Someday these giants could be floating off the Oregon coast
— By Kirsten Korosec on February 6, 2014, 9:31 AM PST
What a waste, at least until the 1st maritime accident!
Why is it so hard for those giving out subsidies to grasp that windmills are the least efficient ways of capturing energy?
Does no one in a position to suggest this junk know any engineering?
Local solar generates 200W/sq meter, with another doubling of that on the way. Wind, fully deployed, might generate 2W/sq meter, and require ~2/3 nameplate power from gas-turbine backup.
There's more than enough sunlit human structure around the world than needed to meet all peak daytime loads. Windmills are wasteful and unnecessary.
Local solar, EVs, efficient storage and advanced nuclear are all that are needed for thousands of years. And we'd better get cracking on that nuclear, being decades behind JFK's goals: http://tinyurl.com/6xgpkfa
Combustion power gone by 2000? Oops.
This is the real oops that makes climate change & sea rise look like peanuts before 2050: http://tinyurl.com/n2qnos6
Dr. A. Cannara 650 400 3071
200 million for 30 Mw? Seems awful pricey to me. I found an estimate on line for expansion of a land based wind farm of 134 Mw for 262 million. I would imagine that preventative maintenance on these won't be cheap either.
After decades of building petroleum platforms that endure tough environments, I'm sure they can manage the same here. On the positive side, it's not an eye sore like those drilling platforms we have off the costs of Southern California.
They'd better build them strong. The Pacific Ocean off the Oregon coast is a very rough environment, but it is quite windy nearly all of the time.