SPECIAL FEATURES:
Email
Japanese breakthrough will make wind power cheaper than nuclear
A surprising aerodynamic innovation in wind turbine design called the 'wind lens' could triple the output of a typical wind turbine, making it less costly than nuclear power.
Mon, Aug 29 2011 at 2:47 AM
Related Topics:
Snapshot from video
NOTE: Some major wind projects like the proposed TWE Carbon Valley project in Wyoming are already pricing in significantly lower than coal power -- $80 per MWh for wind versus $90 per MWh for coal -- and that is without government subsidies using today's wind turbine technology.
The International Clean Energy Analysis (ICEA) gateway estimates that the U.S. possesses 2.2 million km2 of high wind potential (Class 3-7 winds) — about 850,000 square miles of land that could yield high levels of wind energy. This makes the U.S. something of a Saudi Arabia for wind energy, ranked third in the world for total wind energy potential.
Let's say we developed just 20 percent of those wind resources — 170,000 square miles (440,000 km2) or an area roughly 1/4 the size of Alaska — we could produce a whopping 8.7 billion megawatt hours of electricity each year (based on a theoretical conversion of six 1.5 MW turbines per km2 and an average output of 25 percent. (1.5 MW x 365 days x 24 hrs x 25% = 3,285 MWh's).
The United States uses about 26.6 billion MWh's, so at the above rate we could satisfy a full one-third of our total annual energy needs. (Of course, this assumes the concurrent deployment of a nationwide Smart Grid that could store and disburse the variable sources of wind power as needed using a variety of technologies — gas or coal peaking, utility scale storage via batteries or fly-wheels, etc).
Now what if a breakthrough came along that potentially tripled the energy output of those turbines? You see where I'm going. We could in theory supply the TOTAL annual energy needs of the U.S. simply by exploiting 20 percent of our available wind resources.
Well, such a breakthrough has been made, and it's called the "wind lens."
Imagine: no more dirty coal power, no more mining deaths, no more nuclear disasters, no more polluted aquifers as a result of fracking. Our entire society powered by the quiet "woosh" of a wind turbine. Kyushu University's wind lens turbine is one example of the many innovations happening right now that could in the near future make this utopian vision a reality.
Yes, it's a heck of a lot of wind turbines (about 2,640,000) but the U.S. with its endless miles of prairie and agricultural land is one of the few nations that could actually deploy such a network of wind turbines without disrupting the current productivity of the land (Russia and China also come to mind). It would also be a win-win for states in the highest wind area — the Midwest — which has been hard hit by the recession. And think of the millions upon millions of jobs that would be created building a 21st century energy distribution system free of the shackles of ever-diminishing fossil fuel supplies.
It's also important to point out that growth in wind power capacity is perfectly symbiotic with projected growth in electric vehicles. EV battery packs can soak up wind power produced during the night, helping to equalize the curve of daytime energy demand. So the controversial investment currently being entertained by President Obama to pipe oil down from the Canadian Tar Sands would — in my utopian vision — be a moot point.
It is indeed a lofty vision, but the technology we need is now in our reach. And think of the benefits of having our power production fed by a resource that is both free and unlimited. One downside often cited by advocates of coal and gas power is that wind turbines require a lot more maintenence than a typical coal or gas power plant. But in a lagging economy this might just be wind power's biggest upside — it will create lots and lots of permanent jobs, sparking a new cycle of economic growth in America.
Editor's note: Want more info? Karl breaks down the math in his next post.
The opinions expressed by MNN Bloggers and those providing comments are theirs alone, and do not reflect the opinions of MNN.com. While we have reviewed their content to make sure it complies with our Terms and Conditions, MNN is not responsible for the accuracy of any of their information.
You might also like:
Sign in with one of these accounts to add your comment.
EDITORS' PICKS
Earn 100 points for signing up for a free iMeet trial now.
Sponsored by
Advertisement
TODAY'S MOST POPULAR ON
- Tornado survivor finds dog during live TV interview
- Why we turn to dogs when disaster strikes
- 15 famous people who mysteriously disappeared
- 5 of the best-looking cars ever
- Superfoods: 11 berries to improve your health
- Rebounding from adversity: 7 cities that have survived tragedy
- Bride finds self-esteem by taking a diet from her mirror
- 10 false facts most people think are true
- Is that snake venomous?
- Mystery cause of Irish potato famine finally solved
From our sponsor
Follow us:
NEWSLETTER
Advertisement
California voters have a rare opportunity to shut down their nuclear power plants! www.californianuclearinitiative.com
and why would you ever want to shut down a nuclear power plant? im assuming that you have absolutely zero clue as to how a reactor operates, have no knowledge of nuclear engineering, and have no idea what kind of safety protocols exist that govern how a plant runs. until you go to school and really learn about it, then you should keep your mouth shut and let the people who have gotten the degrees determine the fate of the plants, not the ignorant public.
I know a little about the nuclear , but I see what is happening when something goes wrong.... As it happens from time to time...
See son , this is a gun and it is made to kill people or animals. It is loaded so do not play with it, leave on the shelf ... When the unwanted happen's " I told him not to touch it !!! Damn It !!!
But then it's too late... Fukushima, it's too late, Chernobyl... it's too late.. How many other that we will never konw about ?
Apparently the safety protocols at Fukishima were not enough. The people with the degrees were not able to put humpty dumpty back together again. So who is it that has ZERO clue?
Unfortunately, the people who have the degrees mostly work for the nuclear proponents.
Existing safety protocols are at best a bad joke, as shown by Chernoble and Fukishima.
right...like Japan? With our aging nuclear power plant and no clean, safe, and efficient waste disposal methods existing yet, this is not a technology that is worth considering. There are safer and more refined methods of developing clean energy that should be invested in.
Don't be an ass - especially when you do not know the information yourself.
Other than a brief mention of noise being a problem with wind turbines, in general, they failed to talk about noise, vibration of this new design. Hopefully, sound & vibration can be compatible with the enjoyment of all living creatures. It is extremely important.
Wouldn't it be nice if the wind lens could be added to all existing wind turbines in the US? Doubling current annual generation capacity (43,461 wiki 2011 3Q) to 86,922
Duh......
I thought wind power was a great idea... Until I understood that on the hottest day in America, the winds were silent. Good luck with that, there isn't enough storage to make up for a 75% + drop in generation on the peak demand days.
I suspect the reason this will not happen is because too many large corporations are making too much money from the status quo. "If you wonder why something is the way it is, find out who is making money from it being that way."
Why wasn't this discovery made in the United States? Where is our investment in green energy? Our investment should be educating our children for the world of the future and invest in infrastructure, we have the means. we just need the will!
It looks so simple doesn't it. I wish I though of it first.
ZERO CARBON FOOTPRINT. Any other questions?
Wow. Neato. Are the parts of the turbine made of air? Sounds almost miraculous and unbelievable.
Yes, who cares?
It is most certainly not a "zero carbon footprint". Think of the production, shipping, and maintenance that they will require. However, it is absolutely a renewable energy source.
There is no end to the ways we can harness wind energy. Your article is clearly out of date. Did you spend more than 5 seconds researching the subject?
There is only one windmill solution for the planet: A planet sized windmill. Two pivot points, one at each pole and one blade that circumnavigates the globe. It would take 24 hours for one revolution, but the power generated would be incredible. Now, that's a crazy idea!
Care to provide a link, or at least the name of this concept?
Pages