Will Electric Vehicles Be Viable? When?

[J.A.W.]

"A mechanical supercharger geared at 6.374:1 ratio to engine speed provided forced induction, while the propeller was geared at 0.375:1 so that the tips did not reach inefficient supersonic speeds."

Ta for the B-36 data, Greg, hear below the ominous prop-throb of the brutish beast in action:

[Andres125sx]

Well presented post there J-A-F, & that pic of the 'lead sled' B-36 in flight, blasting
out massive visible 'cork-screw' vortices from its huge pusher-props gives a clue as
to why birds have flight problems in the vicinity of electric wind-turbine complexes.

You know a plane prop is spun by an engine at extremelly high rpm while a wind turbine blade is moved by the wind at extremelly low rpm, right?

No, seems you've been playing with toy flight models too long Andres, real big power propellers are geared to suit the actual requirements of sonic-flow in air, for reasons of efficiency, & so the 5.8m diameter 'air screws'
spun by the six massive 71 litre 28-cylinder P & W's pushing on the B-36 were def' geared well down
from engine rpm, yet produced notable dynamic pulses in the infra-sound range, as they strove to
keep their blade tips in synch, avoiding sub-sonic drag-rise regimes..

The huge blade disc zones of large wind-driven electric units like-wise are constrained, & indeed,
must be shut down when ambient air-speed exceeds their capacity for rpm/pitch accommodation.

Yeah I played with toy flight models a lot when I was a child, but that does not change the fact you´re comparing an engine prop spun at sub-sonic speed, with a slow moving wind turbine blade wich spins so much slower you can even watch the blade tip, even if it´s at its maximum speed

Try that with the 5.8m prop spun by that 28 cylinder P&W´s, at idle if you will That should give you a clue about how different are turbulence generated by both so you can stop doing stupid claims to bash wind turbines and renewable energy as you try to do tirelessly.

Comparing turbulence generated by both is like comparing downforce generated by an F1 with that generated by any production sportcar

[J.A.W.]

"Stupid claims", Andres? Who has been caught out by those, lately?

Well, when even such imperturbable people as Finlanders complain,
& the science-based study backs their concerns re: huge bladed wind-turbines:

https://suomenymparistoterveys.files.wo ... 2016-2.pdf

[Just_a_fan]

"Stupid claims", Andres? Who has been caught out by those, lately?

Well, when even such imperturbable people as Finlanders complain,
& the science-based study backs their concerns re: huge bladed wind-turbines:

https://suomenymparistoterveys.files.wo ... 2016-2.pdf

So off shore turbines it is then. That's the infrasound problem solved.

[J.A.W.]

"Stupid claims", Andres? Who has been caught out by those, lately?

Well, when even such imperturbable people as Finlanders complain,
& the science-based study backs their concerns re: huge bladed wind-turbines:

https://suomenymparistoterveys.files.wo ... 2016-2.pdf

So off shore turbines it is then. That's the infrasound problem solved.

Oh no, esp' not during baby seal clubbing season, it'd be offensive on so many levels!

[Andres125sx]

"Stupid claims", Andres? Who has been caught out by those, lately?

Last time it was you, and this time it´s you too

Well, when even such imperturbable people as Finlanders complain,
& the science-based study backs their concerns re: huge bladed wind-turbines:

https://suomenymparistoterveys.files.wo ... 2016-2.pdf

What´s the relation between infrasound causing problems to humans like shown in that study, with vortices from blade tips causing flight problems to birds wich is whay you said? Any or just moving the goalposts?

Well presented post there J-A-F, & that pic of the 'lead sled' B-36 in flight, blasting
out massive visible 'cork-screw' vortices from its huge pusher-props gives a clue as
to why birds have flight problems in the vicinity of electric wind-turbine complexes.

[Big Tea]

"Stupid claims", Andres? Who has been caught out by those, lately?

Well, when even such imperturbable people as Finlanders complain,
& the science-based study backs their concerns re: huge bladed wind-turbines:

https://suomenymparistoterveys.files.wo ... 2016-2.pdf

So off shore turbines it is then. That's the infrasound problem solved.

Oh no, esp' not during baby seal clubbing season, it'd be offensive on so many levels!

They should not even be out clubbing under covid rules

[Greg Locock]

Off shore turbines are far more maintenance intensive than on shore ones, annual maintenance is a significant cost for land based:

Operation and maintenance (O&M) costs constitute a sizeable share of the total annual costs of a wind turbine. For a new turbine, O&M costs may easily make up 20-25 per cent of the total levelised cost per kWh produced over the lifetime of the turbine.

and more so for offshore O&M ~ roughly 4 times higher . This is compensated for to some extent by the higher duty cycle of the offshore units, making their output more valuable. Cap costs are higher obviously as there is no local grid to tap into, and foundations are far more expensive.

[J.A.W.]

"Stupid claims", Andres? Who has been caught out by those, lately?

Last time it was you, and this time it´s you too

Well, when even such imperturbable people as Finlanders complain,
& the science-based study backs their concerns re: huge bladed wind-turbines:

https://suomenymparistoterveys.files.wo ... 2016-2.pdf

What´s the relation between infrasound causing problems to humans like shown in that study, with vortices from blade tips causing flight problems to birds wich is whay you said? Any or just moving the goalposts?

Well presented post there J-A-F, & that pic of the 'lead sled' B-36 in flight, blasting
out massive visible 'cork-screw' vortices from its huge pusher-props gives a clue as
to why birds have flight problems in the vicinity of electric wind-turbine complexes.

Just because you cannot understand something - doesn't mean that it - is stupid, Andres..

The principles of aerofoil efficiencies for propeller blades (active-driving, or passive-driven)
are readily available to literature review in the relevant science data documentation.

The vortex flow dynamics do scale of course, per Reynolds number effects, but are there, even so:



Hit this link, for information
https://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/k-12/airpl ... nolds.html

[J.A.W.]

Off shore turbines are far more maintenance intensive than on shore ones, annual maintenance is a significant cost for land based:

Operation and maintenance (O&M) costs constitute a sizeable share of the total annual costs of a wind turbine. For a new turbine, O&M costs may easily make up 20-25 per cent of the total levelised cost per kWh produced over the lifetime of the turbine.

and more so for offshore O&M ~ roughly 4 times higher . This is compensated for to some extent by the higher duty cycle of the offshore units, making their output more valuable. Cap costs are higher obviously as there is no local grid to tap into, and foundations are far more expensive.

Correct Greg, & furthermore, the disposal costs of large non-recyclable parts of de-commissioned
wind units are also becoming an issue, now that many are rapidly reaching 'use by date' status.

[DChemTech]

Off shore turbines are far more maintenance intensive than on shore ones, annual maintenance is a significant cost for land based:

Operation and maintenance (O&M) costs constitute a sizeable share of the total annual costs of a wind turbine. For a new turbine, O&M costs may easily make up 20-25 per cent of the total levelised cost per kWh produced over the lifetime of the turbine.

and more so for offshore O&M ~ roughly 4 times higher . This is compensated for to some extent by the higher duty cycle of the offshore units, making their output more valuable. Cap costs are higher obviously as there is no local grid to tap into, and foundations are far more expensive.

Correct Greg, & furthermore, the disposal costs of large non-recyclable parts of de-commissioned
wind units are also becoming an issue, now that many are rapidly reaching 'use by date' status.

Like bird murder, recyclability is in reality a very minor issue that has been completely blown up by antagonists of windmills.

The material is pretty inert, and as such quite suitable for landfilling with hardly any impact. Similar to what is being done with decommissioned aircraft. Noone complains about discarding aircraft this way, yet when its done with windmill blades, some act like its the onset of the apocalypse. The discarded material is only a very minor part of the windmill life cycle. And also, waste management in fossil operations isn't great. Many decommissioned mining and power generation, heavily polluted, are just abandoned. Let alone the pollution that operational facilities discharge into water and atmosphere.

And yet, thanks to the negative framing, even though for all quantitative reasons its an absolute non-issue, manufacturers are making great advances regarding production of blades with a better end of life outlook.

[nzjrs]

In my real life I worked with a company developing automated braking systems for wind turbines. The (well funded by governmental bodies) goal being to stop the turbines when birds/bats are detected flying on a path which will take them into the blades.

There are some interesting trolley problem aspects there.

[Andres125sx]

"Stupid claims", Andres? Who has been caught out by those, lately?

Last time it was you, and this time it´s you too

Well, when even such imperturbable people as Finlanders complain,
& the science-based study backs their concerns re: huge bladed wind-turbines:

https://suomenymparistoterveys.files.wo ... 2016-2.pdf

What´s the relation between infrasound causing problems to humans like shown in that study, with vortices from blade tips causing flight problems to birds wich is whay you said? Any or just moving the goalposts?

Well presented post there J-A-F, & that pic of the 'lead sled' B-36 in flight, blasting
out massive visible 'cork-screw' vortices from its huge pusher-props gives a clue as
to why birds have flight problems in the vicinity of electric wind-turbine complexes.

Just because you cannot understand something - doesn't mean that it - is stupid, Andres..

The principles of aerofoil efficiencies for propeller blades (active-driving, or passive-driven)
are readily available to literature review in the relevant science data documentation.

The vortex flow dynamics do scale of course, per Reynolds number effects, but are there, even so:



Hit this link, for information

https://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/k-12/airpl ... nolds.html

Just because you can post a video, that does not mean you´re right JAW

I perfectly know what is a vortex, but seems like you ignore vortex can be extremelly powerfull like those caused by a plane prop, or just a bit of turbulence like this from a wind turbine wich will not disturb not even a butterfly, let alone causing navigation problems to bird as you stated

But I know you JAW, I know you will say the sky is red before accepting you were wrong. Here you jumped from vortex to infrasound for example, and when asked about the relation you didn´t reply and jumped again to vortex, posting a video like if that was enough to prove your nosense right

[J.A.W.]

So Andres, rather than continue in denial, why not check out the case studies of large soaring raptors,
such as eagles, & how they are affected both by being attracted by injured prey birds to 'wind farms',
& consequently fatally, by vortices which you so airily claim are sub 'butterfly effect' - & thereby show
you fail to comprehend scaling/Reynolds #/cube rule inertial effects...

[J.A.W.]

Off shore turbines are far more maintenance intensive than on shore ones, annual maintenance is a significant cost for land based:

Operation and maintenance (O&M) costs constitute a sizeable share of the total annual costs of a wind turbine. For a new turbine, O&M costs may easily make up 20-25 per cent of the total levelised cost per kWh produced over the lifetime of the turbine.

and more so for offshore O&M ~ roughly 4 times higher . This is compensated for to some extent by the higher duty cycle of the offshore units, making their output more valuable. Cap costs are higher obviously as there is no local grid to tap into, and foundations are far more expensive.

Correct Greg, & furthermore, the disposal costs of large non-recyclable parts of de-commissioned
wind units are also becoming an issue, now that many are rapidly reaching 'use by date' status.

Like bird murder, recyclability is in reality a very minor issue that has been completely blown up by antagonists of windmills.

The material is pretty inert, and as such quite suitable for landfilling with hardly any impact. Similar to what is being done with decommissioned aircraft. Noone complains about discarding aircraft this way, yet when its done with windmill blades, some act like its the onset of the apocalypse. The discarded material is only a very minor part of the windmill life cycle. And also, waste management in fossil operations isn't great. Many decommissioned mining and power generation, heavily polluted, are just abandoned. Let alone the pollution that operational facilities discharge into water and atmosphere.

And yet, thanks to the negative framing, even though for all quantitative reasons its an absolute non-issue, manufacturers are making great advances regarding production of blades with a better end of life outlook.

What % of scrapped large aircraft components are resin-impregnated glass-fibre (or like composites)?

Any 'strawman' type - 'yes, but' - conflation, esp' when comparisons with unashamedly filthy & decrepit
fossil-thermal units are raised, are so 'red-herring', as to be shameless, & clean-green energy must
surely be capable of, & duly held to, a far higher standard, ethically/commercially/politically... No?