vs. a conventional power plant, whether hydro, natural gas, nuke or coal, for the same production?

Ah, the proverbial two edged sword.

The nutjobs who complain about wasteful green energy spending can now attack wind farms as harmful to the planet. The problem is they'll have to admit global warming is more than a theory - it's real. But since they know global warming is a crock, they know this study is more liberal bullshiat. But the wind farms will still be there.

I'm sure it sucks to be unable to compromise.

Zhou cautioned that his study used satellite data, which can have errors from clouds, for example, rather than temperature readings taken at the surface. He said he hopes to improve his dataset, and look at wind farms in other parts of the world.

Uh... yeah

Turbines mix air at night and could affect local climate and farming.

Turbines mix air at night and could affect local climate and farming.

local climate

local climate

GAT_00: Turbines mix air at night and could affect local climate and farming.

Turbines mix air at night and could affect local climate and farming.

local climate

local climate

First of all, the guys data source i isn't that good.

However, a local climate change is still bad, and there should be investigations and monitoring. Just because it's green doesn't mean there can't be a bad side effect not accounted for until it's in the field.

At least they have those windmills to keep them cool.

As I said in the redlit thread:

This just in: You can't take large amounts of energy out a system and not affect that system.

Also

DirtyDeadGhostofEbenezerCooke: Local warming is not global warming

this.

Mr. Fuzzypaws: At least they have those windmills to keep them cool.



Windmills do not work that way!

/oblig

DirtyDeadGhostofEbenezerCooke: 3. What is the relative impact on enviroment of a wind farm vs. a conventional power plant, whether hydro, natural gas, nuke or coal, for the same production?

Wind power tends to increase CO2 emissions due to their production/maintenance emissions and the required backup capacity necessary for when the wind doesn't blow.

That backup capacity is typically provided by OCGT peaking units, powered by natural gas. Problem is that those OCGT peaking units are far less efficient than non-peaking units, CCGT, designed to simply run 24/7, thus they have higher emissions.

Link

It will be interesting to see further research and discussion on the topic.

If there is one green technology that I am interested in, it would be GeoThermal power production. True unlimited power that does not need wind (wind mills), or a sunny day (Solar power), or a stream of water (hydroelectric).

I have always wondered how close we are to such a reality

What's strange is that the exact opposite thing should happen. When energy is removed from the air the net effect should be cooling. I want to say there were some large scale simulations done in the last couple years.

cman: If there is one green technology that I am interested in, it would be GeoThermal power production. True unlimited power that does not need wind (wind mills), or a sunny day (Solar power), or a stream of water (hydroelectric).

I have always wondered how close we are to such a reality

It is used where ever it is easy to get to. Unfortunately, that means its mostly Iceland.

b2theory: What's strange is that the exact opposite thing should happen. When energy is removed from the air the net effect should be cooling. I want to say there were some large scale simulations done in the last couple years.

On first thought, maybe, but you're not taking that much heat out of the system when you consider the atmosphere as a whole, rather, you're taking the energy out of the heat transport. The wind is carrying away hot air and bringing in cool air, by killing the breeze so you can tap it for energy, you're not letting the hot air leave, ergo, local heating.

I think Al Gore's head just exploded

This just in: There really is no free lunch.

I think there is actually an issue with local climate and wind farms. I guess if they are positioned well away from an habitation, agriculture or national park it is okay but I certainly wouldn't want a wind farm on the hills around my house.

ARGH! It's phenomenon in the singular. Who's Discovery hiring for copy editors these days?

The turbines would be good for orange groves, as they install (or used to install) huge fans in California groves to mix colder and warmer layers of air to prevent freezing.

Then again, when the temperature is near freezing, it's usually dead calm.

Maybe they could run them in reverse like fans on cold nights?

Temptation: This just in: There really is no free lunch.

But there are junk lunches and healthy lunches.

b2theory: What's strange is that the exact opposite thing should happen. When energy is removed from the air the net effect should be cooling. I want to say there were some large scale simulations done in the last couple years.

Overall, there is no temperature change. The turbines just mix the cooler air at ground level with the warmer air a little higher up. Instead of having air at 15^oC at ground level and 17 higher up, for example, you're getting 16^oC high and low. So, no net effect, just a warming of surface temperature.

20 comments and no GeneralJim to tell us all how we've bought the big lie?

Wow. I guess shill paychecks are bouncing in this economy too.

Scusa me, are we trying to make the planet COLDER? Let's warm the joint up to about room temperature and then hold it.

It's obvious from this article that from here on out, fossil fuels are the way to go. Where do I sign up for a coal-burning car?

And while we're at it, take down solar power as well. Don't tell me the ground doesn't get hotter in a field of those things.

Just one more reason to switch from turbine wind farms to stalk wind farms.

Of course, due to the greater number of stalks needed to generate the same amount of electricity, in the same land area, there will be a lot more cement platforms, which may retain the day's heat and rise the temps in the evening. Additionally, one will not be able to grown as many crops under the stalks due to the greater numbers of platforms.

The SAME PEOPLE who will, straight faced, say this affects global temperature will the rant about thermodynamic laws when arguing the evolution is bullshiat.

MaudlinMutantMollusk: Zhou cautioned that his study used satellite data, which can have errors from clouds, for example, rather than temperature readings taken at the surface. He said he hopes to improve his dataset, and look at wind farms in other parts of the world.

Uh... yeah

Yeah he pretty much went from hypothesis to conclusion with one tid bit of data.

Mr. Fuzzypaws: At least they have those windmills to keep them cool.

Yeah, they should just point them down at the ground to cool it off.

nmrsnr: b2theory: What's strange is that the exact opposite thing should happen. When energy is removed from the air the net effect should be cooling. I want to say there were some large scale simulations done in the last couple years.

On first thought, maybe, but you're not taking that much heat out of the system when you consider the atmosphere as a whole, rather, you're taking the energy out of the heat transport. The wind is carrying away hot air and bringing in cool air, by killing the breeze so you can tap it for energy, you're not letting the hot air leave, ergo, local heating.

ok so um
wind is caused by pressure differentials. Air in HIGH pressure zone flowing into a LOW pressure zone.
Over the width of the wind farm, we can assume that the air wouldnt get that much cooler passing over such a small distance.
The turbine converts the kinetic energy of the moving air into rotating the turbine.
The rotating turbine and generator will have some friction in the system, heat will be generated. This heat + the electricity generated will be equal to the amount of energy lost by the air.

the energy lost by the air will be made up of two parts: the air moving slower and the air being cooler.
throw in turbulence and my head starts hurting ...

IF the air dropped enough in temperature, there would be cloud formation caused by the turbines. (cooler air can hold less water than warmer air)
SO, my guess is that the air doesnt cool that much.

My guess is that the area around the wind farm is warmer do to radiant heat from the warm turbine and generator.


but back to "local climate"
isnt global climate the sum of all local climates?

straight dope did a piece on replacing the worlds power plants with wind turbines. the numbers were HILARIOUS.

/plus the sun is going out and we are all going to freeze to death ... stupid fossil fuel cooling the sun like that

dobro: Scusa me, are we trying to make the planet COLDER? Let's warm the joint up to about room temperature and then hold it.

Thanks to existing technology, every room on the planet is now room temperature. You're welcome.

Do they intend to give us map data on the physical range of the effect? How far outside the wind farm does the effect reach? Are they saying we can't have crops directly under the damn things or is it a notable area?

Maybe cool it by putting solar panels under them.

So, how do pirates fit into this scenario? there MUST be pirates.

fanbladesaresharp: MaudlinMutantMollusk: Zhou cautioned that his study used satellite data, which can have errors from clouds, for example, rather than temperature readings taken at the surface. He said he hopes to improve his dataset, and look at wind farms in other parts of the world.

Uh... yeah

Yeah he pretty much went from hypothesis to conclusion with one tid bit of data.

but the clouds would be in the same place that the wind farm was, right ??
not saying the guy isnt a bit strange ... but still ....

plus dont get me started about the satellite temp data

jack21221: b2theory: What's strange is that the exact opposite thing should happen. When energy is removed from the air the net effect should be cooling. I want to say there were some large scale simulations done in the last couple years.

Overall, there is no temperature change. The turbines just mix the cooler air at ground level with the warmer air a little higher up. Instead of having air at 15oC at ground level and 17 higher up, for example, you're getting 16oC high and low. So, no net effect, just a warming of surface temperature.

Came here to say exactly this. God forbid the overnight surface inversion becomes less pronounced and the atmosphere a little more isothermal.

/WTF was discovery thinking when they made this article?!?!?

shiat like this is catnip for my tebagger family. Any counter-intuitive explanation must automatically be correct. The cause of the increase of hockey concussions? Players wear too much padding. Want to reduce gasoline use in big cities? Outlaw pedestrians. Now they can har har about wind turbines.

laars: So, how do pirates fit into this scenario? there MUST be pirates.

Shrinking glaciers? Ice pirates.

Notabunny: dobro: Scusa me, are we trying to make the planet COLDER? Let's warm the joint up to about room temperature and then hold it.

Thanks to existing technology, every room on the planet is now room temperature. You're welcome.

ba da BOOM

wind energy... I had some of that earlier after eating cabbage, beans, taco bell and then........ washed it down with some boiled eggs and beer.

I don't want to dig out my engineering charts and tables, but shouldn't a windmill take heat out of the air?

Seriously, they interrupt the air and slow it down. Heat is a function of the movement of molecules.

I sorta understand the issue, having been involved with air travel for a while. Air temperatures dip a few degrees every thousand feet up you go. Thus if a windmill stirs upper and lower levels it should have a cooling effect.

laars: So, how do pirates fit into this scenario? there MUST be pirates.

Pirates? Really? I expected to see zombies... or maybe even vampires...

This is an example of why Discovery.com isn't among the sites i check for scientific news each day.

at some point should we just day, well; it's still better than coal.

\granted, when I use that excuse vis a vis smoking cigs is better than shooting smack... It doesn't get to far.

a turbine takes energy out of the atmosphere then converts it to electricity which then gets converted into heat which goes into the atmosphere. no net change.

With all that air moving about you should be able to put some sort-or-a device there, that would utilize said wind, and produce electricity.

namatad: fanbladesaresharp: MaudlinMutantMollusk: Zhou cautioned that his study used satellite data, which can have errors from clouds, for example, rather than temperature readings taken at the surface. He said he hopes to improve his dataset, and look at wind farms in other parts of the world.

Uh... yeah

Yeah he pretty much went from hypothesis to conclusion with one tid bit of data.

but the clouds would be in the same place that the wind farm was, right ??
not saying the guy isnt a bit strange ... but still ....

plus dont get me started about the satellite temp data

Save it for the followup thread where he claims wind farms are de facto heat islands.

So, no matter what type of energy we try to use, we're going to destroy the planet regardless.

wildcardjack: I don't want to dig out my engineering charts and tables, but shouldn't a windmill take heat out of the air?

Seriously, they interrupt the air and slow it down. Heat is a function of the movement of molecules.

I sorta understand the issue, having been involved with air travel for a while. Air temperatures dip a few degrees every thousand feet up you go. Thus if a windmill stirs upper and lower levels it should have a cooling effect.

talk some more, we want to hear

cman: If there is one green technology that I am interested in, it would be GeoThermal power production. True unlimited power that does not need wind (wind mills), or a sunny day (Solar power), or a stream of water (hydroelectric).

I have always wondered how close we are to such a reality


I wonder about thorium reactors, myself. I inherited some stock that my grandfather bought in a company years and years ago. I sure wouldn't mind seeing that technology gain some momentum...

You could use an Airdrop system to put moisture back into the ground Link

Point02GPA: With all that air moving about you should be able to put some sort-or-a device there, that would utilize said wind, and produce electricity.

Wouldn't that increase ground temperatures at night though?

lazyguineapig33: a turbine takes energy out of the atmosphere then converts it to electricity which then gets converted into heat which goes into the atmosphere. no net change.

So the electricity produced is free energy? Wow, you've managed to turn physics on its head here. Should be a Nobel prize in this for you.