More Inconvenient Truth About Wind Power
Not long after I started this blog, I pointed out a few of the realities about wind power. I've linked since then to a number of articles pointing out those and other problems in the MSM. Today a guy who has been writing about wind power points out another few problems with wind power. Household systems, he says, do not work. Size matters.
Wind energy carries the promise of tapping into a free, seemingly endless supply of energy. But those thinking to capture the breeze in their backyard with a personal windmill might be surprised how much the wind actually costs.
"Small wind doesn't make economic sense," says Paul Gipe, who has written several books and commentaries on wind energy.
The only people who should consider small wind systems (less than 100 kilowatts) are those who have to because they aren't connected to the power company, Gipe said. These "off-grid" consumers made up 90 percent of small wind turbine sales last year in the United States.
Gipe said it's fine if someone on-grid wants to help save the planet by buying a "dinky windmill" for home use, but they should know that it very likely won't last long enough to pay for itself in lowered energy bills.
And they should know to never put one on their roof.
A typical American home uses about 10,000 kilowatt-hours of energy per year. Depending on the average wind speed, a 10 kilowatt turbine with a 20-foot rotor diameter could supply most of the electricity for a house. Such a system will likely cost around $40,000.
According to the American Wind Energy Association (AWEA), a person who is living in a windy area (about 10 mph average wind speed or better)—and is eligible for certain government rebates or tax credits—could expect a payback time of 15 years on their small wind system.
That is on top of the issues I raised, of course. Those still apply. But a lot of the advocates for wind cheerfully talk about home systems as if they really were a viable thing if only more people would install them. Gipe begs to differ. (The AWEA obviously disagrees with him, since it's their mission to promote these things.) And putting them on your house? Really, really bad idea. It can damage your house structurally and wind is very turbulent around a house - therefore basically useless for energy production. The thing is, Gipe is pro-wind power, so his words should carry some weight even with advocates.
Energy, Environment | Gaius Tuesday, 16 October , 2007
By Quilly Mammoth, Tuesday, 16 October , 2007 @ 11:51 pm
Add to that a rancher I know in the Sand Hills swears that the wind mills change the grass patterns. He thinks it’s getting thiner around the bases of the towers. This makes a better hunting ground for birds of prey. Who in the course of their hunt get smacked by big blades.
It’s expensive, it make be changing the grasslands and it is certainly killing a lot of birds.