Save money now: 27 ways to lower your utility bills
In the current economic climate, its been a bit rough for those that want to go green on a budget. Not everyone can...
Read the rest of this articleSouth Carolina fixes wind power eyesores, pushes turbines offshore
Many communities struggle with building too many wind farms near residential areas because of the eyesore it creates in an otherwise beautiful view. For South Carolina addressing that concern meant taking wind turbines offshore to a location they’ve been monitoring with sensor buoys since earlier this year. Not to mention the state has fairly low wind speeds on land at an average of less than 10mph.
Data from the buoys isn’t conclusive yet. However South Carolina claims the location is close enough to shore for easy access to maintain the wind turbines, but far enough out to be inside a strong wind belt arcing in from the ocean. The buoys are a preliminary measure and if data from their measurements pans out, the state will invest in another, taller platform to take additional wind measurements.
It’s great to see another state entering the race to generate wind power, and this isn’t the only renewable energy South Carolina is interested in. This offshore wind power project will cost up to $1 million during the testing phase, compared to over $500 million already spent by the state on fuel cell research.
Moving wind power offshore makes a lot of sense for South Carolina where wind speeds start to pick up and waters stay shallow. “Just a few miles off the bay, winds average 17 to 19 mph, according to the latest wind-speed computer models. That's as good as or better than some windy areas in the West and Great Plains,” according to Energy Current.
At this point there are some supporters of the program, but overall South Carolina lacks a strong focus on the initiative. Political leadership can sometimes create inroads in the private sector and this is a good opportunity for the state government to create positive change.
The initial investment for machinery is also expensive, which will be another obstacle requirement strong will from the people involved. To keep the momentum moving though, supporters are quick to remind that a single turbine can provide 3.6 megawatts of power, enough to power 1,700 homes.
- Login to post comments
Advertisement
Follow us
Monthly archive
- June 2011 (1)
- May 2011 (16)
- April 2011 (18)
- March 2011 (31)
- February 2011 (29)
- January 2011 (30)
- December 2010 (17)
Comments
People who see turbines as eyesore are vastly outnumber by those who see them as beautiful additions to the landscape.
In Rhode Island 723 randomly selected people living near a wind turbine were asked if wind turbines are a) beautiful b) attractive c) neither d) unattractive e) ugly f) no opinion
For every person that said wind turbines are ugly 10 people said they were beautiful and for every person that found them unattractive 10 found them attractive. In fact there was a complaint that they could no longer see the turbine now that the leaves blocked the view. The wind turbine was installed in March when there were no leaves on the trees and by the time the survey was taken in June people were missing the beautiful view.
The tiny minority of people who have a problem with the looks of wind turbines should not be selfish and deny the vast majority the pleasure of seeing them. Besides another survey found some of the few people who see wind turbines as ugly support wind turbines because making electricity with oil or coal causes asthma in children from the NOx and SO2 pollution. Others love the idea we are reducing energy imports and others noticed that in many markets increasingly wind electricity is now less expensive than natural gas or oil electricity. Even coal if you calculate what we pay to doctors, pharmacies, and hospitals for asthma and bronchitis becomes more expensive than wind electricity and a lot more expensive if you include human suffering. The cost of electrcity is not just what we pay to utilitities.
Wind electricity is visually beautiful for the overwhelming majority but its greatest beauty is what you do not see: better health, less energy imports, and more money in our pockets.
I should add to the point above that not all locations are economical and therefore it does not make economic (or environmental sense) to install turbines just because they are beautiful.
In fact often offshore is more economical because the winds are much much better. Only 20% faster average wind for the year results in 80% more electricity with the same equipment. So even if installation in the water is more expensive it may generate less expensive electricity.
However if there are ridges with 7 m/s average annual wind in South Carolina it would be a magnificent addition both to the beauty AND the economy of the state.
The new strategy is just another development that South Carolina is doing to create energy. <a href="southeastdiscovery.com">South Carolina gated communities</a> understand the idea of going green. Golf and beach fronts combined with an energy efficient community make South Carolina a hot spot for second and retirement homes.
There is no doubt that political leadership can sometimes create inroads in the private sector and this is a good opportunity for the state government to create positive change. Inspite of the steep expenses involved to keep the momentum moving though, supporters are quick to remind that a single turbine can provide 3.6 megawatts of power, enough to power 1,700 homes. This will be a prudent investment for better resulrs both for the government and the public.Fire Resistant Clothing
Electricity or any type of energy produced from winds are better and safer compared to energy produced from coal which contributes to air pollution. I do not understand how these wind turbines can be not a wonderful sight to watch? it is in fact such a beautiful sight! It does encourage better health and does not disrupt the lives of people living nearby. I also agree that investment in energy derived from wind turbines are beneficial for both the people and the government.
Brighton Colorado Real estate