Study: Wind potenial much greater...16x current electric generation in 48-state US

[Chuck]

Wind speeds are greater at higher elevations (100+ meter turbines). Previous wind studies were based on the deployment of 50- to 80-meter turbines.

John Lorinc - BLOGS - July 15, 2009

Good news, but then they will be more visible. --Ed.

Global wind energy potential is considerably higher than previous estimates by both wind industry groups and government agencies, according to a Harvard University study published last week in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States.

The new research surfaced just weeks after T. Boone Pickens, citing rising financing costs, scaled back his plans for the world’s largest wind farm in west Texas.

Using data from thousands of meteorological stations, the Harvard team estimated the world wind power potential to be 40 times greater than total current power consumption. A previous study cited in the paper put that multiple at about 7 times.... [Read More]

[JusBringIt]

I actually prefer the looks of wind turbines to utility poles..but that's just me

[phoebeisis]

Exactly why do the higher latitudes have stronger more constant winds? Anyone out there know?
I would guess the dense cold air wants to pour south to replace warmer air that is rising, but is the temperature difference between 60N and 50 degree north so much greater than the daily temp "switch" that happens when our great plains warm up, but the gulf and Atlantic/Pacific stay colder?
Or is it a greater sweep-temp diff between poles and the equator?
Still the USA is surrounded by oceans-except to the N. We must have 6,000 miles of useful coastline not counting Alaska which is kinda remote.
Charlie

[antrey]

Originally Posted by phoebeisis

Exactly why do the higher latitudes have stronger more constant winds? Anyone out there know?
I would guess the dense cold air wants to pour south to replace warmer air that is rising, but is the temperature difference between 60N and 50 degree north so much greater than the daily temp "switch" that happens when our great plains warm up, but the gulf and Atlantic/Pacific stay colder?
Or is it a greater sweep-temp diff between poles and the equator?
Still the USA is surrounded by oceans-except to the N. We must have 6,000 miles of useful coastline not counting Alaska which is kinda remote.
Charlie

The article talks about higher elevations not latitudes, meaning the turbines are further from the ground. Near the ground, wind speeds approach zero due to the friction between the air and the boundary layer that forms near still surfaces like the ground. I personally think wind turbines are beautiful and they bring a big smile to my face every time I see one. The more, the more visible, the better!

[phoebeisis]

Antrey

Yes, I would pay to see them.You have a couple of decent sized farms on I-10 about 100 miles east of you.
I was a bit unclear in my latitude statement.I get the wind velocity increasing with altitude-for just the reasons you mention-some velocity is scrubbed off by terrain, hills, trees, houses, mt ranges etc-and also because everything-even wind- falls downhill, so that adds a little potential velocity/energy..
My latitude statement assumed that Canada and Russia/USSR were good wind sources because of their high latitude-they are close to the artic N pole where it is cold.

My guess is air rushed from the cold dense north to the equator when the sun heats the air at the equator and make it rise. The flux of air/wind at higher latitudes would be greatr at 60 degrees that at 50 degrees because the circumference of a latitude line would be less at 60 degrees than at 50 degrees.More air would pass thru per unit of time at 60 than at 50 because there is less cross section to pass thru.

I'm pretty sure that the equator rise actually falls and circulates just 20-30 degrees N- not all the way north.The net movement of air should be N-S with the colder denser N air being close to ground level, and the hot air being much much higher.

I'm just not sure about it-why Canada and Russia have the best wind potential-ignoring that their best areas are on the far side of the moon in hostile places to live and work.All the USA wind potential -except Alaska- is in easily accessible places. Better yet, a lot of it is in low density areas-W TX where you don't have lots of whining people to contend with.
Charlie

Charlie

[R.I.D.E.]

I believe the coriolis effect has a lot to do with wind variations due to latitude.
Basically at the equator the ground speed is around 1000 MPH relative to a point in outer space, while at the poles the ground speed is 0.

Supposedly that's why a toilet in the northern hemisphere flushes clockwise and one in the southern hemisphere rotates counter clockwise.

I think it is why tropical cyclones rotate in opposite directions in the northern and southern hemispheres.

But then I could be just a gullible idiot who was completely conned. I did have to check my toilet LOL.

regards
gary

[antrey]

Originally Posted by phoebeisis

Antrey

Yes, I would pay to see them.You have a couple of decent sized farms on I-10 about 100 miles east of you.
I was a bit unclear in my latitude statement.I get the wind velocity increasing with altitude-for just the reasons you mention-some velocity is scrubbed off by terrain, hills, trees, houses, mt ranges etc-and also because everything-even wind- falls downhill, so that adds a little potential velocity/energy..
My latitude statement assumed that Canada and Russia/USSR were good wind sources because of their high latitude-they are close to the artic N pole where it is cold.

My guess is air rushed from the cold dense north to the equator when the sun heats the air at the equator and make it rise. The flux of air/wind at higher latitudes would be greatr at 60 degrees that at 50 degrees because the circumference of a latitude line would be less at 60 degrees than at 50 degrees.More air would pass thru per unit of time at 60 than at 50 because there is less cross section to pass thru.

I'm pretty sure that the equator rise actually falls and circulates just 20-30 degrees N- not all the way north.The net movement of air should be N-S with the colder denser N air being close to ground level, and the hot air being much much higher.

I'm just not sure about it-why Canada and Russia have the best wind potential-ignoring that their best areas are on the far side of the moon in hostile places to live and work.All the USA wind potential -except Alaska- is in easily accessible places. Better yet, a lot of it is in low density areas-W TX where you don't have lots of whining people to contend with.
Charlie

Charlie

Ohhh, sorry! Now I understand where your comment was coming from. My theory would be that the vast areas of flat, tundra with minimal vegetation allow for high consistent wind speeds much as you see out in the open ocean.

[phoebeisis]

RIDE

The Coriolis effect is why a N hemisphere wind(heading south,a N wind)-at maybe 40 degrees N- is going 700 mph(pure guess)-just like the earth under it, but as it heads south(because S air at the equator is rising) it won't speed up as much as the earth does, so it will develope a component of east to west flow(east wind). The air rising at the equator is doing 1000 mph, so as it moves N over the slower earth it is moving faster than the earth under it, so it gets a west to east component.

Looking from above our hurricane winds go counterclockwise-UNLESS I HAVE IT BACKWARDS.

This is why we-in NOLA- pee in our pants when we are going to be hit by a hurricane that is coming from dead south or slightly West of dead south. The leading winds will push water thru the Rigolets into Lake Ponchartrain(east to west).Once it is over us-heading slightly NE- the winds on the left side will be blowing north to south pushing water over the lake levees and into NOLA.

I don't see why the Coriolis effect would make wind stronger in Canada or Rooskieland? Can you elaborate on it? I'm probably missing something.

Maybe the flat tundra impedes the wind less-certainly plausible. I like my higher flux farther N because the cross section of the ATM increases as you go south-the circumference of a latitude line increases. But, my idea doesn't really thrill me.
Maybe I'll look it up
Thanks
Charlie