[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 150 KB, 480x300, DE95BYZ4NH.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4677935 No.4677935 [Reply] [Original]

Hi there /sci/ i really need your help on this one.
On College we have this debate and each subject has 2 groups - cons and pros groups
Now i ask u :Tell me some motherfucking best arguments for cons of wind energy

>inb4 wind turbines kill birds

>> No.4677942

Inefficiency seems to be the biggest one.

>> No.4677947

usually bullshit like they look unattractive (ruin the skyline view) and are noisy.
expensive to set up, arnt very efficient compared to other methods of energy generation.
require maintenance
etc.

>> No.4677946

Wind energy doesn't solve the peak oil problem. Just like oil wind is a limited resource as well. Some day we will have used up all the wind. It's called peak wind.

>> No.4677952

>>4677946
we'll have to deal with peak qualia long before that becomes a problem.

>> No.4677971

Can't be used in ideal environment. They actually have to turn the turbines off and lock them in place, during high wind speeds to avoid them being damaged.

>> No.4677972

Harvesting wind energy on huge scale is dangerous. Wind is important to keep earth's rotation speed constant. When we catch all the wind, earth might stop spinning and one half has night all day.

>> No.4677976
File: 165 KB, 302x356, 01290843.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4677976

>>4677971
then that isnt an 'ideal environment' is it, shithead!?

>> No.4677977

You need a fuckton of windo turbines to get anywhere near the output of a small hydroelectric dam.

Also, you can't just set them up anywhere and expect a decent efficiency. There needs to be wind.

>> No.4677979
File: 40 KB, 800x557, captain_obvious.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4677979

>>4677977
>Also, you can't just set them up anywhere and expect a decent efficiency. There needs to be wind.
[sarcasm] holy shit, you're a genius, your talents are wasted amongst us, we should get you in NASA or something [/sarcasm]

>> No.4677985

Thank you guys,could someone post info graph showing wind energy power generation vs hydrodroelectric ?

>> No.4677988

>>4677976
If we could put the turbines up 30000 feet, there are some lovely consistent 200mph winds. Ideal for power generation, lots more power per turbine, and no risk of losing power on a windless day.

>> No.4677989
File: 472 KB, 664x479, untitled.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4677989

>>4677985

>> No.4678006

I think we should erect small wind turbines and solar panel arrays on top of buildings so that homes and business can produce as much local energy as possible.

Meanwhile, produce electricity for the national grid via traditional means like hydro, coal and nuclear.

The former, coupled with energy saving strategies that reduce consumption will help take the stress off of the latter.

Finally, if we could simply stop this paradigm of perpetual growth and instead move to one of sustaining and maintaining consumption levels of all resources we might just survive an environmental collapse and not be too much worse off.

>> No.4678015

>>4678006

Wind is actually quite inefficient on a small scale like that. You don't want it on every building. You get much, much more for your buck if you scale it up a couple orders of magnitude.

>> No.4678043

Building a wind turbine is rather resource-intensive.
The gearbox for the turbine alone is finicky due to the high wear and because of this, the parts are made with fine tolerances, about one fifth for similar gearboxes for other use. The tight tolerances lead to a rather high waste in production, with yields of 50-75% being common. And most of the waste happens at the last stages of production.

That is part of the reason why large wind turbines are so damn expensive.

>> No.4678063

Havent' checked the thread to see if these are there, but:
>Very area intensive, the amount of energy you are going to get per area of land used is very small
> if you get a 1MW wind turbine, you will NOT get 1MW. Wind won't always blow at peak levels, meaning it is inefficient and insecure. A Sustainable future for energy is a secure one

You can also say stuff about NIMBY (Not In My Back Yard) principle, but I don't really like that argument because it is very whiny, emotional based and not based on evidence

>> No.4678066
File: 30 KB, 640x480, japaneseturd.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4678066

The cons?

The fact that wind turbines remove joules (energy) from the air might disturb wind patters, which might have a impact on the environment, especially if they become more popular.

>> No.4678093

Right now the industry is heavily subsidised "until it gets more efficient". When all of those tariffs and extra help to jumpstart the business are reduced, the industry will collapse. We are seeing this with solar companies in Germany AND Spain because they are not economical sources of energy. The subsidies are well intentioned, but ultimately thats usually not the way things work.

>> No.4678205

1. intermittent energy
2. expensive
3. sparse, needs large area
4. has to be transmitted from place of generation (where there is wind) to place of use, incurring large cost and loss
5. kills birds
6. noisy