Re: Wind energy
From: ZZBunker (zzbunker_at_netscape.net)
Date: 10/17/04
- Next message: David Findlay: "Conversion of Ratio of specific heats to metric"
- Previous message: Jim Greenfield: "Re: what is the relation between force and energy?"
- In reply to: Alex Terrell: "Re: Wind energy"
- Next in thread: The Ghost In The Machine: "Re: Wind energy"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: 16 Oct 2004 21:58:37 -0700
alexterrell@yahoo.com (Alex Terrell) wrote in message news:<d81e59c9.0410161112.7cb7db68@posting.google.com>...
> amino_acid456@hotmail.com (AaronB) wrote in message news:<564024e.0410151826.16f340bb@posting.google.com>...
> > [snip]
> >
> > > Wind power is growing fast because it is cheap, abundant,
> > > inexhaustible, widely distributed, clean, and climate-
> > > benign. No other energy source has all of these
> > > attributes.
> >
> > I think solar probably does too.
> >
> > > Unlike the widely discussed fuel cell/hydrogen
> > > transportation model, the gas-electric hybrid/wind model
> > > does not require a costly new infrastructure. The network
> > > of gasoline service stations is already in place. So,
> > > too, is the electricity grid needed to link wind farms to
> > > the storage batteries in cars. For this new model to work
> > > most efficiently, we would need a strong integrated
> > > national grid. Fortunately, the need for modernizing our
> > > antiquated set of regional grids, replacing them with a
> > > strong national grid, is now widely recognized --
> > > especially after the blackout that darkened the U.S.
> > > northeast in 2003.
> >
> > The problem is that you cannot have a wind powered car; at best, you
> > can have an electric car that uses wind energy as electricity, but,
> > frankly, pure electric cars are not cost-effective enough to be
> > feasible at this point in time regardless of where the electricity is
> > coming from.
>
> Yes, but plug in hybrids with a range of 80km are just around the
> corner. Most cars do much less than this most days, so a typical plug
> in hybrid will probably consume a quarter the petrol/gasoline of an
> equivelant car.
>
> > Electric motors don't have produce enough power as internal combustion
>
> Yes they do. Their power to weight ratio is actually better than a
> combustion engine. Cars could even be powered by 4 motors placed in
> the wheels.
>
> > and their batteries can't store enough energy to
> > make them last long enough.
>
> Correct - hence the need for hybrids, which might one day be fuel cell
> / battery hybrids
>
> > Wind actually would not be changing the
> > equation, since electricity is already pretty cheap, other than
> > changing where the electricity is coming from (and if its hydro or
> > geothermal, that's basically free as it is now) Simply put, electric
> > cars will never become mainstream unless we can invent a much more
> > powerful battery. That's why the hydrogen model is so promising: it
> > doesn't need a battery. It cuts out both gasoline and battery power.
> > Infrastructure is a problem, and the limitation of the electric motor
> > still exists, of course.
> >
> Hydrogen cars would electric cars, with a fuel cell generating the
> electricity. They would also be part hybrid, for regenerative
> breaking. I think they'll also be plug in hybrid, as moving
> electricity around will be cheaper than making hydrogen and shifting
> it around.
That's true, but it's also the reason we invented movies.
Since electricity is much cheaper to move around than
popcorn is to move around.
Hydrogen is infinitely cheaper to move around than electricity.
Since electricy actually hates hydrogen, and
go aimings for it, with a Jane Fonda spokesmen
at every chance it gets.
- Next message: David Findlay: "Conversion of Ratio of specific heats to metric"
- Previous message: Jim Greenfield: "Re: what is the relation between force and energy?"
- In reply to: Alex Terrell: "Re: Wind energy"
- Next in thread: The Ghost In The Machine: "Re: Wind energy"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
