Wind power

[Luke]

After looking at pictures we took last year at a "wind farm" in the southwest, it occurs to me that one thing needed for this technology is height. What is one tall structure that most cities have, water towers!

I wonder how much power we could generate if ever town could install a wind generating device atop there exsisting water towers?

Keep in mind that here in Mid-Mo most every farm has an old windmill that is in disrepair/abandonded. Maybe I am dreaming, but still, it seems every bit would help.

[samizdat]

The new high tech windmills do @ 240 km an hour- fast spinning and produce megawatts. Height is a variant factor, but 30 meters or @ 100 feet is a standard for topping wind obstruction. There are net wind maps, which indicate wether a certain area is good for bulk production. Land rental for wind projects is viable.

Maybe we're just dreaming. Wind energy is the engineer and practical business storybook solution. We're a half-life or generation late to turn back the clock on nuke energy- not safe. Look at the meltdowns already, and try to investigate what happens if a burning reactor hits water or nuke plants are bombed.

Should be. Could be if the hi-tech molds are safe from a missile attack.

[Malsua]

There are new nuclear designs that are inherently safe and cannot meltdown or go super critical. Pebble Bed Reactors are just one. Toshiba has a 4s design that it is trying to get approval to install in Galena Alaska for FREE!

Toshiba 4S (Super Safe, Small and Simple)
http://www.alaskajournal.com/stories...80427006.shtml

From the Wiki page:
The Toshiba 4S (Super Safe, Small and Simple) is a “nuclear battery” reactor design. It requires only minimal staffing.
The plant design is offered by a partnership that includes Toshiba and the Central Research Institute of Electric Power Industry (CRIEPI) of Japan. ^[1]
The technical specifications of the 4S reactor are unique in the nuclear industry. The actual reactor would be located in a sealed, cylindrical vault 30 m (98 ft) underground, while the building above ground would be 22 x 16 x 11 m (72 × 52.5 x 36 ft) in size. This power plant is designed to provide 10 Megawatts of power.
The 4S uses neutron reflector panels around the perimeter to maintain neutron density. These reflector panels replace complicated control rods, yet keep the ability to shut down the nuclear reaction in case of an emergency. Additionally, the Toshiba 4S utilizes liquid sodium as a coolant, allowing the reactor to operate 200 degrees hotter than if it used water. This means that the reactor is depressurized, as water at this temperature would run at thousands of pounds per square inch.
The reactor is expected to provide electric energy for between 5 and 13 cents/kWh, factoring in only operating costs. On paper, it has been determined that the reactor could run for 30 years without being refueled.
The Toshiba 4S Nuclear Battery is being proposed as the power source for the Galena Nuclear Power Plant in Galena, Alaska.

[samizdat]

They are safer than those in the 60's, yes.
The reactor unit would be about 8 feet by 3 feet in dimension and will be encased and buried 40 feet below the surface. The nuclear reaction will heat liquid sodium that will be moved through heat exchanges with electro-magnetic pumps. Power is generated in a steam turbine at the surface.
An amazing feat in technology, but what to do in case of an earthquake?

I'm no nuke scientist. Here's a list of Q's I cant answer.

What is the half life of the fuel?


The fuel loaded in the reactor will be sufficient for 30 years. Toshiba's plan is to refuel the reactor after 30 years, with the entire unit being extracted from the site and shipped elsewhere for refueling and maintenance. The NRC may decide to have the reactor checked before 30 years, particularly if the Galena reactor is the first commercial installation, Yoder said. An important security consideration is that the grade of nuclear fuel to be used is well below weapons grade. This is a security concern with some reactor designs used elsewhere.

http://www.nuclearfiles.org/menu/educators/study-questions/nuclear-energy_study-questions.htm

What is half life? How long is it harmful- 30 years? 2 million years? What would a bunker buster bomb do to "security measures?"

Nuclear fuel - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

- [ Traducir esta página ] 28 Nov 2008 ... By far the most common type of nuclear fuel is heavy fissile ..... In the form of plutonium dioxide it has a half-life of 87.7 years, ...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_fuel - 115k - En caché - Páginas similares

Radioactive waste - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

- [ Traducir esta página ] The most troublesome transuranic elements in spent fuel are Np-237 (half-life two million years) and Pu-239 (half life 24000 years). [12] Nuclear waste ...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radioactive_waste - 218k - En caché - Páginas similares
Más resultados de en.wikipedia.org »

Spent nuclear fuel inventories at commercial US nuclear plants

- [ Traducir esta página ] Integrated Database 1994 spent nuclear fuel inventories. ... *Half-life: the time it takes for one half of a quantity of radioactivity to decay. ...
www.davistownmuseum.org/cbm/RadxIntegratedDatabase.html - 10k - En caché - Páginas similares

Global Warming Examiner: Nuclear Fuel is Renewable

- [ Traducir esta página ] Nuclear Fuel is Renewable by local Global Warming Examiner expert, John Ryden. ... 3% of the fuel is waste, but it only has a half-life of 30 years. ...

Maybe I'm just dreaming or prejudiced- I'm a green guy- I really get into killing birds with blades and chainsawing trees to erect wind farms.

Boo nuke plants- rah rah eolic energy.

[Luke]

I would agree that nuclear energy has become safer than it was in earlier times. What I am thinking is supplemental supply with wind energy using infrastructre already in place. Another example would be things such as taller bridges,(Golden Gate, George Washington) comes to mind. Normally you will see a flag flying on top of such structures.

Even the little town I live in, population 202, could add to the energy grid.

[Malsua]

The problem with wind is that it is intermittent. You have to have other generation to back it up. Look at what happened here for example:

----------
http://www.kgw.com/news-local/storie...18f86.html?npc

10:18 PM PDT on Sunday, July 6, 2008

Associated Press PORTLAND, Ore. -- The wind huffed, and it puffed, and it nearly caused major problems in the Northwest's electrical grid last week.

Power managers say they have some fixing to do.

A surge of wind last Monday afternoon jumped far beyond levels forecast by operators of Oregon's burgeoning wind-farm industry, sending more power into the regional grid than it could handle.

The Bonneville Power Administration is responsible for adjusting hydropower generation levels to accommodate the power from wind turbines so the system isn't overloaded.

It realized by Monday evening that it could no longer handle the surge without increasing spills of water through hydroelectric dams to levels dangerous to fish. Spilling the water keeps it from the hydropower generators.

Generally, spills are needed to help juvenile salmon make their way downriver, although too much water can prove lethal.

So, for the first time, BPA power managers began calling wind-farm operators with orders to curtail power generation.

But calls to some wind farms reached only answering machines, and at another the operators misunderstood and kept generation steady. One wind-farm, which BPA wouldn't name, did reduce generation.

As it turned out, water the BPA had to spill wasn't heavy enough to do damage.

But a BPA official said it demonstrated a need to make sure that the growth of wind power in the Columbia Basin doesn't cause more such problems.

"It was a wake-up call," said Brian Silverstein, a BPA transmission vice president.

The agency can sanction wind companies that disobey pullback orders. In this case, penalties were unnecessary, Silverstein said, but fine-tuning of protocols definitely is.

[samizdat]

I like killing fish too.

http://www.homemadeenergy.org/?hop=cyprusmete

[Luke]

I would think that a simple on/off switch could rectify an "overage" of energy created by wind/solar/hydro/nuclear power. I was under the impression that municipilities were able to reroute energy back to the "grid".

[Ryan Ruck]

That's odd... I thought that those windmills had automatic braking systems to prevent overspeed or overload.

[Malsua]

I don't think they were overspeed or overloaded, just...finally working at their capacity...something no one ever figured they might do since wind is flaky in most places. There are places where wind makes sense, almost all of them are offshore where it blows constantly 365.25 days a year.

[samizdat]

from sea to shining see. It would be done if we weren't at war and a morally bipolar nation.
eolic cannot provide all municipalities, but many if not most areas. Well regions at least. The research maps out where it is practical.