<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Wind turbine costs</title>
	<atom:link href="http://pingswept.org/2006/12/17/wind-turbine-costs/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://pingswept.org/2006/12/17/wind-turbine-costs/</link>
	<description>Taking the zen out of citizen journalism since the 1900's</description>
	<pubDate>Tue, 06 Jan 2009 12:29:03 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Paul Bonnet</title>
		<link>http://pingswept.org/2006/12/17/wind-turbine-costs/comment-page-1/#comment-12409</link>
		<dc:creator>Paul Bonnet</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 02 Feb 2007 09:52:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pingswept.org/2006/12/17/wind-turbine-costs/#comment-12409</guid>
		<description>Hi All,
There is one point that is missing in the original Aldo da Rosa argument - Brandon already touches on this but it is crucial I think - that is the importance of wind shear.
Wind velocity nearly always increases significantly the further away from the ground you go. And so large turbines see more wind than small ones. Since energy increases to the cubic of wind velocity, this surely has a big impact on the economics.
I myself like the small turbines but you have to admit their shortcomings.
Paul</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi All,<br />
There is one point that is missing in the original Aldo da Rosa argument - Brandon already touches on this but it is crucial I think - that is the importance of wind shear.<br />
Wind velocity nearly always increases significantly the further away from the ground you go. And so large turbines see more wind than small ones. Since energy increases to the cubic of wind velocity, this surely has a big impact on the economics.<br />
I myself like the small turbines but you have to admit their shortcomings.<br />
Paul</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: brandon.stafford</title>
		<link>http://pingswept.org/2006/12/17/wind-turbine-costs/comment-page-1/#comment-7950</link>
		<dc:creator>brandon.stafford</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 18 Dec 2006 05:16:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pingswept.org/2006/12/17/wind-turbine-costs/#comment-7950</guid>
		<description>Hi Jack,

I won't speak for Ben, but I'm definitely baffled by the continued growth of wind turbines. I suspect that the historically decreasing costs as a function of size are actually an artifact of the maturation of the technology, and with that maturation I expect that smaller wind turbines will gain the advantage over the larger.

Ben and I have also been debating the role of two other factors-- transportation and siting.

At some point, transporting towers and blades becomes difficult, with the gating threshold being whether they can fit under freeway overpasses.

In regard to siting, fewer, larger turbines may be easier from both a management complexity perspective and from a political standpoint

Ben also pointed out that in situations in which you are siting turbines linearly along a ridgeline, your potential swept area scales approximately linearly with rotor diameter, i.e. with you'll get the length of your ridgeline with small or large blades, but the highest winds are accessible only by the largest towers. If suitable sites are scarce, higher quantities of power, expensive though it be, might be the optimal choice.

Brandon</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Jack,</p>
<p>I won&#8217;t speak for Ben, but I&#8217;m definitely baffled by the continued growth of wind turbines. I suspect that the historically decreasing costs as a function of size are actually an artifact of the maturation of the technology, and with that maturation I expect that smaller wind turbines will gain the advantage over the larger.</p>
<p>Ben and I have also been debating the role of two other factors&#8211; transportation and siting.</p>
<p>At some point, transporting towers and blades becomes difficult, with the gating threshold being whether they can fit under freeway overpasses.</p>
<p>In regard to siting, fewer, larger turbines may be easier from both a management complexity perspective and from a political standpoint</p>
<p>Ben also pointed out that in situations in which you are siting turbines linearly along a ridgeline, your potential swept area scales approximately linearly with rotor diameter, i.e. with you&#8217;ll get the length of your ridgeline with small or large blades, but the highest winds are accessible only by the largest towers. If suitable sites are scarce, higher quantities of power, expensive though it be, might be the optimal choice.</p>
<p>Brandon</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jack Leslie</title>
		<link>http://pingswept.org/2006/12/17/wind-turbine-costs/comment-page-1/#comment-7927</link>
		<dc:creator>Jack Leslie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 18 Dec 2006 00:23:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://pingswept.org/2006/12/17/wind-turbine-costs/#comment-7927</guid>
		<description>Thanks. At last a sense of reasonability in the never ending climb to develop the highest, most massive, most expensive, and in the most idiotic pursuit of the biggest wind turbine in pursuit of the biggest bucks.

Keep up the great work guys.  Jack</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks. At last a sense of reasonability in the never ending climb to develop the highest, most massive, most expensive, and in the most idiotic pursuit of the biggest wind turbine in pursuit of the biggest bucks.</p>
<p>Keep up the great work guys.  Jack</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
