Opinions
Category:
Safety or Structural Failure
Browse in :
All
> Topics
> Safety (34)
All > Topics > Safety > Structural Failure (5)
All of these categories
All > Topics > Safety > Structural Failure (5)
All of these categories
This has been known to fry wind turbines. With snow, ice and frigid weather, winter creates complications for renewable energy, as I wrote last week. But for Ralph Brokaw, a Wyoming rancher with both cows and wind turbines on his land, the worst hazard is not the ice that his blades can throw off in the winter.
Rather, it is lightning strikes on the towers.
Protection of the public must be paramount. After reading the Cape Vincent engineers' recommendation of 1,200-foot setback from public roads, I was astonished to read one of the committee member's comments, "The chances are so minuscule. I don't see why putting these restrictions on these roads is reasonable." My response is: it is not a chance I want to take with my family, friends or fellow citizens. So why did they choose a 1,000-foot setback instead of 1,200 feet?
Now we find that Elecon, the manufacturer of the city's first industrial wind turbine, doesn't have that many clients either. This will be their first U.S. installation. How do we know their manufacturing standards are up to snuff? The Center for Wind Energy Technology (CWET) reported that 60 percent of the wind turbines survived a cyclone in Gujrat, India, in 1998. However, 14 out of 14 Elecon turbines were destroyed. Didn't anybody notice this? Elecon pulled out of the wind turbine business for a while, and now they are back in. Did anyone find out why?
Also filed under [
Safety|
Massachusetts]
I am extremely opposed to the location of the 300-foot, high wind turbine at the Mark Richey property, 49 Parker St. I am not opposed to alternative energy but, just as the discovery of X-rays had everyone getting new "pictures" taken, to later discover the ramifications of incorrect use of this technology, we cannot build enormous hazardous turbines in such close vicinity to habitable structures industrial and residential.
My wife and I own a home on Backbone Mountain, which is located next to the first turbine in the proposed Roth Rock wind power project.
It will be 1,185 feet from my bedroom to this 476 foot tall industrial structure, which is nearly as tall as the Washington monument but only two "monument lengths" away. Except in this case it's not a benign stone structure. It's mechanical with large, noisy, and dangerous moving parts.
This turbine will also be located within 378 feet of two other lots in our subdivision.
In his recent letter ("Wolf showed courage in supporting Cape Wind"), Elrick misrepresents the FAA's current position on Cape Wind and totally ignores the safety concerns of all three local airports. In fact, in a January 2008 letter to Rep. William Delahunt, the FAA cited a "presumed hazard determination" for Cape Wind due to concerns for local air traffic and radar interference to air traffic control systems.
Sunday's massive series of explosions at a Toronto propane plant gives credence to every Not In My Backyard (NIMBY) argument posed to this point in time. ...In Barrie, Northern Ethanol's plan to build a plant on the former Molson Brewery site has faced opposition from residents in every part of the city.
Opposition to Bob Jackson's plan to built a wind turbine on his Mapleview Drive West Toyota dealership has, conversely, caused mostly local concerns.
In both cases, however, opponents fear the worse. ...And everyone is concerned about how it will affect their bottom lines, property values.
The point is, the reason people look at worst-case scenarios is that sometimes they happen.
Energy secretary John Hutton yesterday gave the go-ahead to plans to build eighteen 125-metre high turbines, at Middlemoor, near Alnwick.
But it cannot be built until energy giant npower comes up with a way of preventing the turbines interfering with RAF radar systems.
Nick Blezard - chairman of the Save Northumberland's Environment, which opposed the project - says this is effectively a refusal given the radar issue.
We can only hope he is right and that the Government - reluctant to admit defeat - is spinning Middlemoor as a "go-ahead" knowing that the radar caveat will halt the project.
The safety of the citizens of Chatham-Kent is being compromised by improper siting of industrial wind turbines.
The General Electric wind turbine "Ice shedding and ice throw -- risk and mitigation" manual states that "1.5 x (hub height + rotor diameter) is the formula for calculating a safe distance for turbine siting from roads and public areas." ...The setbacks C-K has in place for industrial wind turbines (50 m from roadways and property boundaries, and 300 metres from homes) are a threat to the public.
The wind turbine issue is another example of misguided leadership. I've criticized Mike Reagan on this, and with good reason. Instead of having a meaningful discussion about the aviation safety problems being caused by wind turbines, Reagan simply dismisses any concerns as a "phony save Travis" issue. And yes, Mr. Reagan did receive a campaign donation from the wind turbine developer.
Also filed under [
Safety|
California]
Last week the old feeder drove through NW Iowa. My route used to offer pleasant scenery most of the way from the feedlot to my destination. I get off of I-29 at Onawa and take the county blacktops to Arnolds Park. For the last 10 years, a growing part of the drive has been through a wind farm. Its like driving through a hellish, whirling machine.
Almost everyone agrees that these monstrosities are hideous eyesores. Nobody with any sense of the rural aesthetic wants them anywhere near where they live. ...Now the scenic Iowa roads between Galva and Peterson are studded with the ugly contraptions as far as the eye can see. Perhaps portending worse to come.
The foreign-owned companies that are rushing to put 406-foot industrial wind turbines in our beautiful Thousand Islands area are not thinking about our safety or welfare or even about helping the environment. They just want to line their pockets with your tax dollars.
The industrial wind turbines are subsidized with your federal and state taxes as well as surcharges collected from your electric bill. They will not reduce our nation's dependence on foreign oil since we do not use much oil to make electricity. ...The towns of Clayton and Orleans said that it's OK to put a 406-foot industrial wind turbine 500 feet from your property line or 1,250 feet from your home. That is too close for our health and safety.
"One windmill will not put out much noise, but when you put a cluster of them together and get the blades all spinning at the same rate, then it begins to emit noise -- enough that our radar can 'hear' the noise."
You could tell the radar to ignore that frequency, but if there's a thunderstorm with the same frequency, it also would be ignored.
"The use of wind energy has become a big problem not only in the meteorological world, but also to the military community as airplanes could fly low under a wind farm and one would never know the difference as to whether they are looking at false returns from the wind farm or an enemy plane."
The general public and public agencies have apparently missed an important story regarding Travis AFB that has occurred over the last year. In an extraordinary show of concern, base officials have issued four letters objecting to the continued addition of wind turbines to the Montezuma Hills wind resource area.
Air Force officials almost never make public statements about local land use issues, so these letters are highly unusual and show urgent concern.
However, these concerns have fallen on deaf ears with Solano County leadership. ...Simply put, the wind company went over the head of the local commander and went to higher levels to secure a deal. In return for $1 million to study how to mitigate the problem, and stating that 75 new turbines would not increase the damage that the 750 existing turbines have already done, higher HQ then directed Travis to withdraw objections.
Winds of war: The interests of wind power and national security must be squared
February 3, 2008 in The Times
February 3, 2008 in The Times
Supporters of wind energy may be underestimating the seriousness of the damage done to radar signals, and the ease with which problems can be corrected. Not for the first time, they may be guilty of making overambitious claims for the potential of wind power, while countryside champions increasingly rue the way wind farms spoil sweeping vistas. For its part, the Ministry of Defence may be too Quixotic. But this is a genuine conundrum, not a laughing matter. A cost-effective solution must be found quickly. It may be a simple question of coordination and communication. If so, it is high time that different branches of government came together to avoid an unnecessary and potentially damaging conflict.
Wind farms are set to play a big part in national and regional targets for renewable energy production and last year Cumbria's councils produced the 62 page Cumbria Wind Energy Supplementary Planning Document. ...Meanwhile we urge planners seeking the best places to site wind farms in Cumbria to do plenty of background research. ...Such data should be evaluated as Cumbria performs the tricky balancing act of meeting renewable energy targets, safeguarding lives and health, and preserving our uniquely beautiful countryside.
The discussion on the proposed windmills on our coast seems to have ignored the serious potential of devastating damage that these structures could cause.
Although they "would be designed to withstand hurricane-force winds" it is doubtful that they could be engineered to be completely secure in a Category 3-4 or 5 hurricane or a tornado.
The blades of these turbines are designed to produce optimum benefits from the wind, which means to me that if they were detached in a hurricane or tornado, they would become lethal missiles that could slice through not only nearby homes, but would pose a grave danger to the nuclear power plant facilities as well.
County government has the right and duty to investigate the reality of wind turbine facilities and to write a wind energy ordinance that protects the health and safety of its citizens. ...You have to be very naive to believe a 400 to 500 foot, 270-ton to 330-ton piece of machinery would not make noise and negatively affect your family and community. Yes, many of us in Trempealeau County want to protect our health and safety - if you're as smart as I think you are, wouldn't you too?
Wind turbines and radar systems do not get along too well. At least, they haven't to date.
Adding 100 more such machines to the hillsides so close to Travis Air Force Base makes military experts nervous. It should make the rest of us very uncomfortable as well, since the base represents more than a billion dollars a year to the local economy. ...We certainly do not want to close the door forever on this renewable energy supply.
But at this point, the peril posed to the air base's radar system seems too risky.
Also filed under [
Safety|
California]
A controversial proposed site for the placement of a wind farm in Enfield is the focus of public concern and debate. The issue in Enfield is not "green local energy." The primary issue is the responsible location and safe placement of commercial windmills (400 feet tall) and wind farms.