Windfarms

[Stikybeke]

Today whilst driving down to Canberra just south of Goulburn the Hume Hwy forks to go via Lake George or Yass. I took the Lake George route and shortly after turning onto this road noted a number of Wind Turbines off to the West in the Yass direction. Now I've been on this road a few times and haven't seen these before. As I continued down to Lake George I couldn't help myself and found that I was looking at the 80 odd Wind Turbines that have been on the Eastern side of the lake for sometime now.

I recall whilst doing my UPPL test back in the day out of Canberra having to turn and to undertake some scud running due WX much to the annoyance of the Tiz who was then an examiner of airmen (and also failed me on that occasion not because of that but due to lack of airmanship or swearing at him because he made me go to Mills Cross or something.....all good though as I later got through..). It dawned on me that this scud running would have taken me right into the path of these things.

Thankfully they don't put these things anywhere near airfields (or do they?) as who knows what effect the turbulence (I'd imagine) would have as generated when they are in full flight.....Mind you though maybe they don't generate any turbulence but somehow after reflecting on this for a while I 'd reckon they would.

So I was just wondering has anyone else has had any experience with or got an opinion regarding these windfarms? I guess the meat missiles would and I know I'm probably opening pandora's box here but as the saying goes, "unless you ask... ?"

Stiky
:uhoh:

[rutan around]

I reckon we should knock down all Wind Turbines , Microwave Repeater Towers , High Voltage Transmission Lines and level The Great Dividing Range so Stikybeke and I can go scud running whenever we feel like it. It's probably CASA's fault these obstacles are allowed to exist.:E

[Howard Hughes]

At a height of 85 metres + 55 metres for the blades if you need to be down that low scud running, it's probably a good day to be sitting on the couch watching footy! ;)

[Aussie Bob]

Apparently, so I have been told, the lee turbulence can be very high on windy days, so not just the risk of hitting them :sad:

[Ultralights]

thats still 460 Ft! considering lowest legal height is 500 ft. doesnt leave much room

[yr right]

Yes they are near airfields. Big court case happening now can't say much. Killed four people in the USA already. Can't have wake turbulence up to 10 km away from them. They just bad news. Even on still days they take current from the grid to turn the blades so they don't break.
Watch this space !!!!

[Neville Nobody]

You forgot to mention they make birds explode, give anybody within a 5K radius migraines, have an effect on tides and make dogs aggressive. Wake turbulence 10 K away? You blokes make it up as you go along.

[Hempy]

Yes they are near airfields. Big court case happening now can't say much. Killed four people in the USA already. Can't have wake turbulence up to 10 km away from them. They just bad news. Even on still days they take current from the grid to turn the blades so they don't break.
Watch this space !!!

Oooooooh, your friendly neighbourhood illiterate AME is deeply involved in international legal intrigue and affairs!?! :rolleyes: Do tell more Secret Squirrel...or are you waiting for a Wikipedia update? LOL!

[yr right]

Oh Humpty Dumpty air chair expert back. Like I said watch this space. I can say I certainly know a lot more on this subject than you will ever know.

[Bunyan Wingnut]

They even affect whale migration! Shock! Horror! See FDOTM Wind Turbines: Why do they hate our way of life? | Crikey (http://www.crikey.com.au/2012/07/03/first-dog-on-the-moon-466/)

At 10km there is no way that the vortices would not be fully mixed with the entrained air and surrounding airmass. You would not be able to distinguish wind turbine wake from normal ground turbulence. Even on a strong wind day the vortex patterns quickly mix with the surrounding air.

Wind farm approval in NSW requires routine consultation with aviation groups in the area e.g. the new wind farm near Nimmitabel S of Cooma, the project team had to consult aviation users around Cooma, even glider pilots N of Cooma. If you are low enough to be worried about the turbulence and scud, you should be at an airport or in a safe paddock, and not even be airborne!

[rutan around]

Apparently, so I have been told, the lee turbulence can be very high on windy days, so not just the risk of hitting them :sad:

If there is much turbulence above the normal at 500ft on a windy day it still shouldn't worry an ultralight approaching from the downwind side as they should see the wind turbines 10 to 15 minutes before they get to them.:}

Crashed due to Turbine turbulence ! At last a new excuse for piss poor piloting. Go those lawyers. :ugh:

[50 50]

Yr right, what subject are you an expert on?
Airfields
Big court cases
Not saying much
Killing people in the USA
Wake turbulence
Bad news
Turning blades
Or space watching?

[yr right]

We'll when a person ihas over 20000 fly hours and he tells us he had wake turblance from a wind turbine 10 km away I guess he was lying. Just going to say if you believe they are safe and all what you have said is true then I guess you believe in Santa tooth fairy and a whole lot of over stuff. And when it affects you like it has us then may be you would listen a little closer.
I also take it you have been interviewed and given evidence as we'll. you also know how many have been refused to be put up and how many that where told not too be installed but have. But you would know that wouldn't you.

[Creampuff]

Yes they are near airfields.What airfields in Australia, and how "near" are they?

[Stikybeke]

I completely agree with you Bunyan. Shouldn't be flying anywhere near scud or if as a pilot, you have any say in it, (which you should have as part of some basic decision making) not even airborne in such conditions. I'm fairly sure we've all been caught out or had a close call at some stage though. For me just the 2 times that I'll never forget, once under test and the other not long after I got my UPPL and basically in the same neck of woods where I got socked in at Nimmitabel between Merimbula and Canberra and only just made it into Polo Flat. I've said before, lesson well learnt!!!!

That being said I'd hate to be in that situation and also have to deal with one of these things. Even more frightening if you're trying to land at an airfield because of some bad weather!!!

Yr Right, I'm curious now about the court case that you have mentioned. From your post I guess it's in USA and has something to do with the 4 that have been killed over there? Or is it something that's happened in Australia involving an aircraft hitting one of these things because I haven't heard of that occurring..Thanks.

Stiky
:uhoh:

[Ultralights]

10 km downwind from a wind turbine? i am assuming a windy day? arnt most, if not all wind turbines installed on the tops, or near the tops of hills and ridge lines?

can he be sure it was wake turbulence? or a rotor generated by terrain?

i have even been rolled onto my back at 85ooft on a clear sunny day with no aircraft within miles, and terrain 83oo ft below me, was it wake turb?

[yr right]

Court case is in aust. To this point rfs has stated that any airfield that has a wind Farm near by will not be used for any Aireral fire fighting work. We'll creamy you are the expert you find out.
There is a court case in the states with regard to the accident they had. I believe it some high profile farmers onboard. Be warned they are a danger to aviation. What you have to remember that the tip speed is approaching the speed of sound and the diameter of these things is extreme

[yr right]

He flew back to find out what cause it. This no dumb low time bloke we taking about. He found it was the turbine. They funnel the airstream like a straw down stream. The airflow forward of these things is near zero.

[Jabawocky]

Sounds seriously scary stuff. JH is not exactly a newbie pilot either. He must have had a bee in his bonnet about it then to start a court case over it. Good on him too.

I gather you don't fly near any or live near any of them then. ;)

[yr right]

Btw these things are less than 30% efficient. If the wind is to low the turn into a motor and turn the blades from the grid and if it's to windy they feather them so they don't turn or turn enough as not to bend the blades.

[50 50]

20000 fly hours as you put it, does not preclude someone from being wrong.
"This no dumb no time bloke" ......are you joking?
So this is not your own personal experience.
Which court case had high profile farmers on board? Or did the plane convey high profile farmers?
If they had been of a slightly higher profile then would the turbulence have bothered them?
Tip speed is approaching the speed of sound....so is my Holden, just very slowly, perhaps a deep breath before typing would help you.

[Jack Ranga]

Oooooooh, your friendly neighbourhood illiterate AME is deeply involved in international legal intrigue and affairs!?! Do tell more Secret Squirrel...or are you waiting for a Wikipedia update? LOL!

I second that :D

[Jack Ranga]

Why wouldn't you have an open mind on the turbulence issue? Have you seen the size of the effing things??

[Bare Plane]

Did someone say he was a spokesperson for the nuclear power industry?

[Jack Ranga]

He's put himself out there as a spokesman for the engineering industry :sad:

[gerry111]

My challenge to those who follow the likes of AM radio 'Shock Jocks' against renewable energy is simply this:


Go for a drive (or preferably a fly) up the Hunter Valley and have a good look at the wanton destruction of open cut coal mines. Then compare that to the aesthetics of a typical wind farm.


One thing that I find quite sad is that after allowing the coal lobby to do whatever they liked over decades, there still isn't a decent dual carriage highway from Newcastle to Muswellbrook.


And does anyone really believe that the operator of the Mt Thorley / Warkworth mine will ever rejuvenate the massive area of previously agricultural land, now turned into a moonscape? :{

[topdrop]

tip speed is approaching the speed of sound55 metre radius
= 345 metres per revolution
normal 15 to 20 rpm
=6900 metres per min, using 20rpm

So all those DHC8 and BE20 drivers, you are all approaching the speed of sound. You jet jockeys are all breaking the sound barrier. Where are all the court cases for broken windows.

[IBMJunkman]

Don't see wind farm as the cause.

4 dead after small plane crashes into South Dakota wind farm in fog | syracuse.com (http://www.syracuse.com/news/index.ssf/2014/04/4_dead_after_small_plane_crash.html)

[Jack Ranga]

They both have their environmental drawbacks. I can't describe a wind farm as pretty. I wouldn't like the things anywhere near my backyard. A coal mine either. If you want to rid the environment of coal you're gunna have to make some difficult decisions. There's a small city in the US that's 98% solar (yr right probably knows all about it ;)) dunno whether you could power LA on solar but.

[kingRB]

I can say I certainly know a lot more on this subject than you will ever know.

We certainly are lucky to have you here

[truthinbeer]

They both have their environmental drawbacks. I can't describe a wind farm as pretty. I wouldn't like the things anywhere near my backyard. A coal mine either. If you want to rid the environment of coal you're gunna have to make some difficult decisions. There's a small city in the US that's 98% solar (yr right probably knows all about it ;)) dunno whether you could power LA on solar but. There is a fairly recent announcement of a solar town/city in US that is about to commission a large (massive) tower filled with sodium that will act as a battery to provide current through the night for the whole city. Much rather have solar than wind turbines which would not be viable without significant grants and concessions.

[le Pingouin]

A lot of industries get subsidies, including fossil fuel. Clean coal anyone?

New Scientist article about the sort of storage you're talking about: Giant solar farm uses molten salt to keep power coming - 23 April 2014 - New Scientist (http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg22229654.100-giant-solar-farm-uses-molten-salt-to-keep-power-coming.html)

[Jabawocky]

crop pies live their life below 500'

Mind you they should know where every power line is, and anything as big as a wind generator.:uhoh:

[Captain Sand Dune]

Hmmmm, wind turbines, eh? During the last 29 years of flying I have found that they are best avoided by:
1. Studying maps and NOTAMS (that's called 'preparation'),
2. Not scud running, and
3. LOOKING OUT.
:ugh:

[Squawk7700]

I know someone that made over $100m out of his wind farm .... I've never heard him complaining about them for some reason :ok:

[solowflyer]

There have been a few deaths in the USA involving the turbines and guys performing air work and ag. The main concern is not so much the turbines themselves but the towers that they put up near them to measure wind speed. These are basically long poles with bracing wires and unmarked and vertually invisible when flying along. These can be put up over night and not reported as they are within a few feet short of the maximum reporting height.

[rutan around]

4 dead after small plane crashes into South Dakota wind farm in fog | syracuse.com (http://www.syracuse.com/news/index.ssf/2014/04/4_dead_after_small_plane_crash.html)

It seems to be very clear the root cause of the accident was not the Turbines. If we're not to blame the pilot then next in line is the fog .

Here's an idea for our Dear Leader, Tony (don't mention the budget ) Abbott.

As fog causes more deaths in Australia than terrorists ever have he should declare war on FOG. He could call it 'OPERATION FOGGY THINKING'

[Desert Flower]

I can't describe a wind farm as pretty.

I disagree - I think they are. There are some in the mid-north of S.A. that I love watching as when we go south.
And does anyone remember the old "free lights" that used to be on farms many years ago to provide power? Same principle, but of course on a smaller scale. My father remembers sleeping near one when he was a lad. Didn't sleep much the first few nights with the noise, but after that was too damn tired to care!

DF.

[canterbury crusader]

http://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/6/2/696/ag

But did the wind farm cause the fog? Or is it made of the same chemical they use in contrails - got to be more effective at sea level :D

[Oktas8]

In a few areas in the UK there are antenna farms with towers up to 1000' agl. I remember one near the south coast, west of Bournemouth, if anyone wants to fact check me.

The facilities are of course marked on charts. You have to take your headphones off in the vicinity, in case arcing occurs between the ear pieces due to the intense RF field.*

Well, they do teach newbies that scud running is very dangerous. Perhaps the advice is true!



* I popped that one in for you YR RIGHT. It's fun making stuff up - I might do more of it! :p

[yr right]

I don't need to make stuff up. The court cases is a class action btw. Yep all good so long as it's not in your back yard. Btw I speak for my self if I have anything I'll say it if you don't like it don't read it that's maybe a little simple for some of you folk but maybe you don't have a life. Or maybe you all live in the city and don't give a dam about anyone else cause it's not in your back yard. And of course none of you have ever ever ever been court out in bad weather. And none of you every complain about the price of power now do you. And no one ever here ever complained about anything. And you all know exactly everything and no one else is alwolled to have any other opposition to your own views. And yes then continue with your low grade attacks on me and the problem I have with spelling. And ever wondered why there Arnt any other lames on here gee wiz. Then casa looking after it all we'll they not and this will and can be proven. Look at the regs requiring lighting of all structures agl. Now tonight go and have a look at how many of these are lighted. So hands up who when some one is cleaned up is going to face the family's and say well bit tough that sorry. Or like most off you go arrr F$&@. Maybe it may be you or your friend. Then what will you think. But as for now it's in someone else back yard and we'll you really could not give a stuff.

[Frank Arouet]

When Tony, (ask me about Swans budget), Abbott, shuts down the whole renewable energy targets, the decaying wind turbines should stay where they are as monuments to the failed social experiment that was the fraudulent Labor/ Green government, now in exile. No statue could memorialize and symbolize the historic ugliness of the term in office or the continued defence of the incompetence. Failing this, and only if someone can justify their usefulness as a serious alternative to conventional power generation, they should be painted day-glow orange to give the Greens the $hits and further irritate scud runners.

[onetrack]

yr right - You're talking about the U.S. - where stubbing your toe on the step of a shop because you didn't lift your feet, entitles you to launch a mega-million dollar lawsuit.
Where you can launch a mega-million dollar lawsuit for shock and trauma because the aircraft made a loud funny noise right after lift-off, and you thought you were going to die.
Where you can sue someone for putting a mountain in the way of where you wanted to fly, and you ran into it. Gimme a break.

What airfields in Australia, and how "near" are they?

I'll use one of the the newest and biggest windfarms as an example - Collgar, located approximately 15km SE of Merredin, W.A.
Merredin Aerodrome is located 10km W of the windfarm, and two private operators have airstrips located 7.5km and 3.6km respectively from the windfarm.

The Environmental Assessment involved an airspace study carried out by Airport Assist P/L.
The study concluded the windfarm (consisting of 127 horizontal-axis turbine generators spread over 126 sq km, with the towers being 80M high and the blades approximately 45M in diameter) will have negligible effect on aviation.
Consultation was carried out with all relevant aviation interests and authorities - CASA, Airservices Australia, the RFDS, the CSWAFC, officers of the Shire of Merredin and neighbouring shires, local aircraft operators, the aviation policy branch of the Department of Planning & Infrastructure, and the RAAF.
Initial plans proposed 165M high wind turbines, the final design came in at 125M high. This windfarm has been in operation for nearly 2 years, and AFAIK, there have been no aviation incidents involving this windfarm.

http://www.collgarwindfarm.com.au/pdf/Report-Main-Text.pdf

http://www.collgarwindfarm.com.au/pdf/Appendix-F-Airspace-Study.pdf

http://www.collgarwindfarm.com.au/library/gallery/109-collgar-wind-farm-aerial-view-2012

http://mervfrench.files.wordpress.com/2011/06/27jun2011_2425-copy.jpg

Re the comment about wind turbines being placed on ridges in hilly or mountainous country - the Collgar Windfarm is positioned on slightly undulating, but virtually flat terrain, and would potentially provide a greater threat to aviation, due to pilots possibly being more alert to projections in hilly or mountainous country - whereas in relatively flat, somewhat featureless terrain, some pilots would tend to fall into a belief that "there's nothing to hit out here".

Regardless, nothing beats studying up on your NOTAMS and being aware of the possible hazards of the area you are flying into or over. There's no difference between a large HT power pylon or a wind turbine, if you don't know it's there, and fly into it.

A turbulence effect 10kms downstream of a wind turbine sounds like tinfoil hat stuff. What's the wake turbulence clearance for a heavy? - that would generate substantially more turbulence than a wind turbine? It's not 10kms, that's for sure.

[le Pingouin]

I'd rather have a windfarm than fracking any day!

[Dark Knight]

But can you substantially justify why?

[Neville Nobody]

Squawk 7700 said "I know someone that made over $100m out of his wind farm .... I've never heard him complaining about them for some reason"


This is typical of the tripe posted on here as fact.


At the current rate of lease per tower that would be 16,000 towers. Now the biggest windfarm in Oz will have around 420 and that will be over a lot of properties when it's finished so where is this one with 16,000?

[Oktas8]

Ah now yr right, I was just yanking your chain a little. :ok:

But I will explain why I mocked your posts on this thread. Bit rude. Sorry about that. FWIW, no-one is mocking your grammar. Let he who is without sin throw the first stone, and all that.

Wake turbulence doesn't extend 10km downwind of a wind turbine, any more than it extends 33,000' below a large helicopter. Some say you can hear wind turbines 10km away, although having experience with them myself, I doubt it.

Wind turbines are not motored in light winds. Why on earth would they be? Perhaps they are during installation testing. But not routinely. They do routinely use grid power to revolve the entire head, to face into wind. This effort more than pays for itself in the next wind gust.

I have been caught out in bad weather, although fortunately I did something about it before having to descend below 500', or penetrate a marked danger area / dangerous area. (Luck or good training? I claim no superior innate skill, either way.) We trained our pilots to climb at Vy, wings level, in IMC, rather than flying below 500' due weather. Paperwork afterwards, naturally... ;)

I've also routinely flown below MSA at night, VFR, legally. I did not fly in the vicinity of wind turbines. Good training, from others wiser than I. :ok:

Possibly the temptation to scud run is less when your CAA will prosecute for any breach of the low flying rules, weather being no excuse. It certainly sharpens the mind as a junior pilot tempted to cut a corner or two. Food for thought for Australia perhaps.

Wind turbines are here to stay, whether we like them or not. Too much invested in them to do otherwise, at least until nuclear fusion becomes practical! They are a blight on the natural landscape, it's true, but so are most "civilised" structures. Do we think coal & oil are going to get cheaper? But wind power will. For example, research is proceeding on how to build a large generator without using expensive rare earths. As an investor in Lynas Corp, I hope they fail. But they will succeed, I'm sure.

Hope this post generates more light than heat.

[yr right]

One when you wake up and realize you have been coned you can pull it down the other it's all over red rover and you stuck with it. For all you non believers about the length of turbulence we'll you been warned and to stay a heavy has more we'll just how is that. One moves and the other is stationary and continues to move and increase it's length

[Captain Sand Dune]

We've got a live one here.:E

[Squawk7700]

This is typical of the tripe posted on here as fact.

At the current rate of lease per tower that would be 16,000 towers. Now the biggest windfarm in Oz will have around 420 and that will be over a lot of properties when it's finished so where is this one with 16,000?

Good point Neville, he didn't actually make it from the wind farm; he sold his farm FOR a wind farm.

[yr right]

We'll incorrect about the length I can say that with my hand on my heart. It happened. And as for them staying we'll yes some may but some may not and some have been diened to be set up. As for hearing them we'll that's up to the person hearing it. I've not said any thing about the medical effects on people and that's clearly a problem and although some try to silence that it's is a problem. Yep some people get compensation for having them on there properties the naubour doesn't in most cases and yet they cop it in noise devalues in property prices etc etc. they divide and concur

[Jack Ranga]

if you don't like it don't read it

It's not that I don't like it, it's that I CAN'T read it. Get your apprentice to proof read it for us :ok:

[Desert Flower]

yr right, do you have a spell checker? If so, please use it so we more educated folk aren't subjected to your poor spelling mistakes!

DF.

[50 50]

Oh Jack I do so love your posts::8

What "medical effects" could possibly arise from wind farms? If someone is allergic to wind they are in serious trouble, or is it the equipment?
Steel, carbon fibre, copper, fibreglass.....nope not toxic.

Perhaps it's the asbestos wrapped depleted uranium core with the vaporising arsenic regurgitation sprayer that's the problem.

Who is trying to silence the medical problem, and how could they possibly do that when any tw@t with a keyboard can broadcast their thoughts worldwide instantaneously?

(Que people calling me a tw@t with a keyboard)

[Hempy]

yr right, do you have a spell checker? If so, please use it so we more educated folk aren't subjected to your poor spelling mistakes!

DF.

Even if you manage to decipher it you'll realise it wasn't worth the effort.

http://www.ingeniouspress.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/Bull-****-O-Meter.gif

[tipsy2]

I couldn't care less whether they are efficient, safe or whatever, they are plain and simply ugly and a blight on the landscape.:yuk:

tipsy:ugh:

[50 50]

How can you possibly call the world largest propellor ugly? Tsk Tsk Tsk

[Desert Flower]

Hempy - quite agree! :ok:

DF.

[yr right]

Humpty Dumpty at it again nothing to say about nothing useful.

[Creampuff]

I asked the question:What airfields in Australia, and how "near" are they?The only answer I've received so far is:I'll use one of the the newest and biggest windfarms as an example - Collgar, located approximately 15km SE of Merredin, W.A.

Merredin Aerodrome is located 10km W of the windfarm, and two private operators have airstrips located 7.5km and 3.6km respectively from the windfarm.Doesn't sound too dramatic to me.

Who needs to fly that low that close to an airstrip, in non-VMC? :confused:

[gerry111]

Creampuff asked:


"Who needs to fly that low that close to an airstrip, in non VMC?"


Only VFR pilots who aren't afraid of killing themselves and their passengers!

[yr right]

Like I said. Rfs will not allow ANY Aireral aerial fire work to be carries out if any turbines are spinning in the course of putting out bush fires.
Need any thing more be said. Of course none of you have ever got caught out by weather have you.
Yep f$&@ you all they not in out in our back yards.

[50 50]

Aerial firefighting is conducted by day, VFR.

After a diligent search I couldn't find one example of a wind turbine buried deep in the bush. They are all on open land, perhaps a grass fire may erupt?

Given the amount of space squired you must have one f£ck off huge backyard yr right.

[gerry111]

yr right,


That's one of your more cryptic offerings. But I'll attempt to address it.


I'm a great supporter of renewable energy including wind, solar and wave. So I have no problems with wind farms. As Desert Flower mentioned, there are quite a few in the Mid North's of S.A. And those ones are very productive being on the top of hills facing West.


RFS / CFA / CFS probably know phone numbers to ring if they really are concerned about having a wind farm's propellers parked...


Caught out in bad wx? Only once! :eek:

[Oktas8]

Of course none of you have ever got caught out by weather have you.

Well, yes, I have been caught in bad weather. Did I not say that?

It's hardly unique. You don't exist VFR for more than a few thousand hours without being caught out by weather. Last light too, if you're as careless as me. (Which you all are, admit it now. :O )

It's what you do about it that sorts out the men from the boys from the cadavers.

People who scud run to solve the problem are soon late (http://montypython.50webs.com/scripts/Series_1/53.htm).

Give it a rest man.

[sms777]

I got cought out doing a scud run into Coober Pedy once due to unexpected weather. Followed the highway into town from the northwest at 500' I flew next to one of those propeller thingies I swear I could almost touch it with my wingtips. They are way too close to the airport.

[RatsoreA]

Yr right,

I am calling flat out bulls#£! On your claim about the RFS and wind farms. I called a mate of mine who works in aviation support branch on the NSW RFS, (thanks Pogo!) and asked him, and he says they are treated exactly the same as any tower or HT poweline of similar height.

You are a liar, black and white.

[kingRB]

Like I said. Rfs will not allow ANY Aireral aerial fire work to be carries out if any turbines are spinning in the course of putting out bush fires.
Need any thing more be said. Of course none of you have ever got caught out by weather have you.
Yep f$&@ you all they not in out in our back yards.

Apparently a fair bit more does need to be said, according to the info from RatsoreA. BTW thanks for "f$&@ you all" comment as well :ok:

Probably best do everyone a favour and just stop posting mate :ok:

[Obidiah]

yr right,

14 years of dedicated low level flying I reckon I have covered pretty much every itteration of low level bump, can't believe for a moment these things present significant downwind turbulence.

The RFS do many a strange thing often based on a CYA attitude, this follows those principals.

20,000 hours....meh, I've nearly got that many and I'm one of the dumbest people I've ever met.

[Hempy]

Humpty Dumpty at it again nothing to say about nothing useful.

Dude, honestly, give it a spell.

You come on here claiming that you know everything about everything, yet you can't put two words together in a legible sentence. And the words you do write (after being decoded by the boffins at Bletchley Park) are still garbage.

If you must know (and I know this is harsh, but it has to be said), anything you write is considered absolute rubbish by anyone with an IQ > 50, and quite frankly, you are a bit of a joke. It's like listening to a 12 year old trying to claim respect. You've shown nothing.

[Jack Ranga]

In order of dislike, highest to lowest:

Fracking: The most disgraceful & destructive of energy sources.
Coal: The filthiest & most archaic of energy sources.
Wind turbines: As ugly as coal mines, I really don't like them.........but they're clean I guess :cool:

In order of like, highest to lowest:

Avgas: I'm sorry, but it produces cool noise.
JetA1: Because burning it smells great & it produces cool noise. It would be number one except I can't afford anything that burns it.
Solar: Because it's awesome.
Nuclear: I'll put my money where my mouth is if it rids us of fracking & coal until solar is the real deal.

Sorry about the thread drift, but it was either that or abuse yr right :E

[Neville Nobody]

Still can't get rid of nuclear waste beside burying it for thousands of years, that is why we shouldn't use nuclear. Ask the Japs how safe it is.

[601]

Ask the Japs how safe it is.
You don't build any type of power station on a fault line or where they may be subject to inundation.

[Jack Ranga]

I would bury the ****........reeaaal deep.

I wouldn't built a nuclear plant on a fault line.

It would be temporary until solar is the real deal.

[Frank Arouet]

The only unlimited source of energy on the planet is stupidity. Shortly scientists will be able to convert stupidity to clean fuel. This discovery will eclipse the need to use any other form of power generation and is fully renewable. The government hasn't figured out a way to tax it yet and this is the biggest impediment to its implementation. Regulating stupidity hasn't worked, ask CAsA.

[500N]

Since someone commented

http://i58.tinypic.com/25ywwtf.jpg

http://i62.tinypic.com/2ilegco.jpg

[Jabawocky]

yr right,

Out of genuine interest and concern for your passion bout the topic,Or maybe you all live in the city and don't give a dam about anyone else cause it's not in your back yard.

I do live in a city, Brisbane to be precise but I do spend a lot of time in the country.

So with your experience, and clearly you do have a lot here, roughly where do you live and what is the effect you are subject to? I do not mean for you to be specific, as in street and town, but is it rural Qld, rural NSW, Rural WA? Just so I can understand the seriousness of the problem on a state by state basis.

I assume you are not in the USA where the accident occurred as you seem to know so much about CASA.

So please tell me more about these things and the negative effect on aviation. I understand the basics of the engineering of electricity supply but I have nothing to do with them at all and quite keen to learn more.

[Oktas8]

500N

Karman vortex street (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K%C3%A1rm%C3%A1n_vortex_street)

Fascinating things aren't they!

Edit: I can see a distinct transition from laminar to turbulent flow in the cloud downstream of each hub. Perhaps this means that this effect is not a Karman vortex? But it sure looks like it, to this amateur.

[500N]

Oktas

"Fascinating things aren't they!"

The vortex's, yes, very interesting.

The Wind Turbines, No, hate the things.

I'll find some other pictures related to those photos as some were
images of the airflow in colour graphs.

[Stikybeke]

Hey Yr Right,
After reading some of the information in your posts I've done some research into what court cases etc are out there in Australia regarding windfarms near airfields.

I was fascinated to learn that a body called the Airport and Aviation Protection Group exists which is appearing to take on this issue. This has been kept pretty quiet but if you google search that name you'll see that it was formed back in 2008 in response to a windfarm that was being built near the Crookwell airfield in NSW. Within this material is also reference to a policy statement about this they released and their subsequent interactions with the regulator.

Anyone can read this stuff as it's on the net but until tonight I'd never heard of this group. Are you involved with them as that would account for your knowledge as written, some of which is recorded in what I read.

I guess you must have something to do with the Crookwell area which would also account for your RFS stuff you've shared given the fires around there over the years. I don't remember seeing any windfarm around there but next time I'm overhead I'll be looking. Oh and yes, I've also fessed up for scud running in these posts but learnt my lesson. Thanks. Sticky

[plucka]

I regularly conduct Ag operations in amongst them while they are turning and I haven't experienced anything that I would describe as turbulence. The most dangerous part of any wind farm to a pilot is those wind monitoring towers that are always found nearby because they are so difficult to see. The NZ Ag. Association got all the ones in NZ made high vis under their OH&S laws, don't really understand the hold up in Australia for this to happen, considering the fatal accidents they have caused over seas.

On a personal note, the fact they require more 'dirty' energy to manufacture, than 'clean' energy that they will ever produce in their life, renders them kind of pointless to me.

[peterc005]

I think renewable energy is critical for the future and wind farms are a good idea.

If I owned acreage I'd love a wind farm for the income they produce.

[Frank Arouet]

Like I said in my last post. #77.

[Oktas8]

On a personal note, the fact they require more 'dirty' energy to manufacture, than 'clean' energy that they will ever produce in their life, renders them kind of pointless to me.

Yes, I've heard that too.
Apparently the same argument exists against electric cars, given the battery packs must be replaced every five to seven years.
Solar cells, ditto, due to the very dirty industrial processes required for their manufacture.

"Clean" energy might or might not exist.
"Zero-emission" energy certainly does not.

[rutan around]

On a personal note, the fact they require more 'dirty' energy to manufacture, than 'clean' energy that they will ever produce in their life, renders them kind of pointless to me.

How can a supposedly intelligent pilot spout such bullsh*t. If you're too lazy to research the so called facts at least use some common sense. How could the amount of energy produced over many years be less than that required to construct it. If you're referring to the mess made mining rare earth metals then thats a greed problem not an energy problem. ( Just the same as the mess left by coal miners )

While using common sense you should ask yourself where these anti clean energy stories are coming from.

Lazy repetition of untrue BS is how OWTs start and look what that has cost our industry over the years.

Only 30% efficient some earlier post lamented. So what. My aircraft engine is only 30% efficient too. It cost $50K and in it's lifetime will burn 5 times it's original cost in fuel. At least with wind turbines the meter is running the right way.

Enough for now. I'm sure the sun is over the yard arm. (and my solar panels---Kachung )

[onetrack]

IMO, the current styles of design of wind generators and electric car are merely initial, crude designs, that will improve out of sight with more research, improved technology and better materials.

For example, I fail to see how a big propellor is the most effective way of turning a generator. In the same way that jet engines are superior to propeller-turning IC engines, so there must be, and are, wind generator designs that are superior in efficiency, in manufacture, in lower noise levels, and in improved safety levels.

There are substantial numbers of alternative designs of wind generator already on the market and in prototype stage.

Do Alternative Designs for Wind Turbines Work? - Scientific American (http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/do-wind-turbine-alternative-designs-work/)

The problem is, that the manufacturers of the propellor-style wind generators have ensured that their design is currently prominent, because they have aggressively marketed them, ramped up production of them, built a large database of knowledge about them, and cornered the market - just like Henry Ford did with the Model T, and Sopwith did with the Pup.

No-one in their right mind would consider manufacturing and driving a Model T or manufacturing and flying a Sopwith Pup today - but they were right for their time.

We are better situated to make use of a variety of sources of free energy, rather than totally relying on the huge monopoly that is the oil and gas industry, to provide what is essentially, a single energy source. Besides, nothing would please me more than telling the Arabs to shove their oil. I have already reduced my home electricity bill to less than $150 a year with solar panels.

I don't believe anyone complained too much about grain-grinding or water-pumping windmills in the 17th and 18th century, did they? Or were the anti-windmill "activists" of that era, shouted down and run out of town? Perhaps it was because there were no aviators around, to grumble about windmills, back then? :E

[500N]

One Track

"We are better situated to make use of a variety of sources of free energy, rather than totally relying on the huge monopoly that is the oil and gas industry, to provide what is essentially, a single energy source. Besides, nothing would please me more than telling the Arabs to shove their oil. I have already reduced my home electricity bill to less than $150 a year with solar panels."


A single energy source is always dangerous but so is over reliance on wind and solar. Hence why some alternative - be it coal, oil, gas, hydro or nuclear is required for at least Peak demand if not normal demand.

"anti-windmill "activists"

It's quite OK for Greenies to protest against Hydro Electric dams on the basis it damages the land, even though it's clean, renewable energy but it's OK for them to change the rules to damage the land to install unsightly wind turbines on previously untouched ground and cause erosion of fragile ecosystems, not necessarily straight away but over time.

And all with Gov't subsidies of some sort at some point in the chain.

What makes them so special apart from being flavour of the month ?

[truthinbeer]

Agreed, much rather have a damn dam. Nice to look at too.

[Pinky the pilot]

Wind turbines? Hate the Gottverdammt things with a passion.:mad: A visual blight on the landscape and too expensive.

A friend has some property up the Flinders Ranges way and has been approached to have some on his property. Purely on principle he told them to shove it, despite knowing that he'd make quite a bit of money having them.

[500N]

Just to continue on my band wagon for a minute.

If I want to build a tall tower, be it a Building, Mobile phone tower or whatever in areas where they have built a fair few of these Wind Turbines,
no end of objections would be forth coming, especially on the grounds of being pristine bush and unsightly.

Yet they end up being able to build in places no one else could, cutting roads across delicate pristine ground (was thinking of the wind turbines near Ararat).

And that's before we even get onto the subject of Renewable Energy Certificates (bit fat subsidies) that last from day 1 for up to (in some cases) 30 years, paid for by guess who, us, the consumers. And they are mandatory, we don't get a choice.

Efficiency

Check out this web site, actual results, not skewed by whoever writes a report.

A good example are the two wind farms near Canberra
CAPTL_WF Capital Wind Farm
WOODLWN1 Woodlawn Wind Farm

They can theoretically produce 188MW of power, they don't even get close to that. Not only that, most of the time electricity is required, they are calm and or the graph goes up and down like a yo yo which doesn't help anyone.

Wind Energy in Australia | Aneroid (http://energy.anero.id.au/wind-energy)

This graph depicts performance of wind farms connected to the electricity grid in south-eastern Australia over a 24-hour period.

The default, capacity factor graph shows the output as a percentage of registered capacity.


On average wind farms in south-east Australia operate at a capacity factor of around 30-35%.


And just because it produces 30%, it doesn't mean that the 30% is actually produced at a time when people want it.


I'll now vacate this thread !

[Oktas8]

Some facts about cars, from what seems to be a reputable source (http://www.transportation.anl.gov/pdfs/TA/378.PDF), the Argonne National Laboratory in the US.

Comparing conventional, hybrid and hydrogen powered cars, there's no doubt that the conventional cars are worst by a wide margin in terms of total energy used in a lifetime of production + 160,000 statute miles + disposal per vehicle. (Battery pack replacement is accounted for where relevant.) This is especially true if the vehicle is mostly used in an urban environment.

However, there is no overall winner in terms of pollutants per kilometre (CO, NOx, SOx, PM10). At this point the excessively dirty technologies used in some industries are detracting from the benefits of clean energy. For example, if your household electricity is primarily derived from coal, charging the electric car at home is not as helpful as one would hope. Dirty rare earth mining in China is a major drag on battery pack "cleanness". (Buy Lynas. They are cleaner than Chinese production, and it contributes to my retirement. :ok: )

Still, early days. Probably not fair to compare tenth generation (?) internal combustion engines with second generation electric vehicles.

I think that's a fair summary of the information. Corrections welcomed.

[Oktas8]

They can theoretically produce 188MW of power, they don't even get close to that. Not only that, most of the time electricity is required, they are calm and or the graph goes up and down like a yo yo which doesn't help anyone.

That is the elephant in the room of wind power. You have to have base load power generators - coal, gas, geothermal, hydroelectric or our good friend newcular.

NZ actually do wind power fairly well, as a couple of major cities are adjacent to some very windy areas of low population density. I understand Denmark is in a similar position. NZ also do geothermal and hydroelectric base load production in a fairly big way.

But even in those two places, wind power requires subsidies and tariffs to be competitive. I can't see Australian wind power being competitive in the foreseeable future.

[onetrack]

But even in those two places, wind power requires subsidies and tariffs to be competitive. I can't see Australian wind power being competitive in the foreseeable future.I believe the subsidies were needed to get the wind farms up and running to prove up whether they will be effective for the long term.
You can't see them being competitive, because you can't see what research and knowledge gained from setting them up (in practical terms), will produce by way of new technology.

Anyone want to hazard a guess at how much subsidy money has gone into producing the set of wheels you drive?
Gubbmints hand out major subsidies to motor car manufacturers (and - gasp, yes - aircraft manufacturers as well), and a lot of that motor-car manufacturing (or aircraft manufacturing) handouts doesn't necessarily go into producing new, cutting edge designs, either! Seems like a lot of it ended up in senior executives and CEO's pockets! :rolleyes:

I seem to recall Australia has supplied about $2.5B in motor car subsidies over the decades since car manufacturers started whining about handouts - which was not long after WW2.
Subsidies took the form of free land for buildings, substantial tax concessions, ports and roads and infrastructure, installed specifically for the manufacturer - and so on and so on.

I'm sitting on the fence when it comes to wind generators. I neither dislike them, nor do I like them enormously. I do feel they're worth adding to the energy supply mix, just to create competitiveness in the market. Perhaps wave energy will take over from wind, it's pretty promising, and it supplies more continuous power. However, it only takes one breakthrough to sometimes provide a quantum leap in the status quo. Who saw LED's providing such a bonus in low energy requirements?

[truthinbeer]

As the investment in WT in Australia is primarily by foreign backed companies, not even the subsidy stays in the country. Same for CSG. In Qld much of the CSG is owned by Koreans, Chinese. They sell the gas overseas as the price is higher and the market can take the capacity. This means that profit (and taxes on sales) goes overseas with each boat load exported.

The downside for us, apart from ruining our water supplies and depleting the artesian basin and leaving millions of tonnes of salts by-product lying around that no one knows what to do with yet, is that we can no longer be charged a domestic rate for the gas as the government was not smart enough to hive-off a separate deal to guarantee domestic supply. From next year we will be paying the same international rate for our domestic gas as everyone else.

[Jack Ranga]

This discussion is getting waaaay out of control & getting too technical, how about we go back to putting **** on yr right?

[Hempy]

how about we go back to putting **** on yr right?

yr rihgt has gone all quiet.

I reckon he's either picking burnt clys off the floor or nutting out a brief with his attending Barrister. Gun team, they've already smashed CASA in court!

[Creampuff]

Tac got your tongue, Mr Sunhot? :E

[Andy_RR]

There's a very close correlation between GDP and energy consumption

There is a very close correlation between energy consumption and CO2 emissions

The government of most western countries, Australia included, accounts for 30%-70% of GDP

A substantial reduction of CO2 emissions could be achieved by eliminating or substantially reducing government and replacing it with wind turbines.

[Ultralights]

while not a fan of wind turbines, nothing like standing on the top of Mt Perisher, in awe of the inspiring vistas before me, until i see the huge wind far right in the middle of the best part of the view...

though they are great nav fixes.

i am more a fan of Solar, but not a fan of being forced to accept a far lower rate for the energy i produce, i feel we should be paid the wholesale rate that the large energy providers receive, but the last thing the big companies want is homeowners taking their profits. and can fortunately pay lobbyists to ensure it stays that way..

but the question im posing, what kind, if any,would such a development below have on Aviation?

http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/multimedia/dynamic/01685/bl15solar_jpg_1685511f.jpg

http://blogthinkbig.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/PIC_Neuhadernberg_0001-620x298.jpg

If solar energy was bought from providers at the wholesale rate as paid to large generators, then we would see far more of this, solar covered car parks...
http://media.utsandiego.com/img/photos/2014/04/04/Artists_rendering_of_San_Diego_airport_solar_project_r620x34 9.jpg?75d51d0aea2efce5189afce216053cbc530c46a8

or projects like this..
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/1b/PV_Soundless_Freising.jpg


then we would have little or no use for coal burners, Hydro and maybe small Nuke power plants for base load power.

as for nuke being very very bad? what happened to Hiroshima? and Nagasaki? are they nuclear wastelands dead for 1000's of years as predicted? doesn't get much worse than nuked in the military sense of the word... and i hear the French have great technology in Nuclear waste disposal, considering most of the country is powered by it.. :ok:

[Neville Nobody]

"and i hear the French have great technology in Nuclear waste disposal, considering most of the country is powered by it.. "
Spose it would be like when they were doing the nuclear testing, do it in somebody else's back yard. Is their waste disposal method to sink it in the Pacifc somewhere?

[yr right]

Yes I know a lot about crookwell. It was the first place in Australia to have a minor win against wind turbines in having some stoped. There is a hell of a lot more going on with what is happening down there. They all the way across to gunning and then lake George

These things are subsidised by the tax payer and anyone that uses power. Quick thought for all of you. How much concrete dose it take to hold up one of these things up.

Now Humpty Dumpty as usual nothing to say again. To answer your questions. Yes I have been made an expert witness by the Australian court system. Also if you haven't notice I only speak on a few topics on this site. And unlike your self which I'm guess Arnt even in the aviation industry.

You won't put **** on me go a head I really don't care.

Next is the biggest myth of all green house gasses. What a joke. C02 is not a green house gas for a start. They say Aussie are the biggest users. Why is this. This is fact. They place all we export onto us. That means all that is sent to China India Japan they burn it we wear the cost. Didn't know that did you. Next is base line power as these things come on line the power producers have to buy it so they slow down there generators. This then makes them inificent producing more c02 than at full power.

Get hold of this book.

Trashing the planet.

Read and weep at the lies told buy the greens. This book is a must read for those that Arnt sheep as she one by one exposes the green lies.

[CAR42ZE]

http://blogthinkbig.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/PIC_Neuhadernberg_0001-620x298.jpg


You would not want to be on short finals with the sun in the wrong position there. It'd burn your retinas out!


Quick thought for all of you. How much concrete dose it take to hold up one of these things up.


I reckon a metric f#ckton of concrete to keep those bad boys pointing towards the heavens. Is that nearly right?

[Avgas172]

Sigh .....

[yr right]

I was told upwards of 500 tons per tower give or take. They decide the community to those that have and those that don't. At the end of the day they don't give a stuff about the community at all.

[HarleyD]

Yr right

You really must change your name to:

I am completely wrong and make up random BS that I present as well informed facts.

Still you are very entertaining in a troll like manner

Keep up the shoddily researched and unsupported comments, it's good for a laugh. Makes some of us feel mildly intelligent.

HD

[Avgas172]

Wind farms construction · Foundations (http://www.windfarmbop.com/category/foundations/)

Double Sigh .....

[Andy_RR]

HD, yr right is just suffering the symptoms of infrasound and chemtrail exposure.

[500N]

yr right

I know we might be on the same side but can you send me a link to this.

"They place all we export onto us. That means all that is sent to China India Japan they burn it we wear the cost."



Solar around airports ?
If it stopped under utilized airports being sold off for development like in the UK, why not ?

[gerry111]

"Yes I have been made an expert witness by the Australian court system."

Hopefully yr right will never appear before any inquest into a GA prang where the pilot was "suspected" of operating 'lean of peak'. :ouch:

[gerry111]

Sadly though, wind farms haven't been built in Australia for advantageous environmental reasons at all. They are from big business for bigger profits.


Have you ever wondered when driving past one on a windy 25 degree C day that many or all the props are parked? Why would that be? They are U/S?


I think because of the ridiculous "competitive" electricity market on the East coast of Australia. Wind power waits until base load (coal and gas fired) peaks and the spot price skyrockets and then they come on line. :ugh:

[onetrack]

The Collgar Windfarm doesn't have any of the problems associated with East Coast power generation - but you can probably sheet a lot of Australias power generations problems right into politicians laps.
They're the ones who played around with electricity power prices, power station ownership, and a dozen other related issues, that have led to distortions in the power generation business on both the East Coast and the West Coast.
None of them had any foresight to see what renewable energy in the form of home solar installations would do to coal-fired power stations profitability - let alone the pressure to close inefficient coal-fired power stations.

In W.A., the Liberal Barnett Govt has blown no less than $250 MILLION of taxpayers money on trying to restore a power station with rusty boilers - and it will never make any money, even after its finished. That's what happens when you let politicians make financial decisions. They can't even figure out when corrosion has damaged a coal fired power station beyond repair - and spend multiple tens of millions before they realise they should have done some more homework, first.

Botched coal-fired Power Station refurbishment expected to lead to $250M loss for taxpayers (https://au.news.yahoo.com/thewest/a/17667387/botched-power-station-fix-to-cost-taxpayers-250m)

WA government says no to new renewable energy : Renew Economy (http://reneweconomy.com.au/2013/wa-government-says-no-to-new-renewable-energy-82648)

Collgar Windfarm was constructed on a fixed-price, turn-key basis with Vestas, and is currently fully operational. It was completed ahead of schedule.
It provides regular power output, is not "idled" at any time, and is operated and maintained on contract by Vestas. Vestas has an initial 10 yr O&M contract, with two possible extensions. The turbines life is expected to be 25 years, and all calculations have been done on that basis.

This is an overview presented after 100 turbine had been installed, and around 5 mths before completion of the project -

http://sen.asn.au/images/pages/presentations/CraibSlidesJune13.pdf

Fast facts about Collgar;

Operating at 50% efficiency
111 turbine towers
40,000 cu. m. of concrete
4000 tonnes of reinforcing
270,000 cu. m. of soil excavation
74 kms of roads.

Each tower base contains approximately 360 cu. m. of concrete = approx. 900 tonnes.

Collgar windfarm - Mobile Concreting Solutions (http://www.mobileconcrete.com.au/our-successes/collgar-windfarm/)

This was a $750M project, and a lot of W.A. companies and employees made a lot of money from it. Everyone from truckies, to concreters, to earthmovers, to electricians, to farmers, to general labourers, benefitted.
The project has unwavering full community support and the generation of an average 792,000MWh of power per year is providing around 4% of Western Australias electricity requirements.
One of the interesting features of windpower in the interior of Australia (which goes against the regular argument that "the wind never blows when you want it to"), is that the wind picks up regularly on sunrise due to the suns heating effect on the land, thus providing early morning power when needed.

[500N]

One Track

WA has unique weather and land so your wind farm might actually do OK
and be able to provide power as part of the base load.

As for coal fired power stations, while we have a huge hole in the ground full of Brown coal,
right next to the Power station, it isn't going to go anywhere fast.

[Jack Ranga]

To answer your questions. Yes I have been made an expert witness by the Australian court system.

Do you take your apprentice with you? Does the taxpayer pay only your costs or are we getting slugged for your apprentice costs as well?

[yr right]

Yes jack but you weren't available so I had to go by myself. The mounts quoted for the crookwell turbines. These are the extreme large ones that are being used. Don't believe me about out co2 emissions that's fine. I'll use the greens tactics here say **** you prove me wrong. We a large country with a small population. I just drove across the country again 5000km yet had less than 10 sets of traffic lights and would had pass through less than 200000 people more like maybe 100000. Where else in the world could you do that.
Get the app called planets.
Watch the earth rotate and look at the lights in the dark spots then look at here.

The turbines in WA or SA. Do they have lights in the tops of the shafts.

[50 50]

I just drove 5000km across the country AGAIN, instead of hopping on RPT that was going anyway, yet complain about carbon emissions. Explain?

[yr right]

Bit hard to put the car tool box etc etc on the plane. I'm not complaining at all about carbon emissions. It's a bit of a con. It's just another way to slug you extra dollars. I would have thought in this country the waste that is been spent on this crap would have been placed better into hospitals and roads but oh no. As the red headed bitch said we won't be able to breath if we don't reduce the c02 wtf.

[Ultralights]

for a 5000km journey, im sure air freight on a heavy toolbox would have been cheaper than the fuel costs, food and accomadation for driving the same distance..

not to mention, you would have seen the vast emptiness that would make nuclear generation a viable alternative...satifies the Not in my back yard crowd, or the vast spaces for solar farms

[Jack Ranga]

Sorry yr right, you wouldn't want to take me to court, I'm like the greens, talk a lot of **** & an expert at nothing :ok:

[500N]

yr right

Don't believe me about out co2 emissions that's fine.

It's not that I don't believe you, it's I have never heard of it before AND I can't fid any reference to it on the net and I am normally pretty good at searching.

Have also never read anything in the business media.

[Flying Binghi]

via onetrack:
...the wind picks up regularly on sunrise due to the suns heating effect on the land, thus providing early morning power when needed...

"regularly" ... apart from those days it dont.. :hmm:

Wind 'power' would have to be one of the most idiotic things of recent history.

Here's a link to the current production of most of Australia's wind 'power'
Wind Energy in Australia | Aneroid (http://energy.anero.id.au/wind-energy)

... due to a shortage of wind the 'power' output is about 10% of the maximum potential rated output at this time.. :hmm:










.

[yr right]

You probably won't find it. It's been hushed up for such a long time. It's not widely known and they don't won't you to know the truth. Bit like global warm. Proved it was so then they changed the name. Funny how many places in Australia have had the coldest days since records began this year

[Lantern10]

A few numbers relating to Wattle Point wind farm at Edithburg SA.

55 x 1.65 mW turbines
each turbine powers approx 945 houses
Each Nacelle weighs in at 51 Tons
The foundations each contain 210 cu/m of 504 Tons of concrete
Each foundation contains 20 Tons of reinforcing
The farm produces 2% of SA's electricity
The farm cost $165M to build
Design life of 25 years
So $127 per house/per year
Tip speed of blade is 222Klm/h

This info came from a pic I took of the data plate, so sorry no link.

Personally I thought they looked fantastic.:ok:

[500N]

each turbine powers approx 945 houses

But only when the wind is blowing ;)

[yr right]

What 500 tons of concrete say it Arnt so

[Flying Binghi]

via Lantern10:
A few numbers relating to Wattle Point wind farm at Edithburg SA.

55 x 1.65 mW turbines
each turbine powers approx 945 houses
Each Nacelle weighs in at 51 Tons
The foundations each contain 210 cu/m of 504 Tons of concrete
Each foundation contains 20 Tons of reinforcing
The farm produces 2% of SA's electricity
The farm cost $165M to build
Design life of 25 years
So $127 per house/per year
Tip speed of blade is 222Klm/h

This info...



Arnt you fer getting something Lantern10 ?

A coal fired power station dont need any other power source to back it up so if yer were to 'cost' it, thats all.

On the other hand, solar or wind power needs a coal fired, or equivalent, back up running at all times, and not very efficiently as a back up, to ensure we actualy have power when we need it. There is allso the the cost of the extra power lines to factor in.

So tell us Lantern10, are these extra 'costs' factored into that $127 per house..:hmm:










.

[500N]

You probably won't find it. It's been hushed up for such a long time. It's not widely known and they don't won't you to know the truth. Bit like global warm. Proved it was so then they changed the name. Funny how many places in Australia have had the coldest days since records began this year



Yr Right

I don't do this often but I am going to say BS to your post unless you show a link to back up your argument.

They say Aussie are the biggest users. Why is this. This is fact. They place all we export onto us. That means all that is sent to China India Japan they burn it we wear the cost. Didn't know that did you.


IF they place all the export onto us, then that means the companies that export would have to buy credits or off sets and highly likely make one hell of a lot of them uneconomical propositions.

Which means that all the Annual reports for Woodside et al would be full of it, as would the business pages, as would the Gov't web sites.

I'll await your proof and if you provide it, I am happy to say I was wrong.

BTW1 - I am no friend of the Greens and the BS they sprout and would prefer to use them as fertilizer if we could.

BTW2 - I still don't get why you drove across Aus because of a tool box ?????? :O

[Lantern10]

Wasn't trying to make points for or against. Just wanted to give you SOME of the numbers involved.


But only when the wind is blowing

Of course only when the wind is blowing!

What 500 tons of concrete say it Arnt so

Well that's what it said on the box it came in.

[Hempy]

- I still don't get why you drove across Aus because of a tool box ?????? :O

I told him there was a rumour Qantas were running LOP :)

[500N]

Lantern

The reason Yr Right said about the 500 tons is because he said in post #106 that the foundations used "500 tons, give or take".


All these wind farms state such huge figures, be it houses powered, MW generated but very rarely if at all do they ever produce that amount.

Just look at the Graphs on the link provided by me on the previous page and again by someone else above. NONE of the wind farms generate much power and the average over all of them is pathetic.

[criticalmass]

Has anyone seen any sort of "exit-strategy" for wind-farms when they reach the end of their service-life?

The companies which erected them will have long since ceased to exist, and the energy-provider who harvests the output will most likely have a clause written into the contract absolving them from the expense and inconvenience of dismantling them and recycling whatever is recyclable (quite a bit of copper in the windings and armatures, for a start).

I'd be interested to now if anyone is thinking that far ahead. A nascent industry, perhaps?

[yr right]

Why did I drive. Cause it was to far to walk. Wtf.

[500N]

Don't forget the rehabilitation if the ground to ensure no future erosion.
All the ground a round wind farms has been severely damaged already.

[yr right]

Yes that's been look at as well when and if that see the life to the end of the service life. Good chance they won't make it though the oil in these units they have a lot of trouble with. That's why they catch fire.
Has anyone seen any lights on them yet ?

[yr right]

How do you remove 500 ton of concrete. Maybe Avgas you can tell us

[500N]

Yr right.

Re lights, the ones you pass coming out of sydney near the hills, canberra area have lights on them.


500 tons of concrete ? - blow it up to fracture it:O

[yr right]

We'll believe this or not. If you won't to find it it's in the court documents. The mast at crookwell Arnt lighted due to the cost of looking after them. In direct contravention of the casa reqs. That's fact.
In regards to c02 emissions due you really expect to be told the truth about that by the government.
Now look at the worlds population. Now look at us. We are nothing. If we stop tomorrow we won't make a spec of difference.

Now I'm not saying we should just waste but I'm
Sure as f$&@ not happy about the waste to support something that don't work toke a few people look good. Like I've said before fix our hospitals and roads. If these things can't support them selfs why have them. If they work great but they don't. They divide the community's they enter. Let's see them down the coast from Sydney to the Wollongong. All in the national park as we'll.

Let's share the pain.

[500N]

Yr right

Re "The mast at crookwell Arnt lighted due to the cost of looking after them."

My bad, you are correct. The radio mast that is right next to he turbines and stands much higher than them by quite a bit is lit up with two white lights.


Bugger lets share the pain, stick them al in the greenies back yard.
They want green power, let them suffer.

[Ultralights]

Has anyone seen any sort of "exit-strategy" for wind-farms when they reach the end of their service-life?

there was a wind turbine setup near Thredbo in the alps, designed to power the nearby eco resort, during a big storm 3 years ago, the wind turbine was destroyed.....

and is still lying in the paddock in a tangled rusty mess today...

[500N]

The greenies won't clean it up, they are the messiest people in the bush.
All protest sights are a mess when they leave.

[Captain Sand Dune]

Time to cut the oxygen, methinks.

[Avgas172]

► 2:06► 2:06
www.youtube.com/watch?v=xqZ0wAqypn8
Oct 16, 2013 - Uploaded by Kevin Nixon
More details:http://crusher.quartz-crusher.com/con... Get the price of machines: http://crusher ...http://crusher.quartz-crusher.com/contact/index.htmlyr wrong


How do you remove 500 ton of concrete. Maybe Avgas you can tell us

Yr don't, why get rid of rocks in the ground ... duh!

[500N]

That is pollution.

Mining companies are not allowed to do it, why should th greenies ?

[Up-into-the-air]

For 500N's benefit, there is data now coming to light that supports yr-right's argument.

Published wery recently at: http://jennifermarohasy.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/Changing_Temperature_Data.pdf

Jennifer at last has published on a range of issues, which most people are called 'skeptics'. I like to think that it is a proper look at data and that an alternate view can be substantiated.

Sorry to come in late guys, but only just got up to speed on this subject in past couple of weeks.

There is a lot of reading in the background and some good documentary evidence:
Wind Farm Aviation Policy (http://www.arising.com.au/aviation/windfarmpolicy/index.html)
Wind turbines ? Related Information | Assistance to the Aviation Industry (http://vocasupport.com/wind-turbines-related-information/)

and:

Wind Turbines | Assistance to the Aviation Industry (http://vocasupport.com/sample-page/wind-turbines/)

[Avgas172]

Wind turbines do not exceed 500ft AGL, pilots do not fly below 500 ft AGL in our fossil fuel powered machines, unless they are of the highly skilled and obstacle aware Ag variety. Any pilot whom gets in the way of said Turbines should therefore have :
A: Landed at the previous airstrip
B: conducted a precautionary landing prior to running into turbines
C: stayed at the pub regaling all the patrons of his flying prowess

just saying .....

[peterc005]

Jennifer Marohasy is just another of those right-wing climate sceptic nutters.

She peddles a mixture of ignorance and misinformation to the dimwitted.

The future is renewable energy. Wind farms make sense to me.

[yr right]

Of course typical left wing greenie. Anyone with anything against your dripple is a nutter. Sorry sir the world is waking up to fools like your self. They don't work and take money away from projects that should receive it.

[Aussie Bob]

Pete, I believe you show the symptoms of cognitive dissonance ...

[yr right]

If your so so worries about climate change there is only one option. That's nuclear the quicker we do that the better.
So can anyone tell me why the snowy scheme had to pay the carbon tax when it's energy is the purest cleanest way to produce power and has the added benefit of supplying water to produce food via irrigation and water for all things. Why is the green moment so opposed to dams as we'll

Green on the outside red in the centre.

[onetrack]

yr right:The turbines in WA or SA. Do they have lights in the tops of the shafts.Every wind turbine I've seen, has a red light (or sometimes two) - otherwise known as hazard beacons - as required, per CASA regulations "Aerodrome Lighting, Chapter 12, Section 2 - Obstacle Lighting". ;)

https://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CCcQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.casa.gov.au%2Faerodromes%2Frpa%2Fchap12 .pdf&ei=OeYGVJr9FMyeugT_xoDIBg&usg=AFQjCNHpfBmUBKgyAmlBlJUJKrGp4HPn-g&sig2=BJQNOaOUzPR0nHK2dE7tIw&bvm=bv.74115972,d.c2E

Binghi - Your link to windfarm efficiency is a classic of cherry-picking out the parts that appeal to the argument. According to your map in your link, W.A. does not exist, and has no windfarms.
I'm not surprised - in my experience, most Eastern Staters have always considered that nothing exists West of the Nullarbor Plain - because NSW, VIC., and QLD., are the centre of the universe, around which Australia revolves. :)

You might want to advise the windfarm map website that W.A. is actually a real State, populated by 2.5M people, not just 2.5M 'roos - and we happen to have a total of 7 fully functioning windfarms, with more than 450MW capacity, that achieve a lot more than 30% efficiency (actually, there are 12 windfarms, counting all the smaller ones).

List of wind farms in Western Australia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wind_farms_in_Western_Australia)

A comprehensive overview of W.A. windfarms - http://ramblingsdc.net/Australia/WindWA.html

[onetrack]

yr right - Sorry, I'm still stuck on the puzzling question as to why 500 (or 900) tonnes of concrete in a wind turbine base, is a major disaster/hazard/problem?
Ever had a little think about the total tonnage of concrete that is poured into buildings, bridges, or foundations for a hundred other structures? - every day of the week?? :rolleyes:
Your average multi-storey carpark contains anywhere between 50,000 and 150,000 tonnes of concrete! Ever seen a carpark demolition job? You ought to watch a few more YooToob vids! :)

[yr right]

One track I think you missed the point. It's just one of the things that are pushed under the bed
The turbines at crookwell DONT have lights on them. Casa on your side I think not

[yr right]

Did you know that they had that amount of concrete in them. Others here didn't In fact they said I was full of **** however others here have said the same funny that. Your have two ears one mouth some people should learn why that is

[Ultralights]

so when one turbine falls over, catches fire, or sheds a blade or 3, who cleans up the mess? from the dead turbines i have seen, its not the constructor, or the electricity company.. its the property owner... or no one.

[truthinbeer]

I heard an interview today with the local member down Canberrra way. Said there were plans for 1400...that's right 1400 wind turbines in his electorate in the area Canberra/Yass/Collector. So many on the outskirts of Collector (300?) that property values had plummeted and retiree's lost thee retirement investment.

[onetrack]

Others here didn't In fact they said I was full of ****

Well, with comments such as the following, I can understand that point of view. :)

Even on still days they take current from the grid to turn the blades so they don't break

Why would a wind turbine take current from the grid, to continue their rotation?
What is going to break on a wind turbine when it stops turning on a windless day?? :rolleyes:
Does this mean that you can't stop any prop-powered aircraft engine in case something breaks, when it's stopped?? :)

FYI - I've just spent a restful 3 days on Rottnest Island. Rottnest has a wind turbine (real close to an airstrip, too! ;) ).
That turbine provides quite a substantial amount of additional power (37%) for the people of Rottnest. Never heard anyone raise even the slightest complaint about it. It's less than a km from a lot of the housing there, too (350M, in fact).

What was even more surprising is that, yesterday - unusually for Rottnest (where the wind blows strongly almost every day) - the wind stopped completely, it was dead calm.
The Rottnest wind turbine actually stopped turning for half an hour - and the blades never fell off it!! ;)

I saw this with my own eyes!! - and I'll swear that fact on a stack of Bibles, yer honour! :D ;)

[500N]

Up-into-the-air

Thanks for the post. The only bit of Yr rights discussion I was questioning
was the bit where he said greenhouse gasses from burnt fossil fuels that Australia exports are slated to Australia's total, not China, India or Japan's total.


OneTrack
"puzzling question as to why 500 (or 900) tonnes of concrete in a wind turbine base, is a major disaster/hazard/problem ?"

Concrete doesn't last forever and gradually breaks down and leaches into the earth.

And why shouldn't they clean it up and remove it ?

[onetrack]

500N - Concrete is basically inert and doesn't break down for hundreds of years at the minimum. What happens to concrete when it fails, is the reinforcing bar corrodes, the growth of the corrosion produces expansion stresses, and the concrete fractures.
It needs moisture ingress for this to happen, and properly constructed concrete structures are designed to stop moisture ingress into the reinforcing bar.

There are still tens of thousands of abandoned concrete structures, such as WW2 fortifications, that pose no threat to anyone. Concrete is 100% recyclable and the reinforcing bar can be recovered and smelted into new rebar.

End of life recycling (http://www.concretecentre.com/sustainability/end_of_life_recycling.aspx)

I agree that the windfarms should have environmental bonds posted, to cover cleanup costs when they are finally abandoned.
Currently, EPA approvals for windfarms outline cleanup guidelines, and the lease agreements with landowners normally outline precise cleanup procedures upon the termination of the project.
However, it's not like there's massive costs involved, nor are there any contentious/dangerous materials involved in abandoned windfarm residues.

We have an abandoned windfarm here in W.A. (Salmon Beach windfarm), it was built in 1987 and the turbines reached their designed lifespan after 13 yrs, and they were replaced by superior designs in another position.
Urban encroachment was another reason for the closure of the Salmon Beach windfarm.

The Salmon Beach windfarm was a total success at the end of the 13 yrs, despite the fact it used early-design, W.A.-made wind turbines.
The abandoned windfarm site was cleaned up according to the requirements of the Clean Energy Council, and no-one has complained about the site, or any potential residual health hazards emanating from it - because there are none. The old windfarm site is now actually a tourist trail.

Abandoned windfarms, cleaned up to the regulatory standards, pose no threat to anyone - unlike the 40% of Australian homes and buildings that still contain sizeable amounts of asbestos.
If you need something to worry about, worry about that asbestos - not harmless concrete foundations of abandoned windfarms - which can be 100% recycled with ease, anytime it is so desired.

Fact sheet - Decommissioning Wind Turbines (https://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=4&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CDoQFjAD&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.cleanenergycouncil.org.au%2Fdam%2Fcec% 2Ftechnologies%2Fwind%2Ffact-sheets%2FWind-Energy-Fact-Sheet-4-Decommissioning-Wind-Turbines.pdf&ei=vxsHVJq-I8KgugSy9YLwAw&usg=AFQjCNGbFCA9GFo_UpNNhXvaWRzZQkJwQw&sig2=Fz9Vj1SuW87pYWzKIkzLjA&bvm=bv.74115972,d.c2E)

[yr right]

One track. Do you understand any thing about stresses' on the blades. Do you have any engineering knowledge. Then you can explain to me why on a perfectly still day the blades are turning. May be it's Magic or my eyes need testing. Or maybe they take power form the grid and turn the blade to relieve the stresses in the blades.

[Aussie Bob]

Yr right, you must know different wind farms than me. On still days I see lots of stationary blades on major windfarms. Nothing turning them at all, stopped completely. They also stop them on windy days for maintenance.

[500N]

Yr right.

I'll go with Bob on this one, the blades don't always turn.

[fujii]

A diversion. My pet hate in this whole debate is the term "renewable energy." There is no such thing. All energy in the universe was created 14.8 billion years ago (approximately).

[rutan around]

Then you can explain to me why on a perfectly still day the blades are turning.

Probably because at 300 or 400 ft it's not perfectly still. Anyone who's done much flying knows that ground conditions often are not much of an indication of what's going on aloft.:=

[Flying Binghi]

Most of the time when i fly over any wind generators they seem to be stationary. As far as i'm aware the generators that need to take power from the grid are heating the blades and gearboxes in the colder places.

...Anyway, since yesterday the combined 'power' output of all of south eastern Australia's wind generators has not exceeded 15% of potential capacity at any time. What an idiotic power system..:hmm:

Wind Energy in Australia | Aneroid (http://energy.anero.id.au/wind-energy)











.

[rutan around]

My pet hate in this whole debate is the term "renewable energy." There is no such thing.

Fujii I beg to differ. If you take say coal or gas or uranium as examples they are not renewable in the sense that after they are used they are finished having provided us with energy and and a nasty bag of pollutants.

Wind, hydro,wave and solar provide us with energy and no pollution. They don't change form and are still there to be recharged with energy from the sun which we can harvest add infinitum.

[500N]

Flying Binghi

Aahh, but you are not factoring in the "feel good factor" of people "thinking" they are buying "Green power" - and paying through the nose for it !

A bit like the $100,000 a year Greenies, they earn $100,000, send of a $100 membership to Greenpeace every year to get the "feel good factor" and call themselves Greenies :rolleyes:

[500N]

Wind, hydro,wave and solar provide us with energy and no pollution.

No pollution while making the energy but by god they are dirty to make the equipment required to generate the electricity, especially solar panels !


Uranium - dirty when it comes out, dirty when it gets put back into the ground. The ground can't be used for anything else if uranium is in the ground anyway so why not dig it up and use it ? No emissions when generating electricity.

[parabellum]

According to my B-I-L, a scientist, wind farms are a total waste of money, maintenance costs far out way the amount of electricity they produce and they never recover their capital outlay. They also take a terrible toll on migrating birds, but the Greens won't talk about that!

[yr right]

If you get the book I have mentioned before and read it.
Nuke power and what it gives and what it leaves it's the only way to go if that is of course your serious about c02. Plus the yanks don't but France dose recycle spent fuel rods so they can be re used. When you consider that a USA nuke carrier runs for 25 years and has only just I've 3 handfuls or fuel what more can you say

[rutan around]

but by god they are dirty to make the equipment required to generate the electricity, especially solar panels !

No worse than making a coal powered station. The difference is the pollution continues for the whole life of the power station.

[500N]

Yes, but you were saying the 4 methods have no pollution.

We know Coal, Gas and Oil power stations produce CO2 and other chemicals, and waste.


Re Uranium, plenty of places to bury it, especially since any facility will need to be built anyway to get rid of nuclear waste from missile warhead production and other things. Why not bury it in Nevada, after all the place is contaminated already !

[fujii]

It is basic physics.
The 1st Law of Thermodyamics simply states that energy can be neither created nor destroyed (conservation of energy). Thus power generation processes and energy sources actually involve conversion of energy from one form to another, rather than creation of energy from nothing.

[truthinbeer]

...They also take a terrible toll on migrating birds, but the Greens won't talk about that!

Eagles too! In US the effect of WT on precarious eagle populations has become an issue.
Should Wind Turbines Be Allowed To Kill Eagles? Debate Ratchets Up With Bird Group Lawsuit (http://www.ibtimes.com/should-wind-turbines-be-allowed-kill-eagles-debate-ratchets-bird-group-lawsuit-1607240)
Bird Enthusiasts Sue Feds For Wind Turbines Killing Eagles | The Daily Caller (http://dailycaller.com/2014/05/01/bird-enthusiasts-to-sue-feds-for-allowing-wind-turbines-to-kill-eagles-for-30-years/)

Denmark, Spain and Sth Africa have expressed concerns for rare bird populations that have been decimated by WT farms and see their impending extinction as inevitable.

[yr right]

1400 more of them in the snowy yer that's just great. I guess the tax payer will subadise them as we'll sievert funds from roads and hospital etc. the the power provider has to by law buy there power weather they won't to or not at a higher rate that's the passed onto the consumer. If they so good and so efficient why do the need to be subsidized and why can't they produce power at a lower cost. It has nothin to do with c02 emissions more to do with greed cause we can You and I pay for it in the end

[Up-into-the-air]

My understanding has always been that Australia has taken "CO2" in coal production by us in calculating total C production as a "world production" basis. A bit hard to find the actual reference, as the greenies have been hiding this material and it is likely the real "ramp up" of totals.

The only reference I have found is: (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contribution_to_global_warming_by_Australia)

Cumulative historical contribution

The World Resources Institute (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Resources_Institute) estimates that Australia was responsible for 1.1% of all CO2 emissions between 1850 and 2002.[2] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contribution_to_global_warming_by_Australia#cite_note-2) Australia has a correspondingly tiny share of the global population, roughly a third of a percent as of 2013.

Projected contribution

According to the no-mitigation scenario in the Garnaut Climate Change Review (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garnaut_Climate_Change_Review), Australia's share of world emissions, at 1.5% in 2005, declines to 1.1% by 2030, and to 1% by 2100.[3] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contribution_to_global_warming_by_Australia#cite_note-3)

Confounding factors

The import (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Import) and export (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Export) of goods confounds equitable measurements of emissions, particularly in the context of endeavouring to reach a global agreement on emissions reduction based on contraction and convergence (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contraction_and_convergence). Australian emissions are monitored on a production (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Production_%28economics%29) rather than a consumption (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Consumption_%28economics%29) basis. This means that the emissions from the manufacture of goods imported into and consumed within Australia, for example many motor vehicles, are allocated to the country of manufacture. Similarly, Australia produces aluminium (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aluminium) for export which requires substantial amounts of electricity (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electricity) which is produced by greenhouse gas (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greenhouse_gas) emitting coal-fired power stations (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coal-fired_power_station). While the aluminium is mainly consumed overseas, the emissions of its production are allocated to Australia. Geoff Carmody argues we need a consumption based emissions trading scheme (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emissions_trading_scheme).[4] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contribution_to_global_warming_by_Australia#cite_note-4)

Indirect contribution

Australia is a major exporter of coal (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coal), particularly from Newcastle, Australia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newcastle,_Australia).[5] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contribution_to_global_warming_by_Australia#cite_note-5) The coal is produced from coal mining in Australia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coal_mining_in_Australia). The greenhouse gas emissions in other countries from the proposed increase in coal export capacity of the major Australian ports will greatly outweigh the proposed reductions in Australia's emissions from the introduction of the Carbon Pollution Reduction Scheme (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_Pollution_Reduction_Scheme). While Australia imposes safeguards on the export of uranium (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uranium), it does not impose any requirements for carbon capture and storage (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carbon_capture_and_storage) of greenhouse gas emissions of exported coal. Australia thus contributes substantially more to the global warming (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_warming) which, according to the Garnaut Climate Change Review (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garnaut_Climate_Change_Review) will lead to the destruction of the Great Barrier Reef (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Barrier_Reef), Kakadu (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kakadu_National_Park) and the Murray Darling Basin (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murray_Darling_Basin) as they have existed during recorded history to date.
Australia is also a major exporter of liquefied natural gas (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liquefied_natural_gas), another fossil fuel (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fossil_fuel).[6] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contribution_to_global_warming_by_Australia#cite_note-6)


However, this is an aviation forum and I believe the issues are:



Has casa properly protected us from the wind turbines?;
Do the wind turbines affect aviation?;
What is the proper distance from an airport;
What protection is being made for the future?;
Is casa being consulted by approving organisations for proper effects on aviation?;
Are the proposers using proper and correct information from aviation savvy people?;
Has CAAct 9A been breached by casa in respect of approvals of wind turbine farms??
How does the movement [without approval] by 385metres in the Crookwell area, affect the actual approval and aviation? and
Was this confirmed [post final approval] OR
Does the constructing company and the approving organisation breach CAAct 9A?

Only thinking.

[tecman]

Onetrack, your assessment is spot on. I'm sitting on Rottnest right now, watching the turbine, aircraft, people, animals and birds happily co-existing. While I realize that a PhD in electrical engineering is a poor substitute for reading nutter websites, I'll nevertheless comment that the main reason for motoring some types of wind turbines is to reduce the start-up torque in light wind conditions.

In fact, motoring is common with other generation technologies, too. In a hydro system for example, it's quite common to run one or more machines as a synchronous capacitor to allow power factor correction and efficiency gains. A machine can also drive a pump, allowing water storage to be supplemented during time of excess energy availability.

If you want to look for concerns about wind turbines near major airports, consider the possible effects on radar systems due multiple, complex reflections from the structures and any metal blade components. The adaptive signal processing schemes to overcome such effects came from 'blue sky' research in radio astronomy and allied fields, and are now in routine use in new radar systems in the UK and elsewhere.

[Jack Ranga]

Is this an aviation forum?