Comments on: Advanced Electricity Technologies Could Lower CO2 Control Costs By 50% http://www.environmentalleader.com/2007/08/20/advanced-electricity-technologies-could-lower-co2-control-costs-by-50/ Environmental Leader Thu, 24 May 2012 16:26:26 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Tuba http://www.environmentalleader.com/2007/08/20/advanced-electricity-technologies-could-lower-co2-control-costs-by-50/comment-page-1/#comment-445582 Tuba Wed, 07 Mar 2012 12:13:03 +0000 http://www.environmentalleader.com/2007/08/20/advanced-electricity-technologies-could-lower-co2-control-costs-by-50/#comment-445582 A wind turbine will not make a sfinigicant dent in your electric bill unless you live in a place where the wind blows pretty hard most of the time. Even in a very windy location, it may take 10 years for to generate enough power to pay for the initial cost. Windmills are designed to produce maximum power at a particular wind speed; at half that speed, they produce only one eighth as much power. Here's a link for some commercially available windmills. If you build your own, it will probably be much less efficient. In most cases, the price tag does not include a tower or installation. Check your electric bill to see how many kilowatt hours you use during your windy season. Divide by the number of hours in the billing period to get the average power consumption. Before deciding on a windmill, you should compare against other options. In urban communities with lots of sunshine, solar is best. Gasification is a much more attractive option for areas that don't get much wind or sunshine. However, the gas turbines that go with them tend to be pretty noisy, so they are not suitable for crowded urban communities. A wind turbine will not make a sfinigicant dent in your electric bill unless you live in a place where the wind blows pretty hard most of the time. Even in a very windy location, it may take 10 years for to generate enough power to pay for the initial cost. Windmills are designed to produce maximum power at a particular wind speed; at half that speed, they produce only one eighth as much power. Here’s a link for some commercially available windmills. If you build your own, it will probably be much less efficient. In most cases, the price tag does not include a tower or installation. Check your electric bill to see how many kilowatt hours you use during your windy season. Divide by the number of hours in the billing period to get the average power consumption. Before deciding on a windmill, you should compare against other options. In urban communities with lots of sunshine, solar is best. Gasification is a much more attractive option for areas that don’t get much wind or sunshine. However, the gas turbines that go with them tend to be pretty noisy, so they are not suitable for crowded urban communities.

]]> By: Shel Horowitz, Ethical Marketing Expert http://www.environmentalleader.com/2007/08/20/advanced-electricity-technologies-could-lower-co2-control-costs-by-50/comment-page-1/#comment-7566 Shel Horowitz, Ethical Marketing Expert Fri, 24 Aug 2007 11:56:02 +0000 http://www.environmentalleader.com/2007/08/20/advanced-electricity-technologies-could-lower-co2-control-costs-by-50/#comment-7566 I am sorry, but inclusion of nuclear and coal in the mix casts serious doubt on your recommendations. I personally believe that conservation and radical re-engineering of many products can cut our energy uses 780 to 80 percent, but that big, centralized energy systems are first of all, inefficient by their nature, and second, in the cases of nuclear and coal, inherently dangerous. Solar, wind, geothermal, etc. are much more viable alternatives, and when combined with massive conservation and re-engineering, contain the key to long-term energy security. I recommend reading Amory Lovins. Here's an introductory article to his work that I wrote a few years ago: http://www.frugalmarketing.com/dtb/amorylovins.shtml Shel Horowitz, author, Principled Profit: Marketing That Puts People First I am sorry, but inclusion of nuclear and coal in the mix casts serious doubt on your recommendations. I personally believe that conservation and radical re-engineering of many products can cut our energy uses 780 to 80 percent, but that big, centralized energy systems are first of all, inefficient by their nature, and second, in the cases of nuclear and coal, inherently dangerous. Solar, wind, geothermal, etc. are much more viable alternatives, and when combined with massive conservation and re-engineering, contain the key to long-term energy security.

I recommend reading Amory Lovins. Here’s an introductory article to his work that I wrote a few years ago: http://www.frugalmarketing.com/dtb/amorylovins.shtml

Shel Horowitz, author, Principled Profit: Marketing That Puts People First

]]> By: LEE LOE http://www.environmentalleader.com/2007/08/20/advanced-electricity-technologies-could-lower-co2-control-costs-by-50/comment-page-1/#comment-7469 LEE LOE Thu, 23 Aug 2007 16:30:41 +0000 http://www.environmentalleader.com/2007/08/20/advanced-electricity-technologies-could-lower-co2-control-costs-by-50/#comment-7469 NO! No to nuclear, coal carbon capture and storage. The inclusion of these options casts doubts on much else that you advise. NO! No to nuclear, coal carbon capture and storage. The inclusion of these options casts doubts on much else that you advise.

]]>