A wind power cautionary tale
Here’s a “green jobs” tale gone awry from my Colorado Springs neighborhood. Beware of naked emperors peddling economic prosperity through environmental alternatives. They are not always what they seem:
Just days after a news conference announcing the arrival of Colorado Springs’ first wind energy company, the deal appears to have hit heavy turbulence.
The Colorado Springs Regional Economic Development Corp., which arranged the deal to bring Rocky Wind Power to the city, sent out a news release Monday raising questions about the company’s credibility and past performance.
Mike Kazmierski, EDC president, said that since Thursday’s announcement, several people had contacted him with complaints about Prevailing Power, the Iowa wind company owned by Rocky Wind owners Steve and Pam Stultz, including at least four consumer complaints filed with the Iowa Attorney General’s Office.
The Iowa Attorney General’s Office could not be reached on Monday.
Furthermore, Kazmierski said, questions had been raised about the technology the company planned to bring to Colorado Springs.
“At this point, he has some issues to resolve in Iowa,” Kazmierski said. “Whether that means he comes here at some point is his call.”
It’s a dramatic shift in tone from Thursday’s news conference announcing Rocky Wind’s decision to locate in Colorado Springs, when Kazmierski called Rocky Wind a “very strong, reputable company.”
Background on Rocky Wind’s shady parent company, Prevailing Wind, here.
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
 |
Jaczko the Jerk: Harry Reid’s sexist crony gets the boot
May 23, 2012 05:15 AM by Michelle Malkin
31 CommentsWhite House lied, jobs died
May 11, 2012 09:49 AM by Michelle Malkin
102 CommentsDrilling moratorium probe update: Green stonewallers caught red-handed
May 10, 2012 04:37 PM by Michelle Malkin
44 CommentsHillary Clinton convinces China to allow dissident and family to accompany her back to the US join ‘Global Alliance for Clean Cookstoves’
May 5, 2012 11:17 AM by Doug Powers
34 Comments
Tens of thousands to fly to Rio to discuss how to limit greenhouse gas emissions
May 3, 2012 07:03 PM by Doug Powers
51 Comments
Obama energy solutions: Chicken crap is the new algae
April 30, 2012 01:13 PM by Michelle Malkin
145 Comments
EPA’s “Crucify them” guy throws himself under the bus
April 30, 2012 12:41 PM by Michelle Malkin
60 Comments
Fox Sports baseball analyst does Al Gore a solid during MLB broadcast
April 29, 2012 10:49 AM by Doug Powers
61 Comments
Categories: Enviro-nitwits
Pundit & Pundette
» Patterico's chilling account of harassmentNice Deb
» The Organized Left Now Stalking RomneyBetsys Page
» Cruising the WebNRO
» Unleash Biden!NewsBusters.org
» Very Annoyed Matthews Rips ‘Horse’s Ass Right-Wingers’ Who Cite ‘Thrill Up My Leg,’ Calls C-SPAN Host a ‘Jackass’
Smells like passing wind, to me.
Someone with a mischievous bent might be tempted to remark that “Wind” seems to be at least at some risk of being “broken”.
Steve and Pam Stultz respond: “This blows!”
I don’t understand the ‘wind farm’ mentality. Pickens wants government money to go to him and that’s why he supports it.
But you have to produce the energy where it is consumed. Why wouldn’t we just put wind turbines on the tops of the skyscrapers (along with solar cells?) That way it doesn’t take up space and you don’t have to transport the electricity.
For new buildings, you can incorporate turbines into the walls of the building going all the way up the outside of the skyscraper.
All this government money ‘pushing’ people this way will undoubtedly end up with waste and fraud.
Nobody does anything in the government that makes sense anymore. They only care how much money they can spend and who they can give it to. Whether it helps, is good, or works, is not relevant to government.
Alternative energy scams are a dime a dozen–they tout rebates and tax credits but when you ask them to actually cost it out they have not a clue.
My parents had a windmill to pump water-it was neat until you got 2 or 3 still days in a row then HAND PUMP TILL YOU DROP-that could go on for days. Seven and three quarter seconds after the electricity grid came in we converted.
Say hell-o to the Man of La Mancha.
It’s not a company if it has to survive off of government largesse. Subsidies from taxes means that it’s not truly competing in the market place. If they “compete” for a contract and don’t get it, instead of folding due to lack of funds, they just hit up Uncle Sam for a few more bux.
That’s not a company; that’s just panhandling under a different name.
Once you get over the quaint romantic novelty of seeing them whirl, it sinks in that these monstrous things are a blight on the landscape or your once pristine unruffled horizons and seashores. You don’t pass by one on the highway in thirty as you would a nuclear power plant, but they go for hundreds of acres, miles after miles. They’re just plain UGLY, marring the true beauty of our countrysides and deserts! And noisy. Forget what happens when the winds stops or a tornado topples them over, they’re just UGLY. Yet there are those who want to literally line the Interstates with those whales of the energy world. There are even anime cartoons of the damn things whirling away in the center of cities (to show how caringly green the animators are I guess), and before we snicker, such is EXACTLY what Mayor Bloomberg wants to see in NYC! Windmills competing with skyscrapers! Oh, stop the green insaity!!
James Greenidge
Queens NY
Oh, man!
The “picture” just hit me.
“…wind power….” and the immediately beneath photo of ManBearPig juxtaposed….
Classic!
Wind mills kill birds, many of which are from endangered species. They are far worse than oil spills.
Frankly, there are a reasons why no industrialized nation in the world uses wind power.
If it worked so well people would be using it already. It is not exactly a new theory.
Wind power is just another example of the enviro-nitwits peddling an old scam…
BINGO!!
***
When I drive the shorter and scenic mountain road from El Paso, Tx. to Denver I pass about 100 wind power towers near Pasturas, NM. They are usually spinning–and it looks like a free energy lunch.
***
But the power costs 1.5 times as much as conventional coal fired generation sources, and at least twice as much as the nuclear power sources cost. And the costs to maintain and repair many smaller plants usually exceeds the costs for larger conventional plants.
***
And if the wind speed drops another “on line” plant must have enough spare capacity running to make up the power shortfall. If the backup power can’t supply the missing power within a second or two–the power grid starts shutting down, and lots of blackouts occur–like New York City. Ditto for solar generation sources when a cloud obscures the sun. System stability problems can cause big blackouts when these events occur if intermittent power sources are more than about 10 percent of total system load.
***
We used windmill power sources for many centuries–and replaced them with cheaper and better sources in the last hundred years. Without government subsidies none of these uneconomical and unreliable “green energy” sources would exist. Don’t waste any more money on them–build the reliable, cheap, and non-polluting nuclear power plants instead. Let’s get some real payback for the money we spend–instead of getting only a “warm fuzzy” feeling from these BULLS**T energy sources.
***
John Bibb
***
Sounds like another democrat con job…
If you really want to see something:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7nSB1SdVHqQ
When a turbine handgrenades, Katy bar the door! The explosion is not only spectacular but you better hope your other windmills are not within the fragment range.
Perhaps windmill deployment is being pushed by trial lawyers, hoping to cash in on the emotional distress caused by watching the epic failure of a turbine.
War Eagle and granite; exactly on point. If these alternative energies actually worked without gubmint subsidies, companies would be doing them (nuclear, gasoline) and the democrats would be blocking their expansion. Democrats love grants, especially to their constituents (blacks, academia, unions) so they propose these sources which get going by grants, and can’t survive without continuing grants.
Greenpeace and the Sierra Club have denounced Facebook for putting its new data center in Prineville Oregon, because the town is run by coal power. Now Central Oregon is waging a war against these enviro-nuts, who would rather see the unemployment of the area soar beyond its 20 percent. Time to send eagle feathers to their headquarters in protest of the eagles killed in wind mills.
Better yet, have the picture showing ManBearPig speaking and the windmill farm facing him, powered by his hot air.
ThackerAgency asks:
Because wind and solar power are diffuse. And skyscrapers typically don’t stand apart from other buildings, which means they cast shadows and create turbulence, each of which would interfere with the power generation at nearby buildings. And they are expensive. Micro-generation only makes sense when you don’t need very much power to begin with.
Wind turbines only work for a specified range of wind speeds, they’re useless if the wind is too slow or too fast. Solar doesn’t work when it’s cloudy, let alone when it’s dark. This means that there are limited regions that are good sites for wind and solar, just as there are limited sites that are for hydro-power.
What “renewable” power proponents don’t mention is that, because of high variability inherent in wind and solar, they have to have a conventional backup ready to go when they fade. So you have to have conventional generation to supply peak demand in addition to the solar and wind facilities, which are more expensive than conventional facilities to begin with.
“the money was in rebates”
Per the linked original article.
They wanted you and me to pay for their turbines.
Here is a link to an excellent article about wind power that was posted in the American Thinker back on February 15th of this year:
http://www.americanthinker.com/2010/02/wind_energys_ghosts_1.html
I will on occasion travel through the Tehachapi Pass, and it sickens me that these non-functioning windmills will forever litter that landscape.
LOL–I love it. Right on.
Wind power is just another environmental hoax.
Their theme song should be Spinal Taps’ “Break Like The Wind”.
Another pyramid scheme like all ‘environmental-friendly’ crap and Social inSecurity.
I don’t get it really. Where are the environmentalist with the wind turbines? Talking about UGLY and a real threat to the bird populations. Ever see the ugly turbines in and around Indio, CA? U-G-L-Y!
“There’s a might wind a-blowin’ and it’s blowin’ for you!”
You guys are being too hard on windmills. They are true multi-taskers.
Sure, they occasionally produce some power on good days, but they can do so much more:
1. They are great as clothes dryers – Hook those sheets and undies on them when they aren’t moving and just wait. Once they get whirling they dry those clothes in no time. As it gets faster the clothes fly off and the kids have a great time running after them before they hit the dirt. (Great aerobic exercise!)
2. White noise machine on steroids – Can’t sleep? Just park you car next to one of these windmills and the constant hum will put you to sleep like a baby on a dryer.
3. Slice and dicer – Can’t afford meat ’cause the price is too high? Then wait for a flock of birds to show up around these giant blenders. Birdburgers for weeks!
See? And that is just off the top of my head.
Windmills, they aren’t just for power anymore.
Mr. Tesla was shafted by Edison. Tesla designed and built a industry-worthy generator for Edison and then Edison turned around and renigged on his agreement with Tesla for company shares and subsequently fired Nicola….keeping his DC generator patents to boot. Telsa, not to be outdone created, with the help of his new partner, Westinghouse, a better more efficient generator and method called AC current which as most know, we use today. Any generator still requires an input of energy (wind, water, gas etc.) to produce a flowing electric current down the wires. What most do not know is that Tesla also invented a generator that, when powered on, not only runs itself but also powers a load. In other words, once you turned it on you could disconnect it from any source of power and it would RUN ITSELF and power it’s load. Forever. Or, at least until you turned it off or the parts broke. Westinghouse saw the genius of this idea and since anything Tesla did Westinghouse owned the patents to….this technology went on the shelf. Because as we all know, if you have your own power generator at home powering itself, and your home at the same time, without any input from a city grid, then there would be no way to profit from it. And so it was shelved.
Perhaps if the U.S. patent office wasn’t so corrupt (speaking from experience) we could get these types of generators on the market.
That is TOTAL BS! How stupid do you think birds are? Have you ever even seen a wind turbine? You won’t ever find a single dead bird.
Those wind vanes aren’t exactly spinning like propellers. Even if birds were to fly into them, it wouldn’t kill them any more than flying into a building kills birds. It just doesn’t happen. Migrating birds fly much too high and believe it or not, they can manuever around things.
Pickens is buying his generators from China. We’re creating more green jobs in China with all of this tax money than in the USA.
The problem with wind power is not environmental damage or that it doesn’t work. It’s that it will never amount to a significant source of electricity. Wind is very useful for local dedicated purposes and they pencil out economically. The break-even point is about seven years.
The point is that they will never be a substitute for a good nuclear (or other source of cheap robust energy) plant.
Much of the nonsense posted on this thread may be funny but it is wrong. Wind turbines work and they are profitable.
***
HI SURVEYOR #28. Yes–Tesla was an eccentric genius who invented the technology that made possible the A.C. power system we use today. And some of his wireless power transmission system schemes are still mystery technologies today.
***
But as far as a generator that powers a load and keeps itself running without other energy inputs? Please review Physics 101 and basic Thermodynamics. No free lunches–no perpetual motion machines–no cold fusion power sources were mentioned in any of my BSEE or MSEE courses! Only in the political realm does 2+2=5.
***
Regards, John Bibb
***
You beat me to it.
Thank you.
You obviously don’t have a clue about what you are talking about.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2005-01-04-windmills-usat_x.htm
burrowing owls and other raptors.
Funny how you refer to Physics 101 and perpetual motion machines. Einstein’s General Theory breaks the first rule of Physics. The Law of Conservation of Energy. According to Eisntein’s own theory….you should be able to drill a hole straight into the earth, from one end to the other….then, drop an object through it. Now ACCORDING TO PHYSICS 101
TOTAL BS!! Wake up and smell the coffee. I’ve visited and analyzed these installations several times. You link is a crock. Use your common sense. AGW is junk science too and I am sure there are many sources to link to that will challenge my own experience and common sense.
The abandoned wind farm at South Point (Ka Lae) on the Big Island is a monument to greed and stupidity. It is a scar upon the land.
Or Kansas “Dust in the Wind“
Right, some guy who post on the internet is the real expert. Give us all a break!
BTW: Common sense says the Robin this morning should never never have slammed into our house killing itself. Common sense says that birds know exactly what the blades of a windmill are going to do
ooops….where was I? Oh yeah…
ACCORDING TO PHYSICS 101…dropping a ball through this hole would create a situation where “gravity” pulls the object down through the hole, accelerating it to terminal velocity, then the ball would pass the center of the earth and with momentum, continue “up” the other side of the hole to emerge at the rim of the opposite hole (all of this is theoretical of course). When the ball reached the opposite side, it would then “fall” back down the hole and repeat the process over and over…which in theory would give you a perpetual motion machine….which of course violates the Laws of Physics in the first place. How can Einstein say there can be no perpetual motion machine yet this GLARINGLY obvious problem still exists in physics. Note: don’t trust Physics today…it is bunk.
Mister P: do yourself a favor and visit one of these wind farms. It will be instantly obvious to you what nonsense it is for birds to be “slaughtered” by wind turbines.
It is no less stupid to be making these “bird holocaust” arguments in fighting wind farms that to be arguing “snail darter annihilation” to prevent dams being built. Both are equally stupid.
We don’t need to resort to pseudo-science and stupid logic that defies all common sense to win our case. If you don’t understand that, YOU are a nut.
Also, one more thing to ponder John Bibb…
When you shine a light, laser or flashlight or whatever, through a tank of water…let’s say an aquarium…we know from Physics 101 that the light slows down as it passes through the water….but when it (your light beam) exits the other side of the tank….WHAT POWER SOURCE is there to accelerate the light photons BACK TO THE SPEED OF LIGHT? Where is the source of power to do this coming from? Also, there is NO SCIENTIST on this planet that can explain how a simple fridge magnet works either. How does it hold itself up endlessly against the all mighty pull of “gravity”? Where is the POWER SOURCE for this endless energy coming from? You won’t find any answers to these questions in todays physics.
Errah, MONORAIL!
Perpetual motion machines are theoretical only. Mechanical parts will always have some type of friction which is translated as heat or some sort of energy (light, etc.). This is waste and it will occur with all machinery.
Einstein was a brilliant theoretical physicist who thought outside the box, but he wasn’t an engineer. We do not have a way of creating a 100% efficient machine yet. If anyone ever finds a way to do so, please contact me. We will make billions and can retire within 30 days.
You think someone YOU are the only one with access to forbidden lore?
Tesla had some successes, but this one doesn’t work. The patents have long expired, and people have repeatedly built it. No dice. Our better understanding of physics today can’t identify changes or improvements to make it work.
There IS no free lunch. Even the stars, even our Sun, will eventually run out of fuel and burn out. The universe itself will eventually grow cold. We live in a closed system: our universe. There is no way to add energy to the system, only methods of moving it around inside.
Dark Matter
My preferred energy source.
They don’t even know I’m using it.
They’re just trying to infer there is less around.
Wind turbines kill birds – LOTS of them.
At Altamont alone -
Power transmission lines to wind farms, ( in remote areas far away from population centers where no one wants them…), have to be sized for the MAXIMUM amount of amperage that the farm could possibly generate. That even though the farms rarely generate even 10% that amount of juice. Not only is the excess cost a colossal waste, the energy needed to manufacture all that copper isn’t generally included in energy break-even calculations, (as T Boone Pickens was rudely informed before he pulled out of those wind energy investments that he was able to pull out of without losing his shorts.).
The Danes generate 20% of their electricity from wind but have yet to decommission any of their fossil fuel power plants because – wind is UNRELIABLE.
So that’s wind, what about solar panels? Well… trees cannot cannot grow under a solar panel and solar panels generally do not work under trees. Hey, let’s cut down all the trees and put up solar panels!
Eco-nitwits.
Slightly OT, here’s a great story about where the data for “global warming”: comes from. Hahahahahaha!
Its like the old question goes – why is coal and oil like a rubberband? Solar panels – they work very well at night and on cloudy days, wind turbines, they work very well when there is no wind and when the temp drops below their operational threshhold.
No. It’s all over the place if you look.
I’m not saying there is a free lunch. I’m saying that what is taught as fact today is not the fact at all. Energy is just different frequencies of waves. For instance: your eyeball only functions correctly if visible light is hitting it. You can’t see in infrared because it doesn’t excite the “light detectors” in your eye as white light does, but infrared light exists nonetheless. If we can somehow build generators tuned to different wave “frequencies” then they would be able to operate and power a load while draining energy from the vast cosmos. Basically the energy would not be “free”, as in something for nothing, but you would be able to generate power without connecting your generator to any other power source…ie, wind, solar, water whatever. And we would never be able to exhaust the source because the source would be the entire universe and I doubt were gonna need all the energy thats out there to power our little planet. “Frequencies” is the main word here.
Westinghouse has a patent for the minuteman missle that does something very similar to what I’m talking about. The patent hasn’t expired….but good luck getting a copy of it from the patent office.
Anyone see the bit on tv about Bloom Energy and the BloomBox? It is fascinating. Fuel cells powered by natural gas, etc.
I have solved the solar power problem and the wind power problem.
First, we build solar panel farms next to windmill farms.
Second, we build a really big flashlight.
Third, we build a really big electric fan.
Next, at night we shine the really big flashlight on the solar panels. This drives the really big fan that will blow on the windmill farm. Thus, the big flashlight can power the solar cells that power the fan that drives the windmills. It works in rain or shine, night or day, and even in still weather!
The world’s energy problem has been solved!!!
Hooray for WarEagle!!!!
wait – then how are the dems going to run their unicorn factories?
I have a Minuteman missle powering my microwave. Al Gore shows up at my door occasionally with a Chinese “monk” asking if they can borrow it for awhile…
Wait, is someone suggesting the MinuteMan III ICBM is a perpetual motion machine? I mean it does make a really big bang but I was unaware it had any facility for powering the cosmos. I mean, it certainly can relocate a sizable chuck of the cosmos but that is hardly the same thing…
Is that a unicorn or a umicorn?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_L6IeH6KeaY
Check out this classic about 5:20 for the umicorn.
Basic grammar…use “an” in front of words beginning with vowel instead of “a”…Sorry, Mrs. Yarborough…
No, no no. Thats not what I’m trying to get across here. Inside the missle is a device that can generate power in a way that needs no outside electrical plug or current. Westinghouse holds the patent to this device. It is installed in the missle in case there is a power failure in the system which supplies the power to the missle as it sits in its silo.
The whole perpetual motion idea came when I was trying to explain Einsteins theory of gravity. If you extrapolate the theory you get the impression that the EARTH is a “free energy” device in itself because NO KNOWN POWER SOURCE IS DRAINED by so-called “gravity”. Therefore….according to Einsteins THEORY….not Einstein himself…..the Earth IS A FREE ENERGY DEVICE. So in other words…Newton and Einsteins theories would create a situation where the EARTH is a free energy device because a SOURCE of energy for gravity has never been found or proven to exist. In short…Newton and Einsteins theories BOTH BREAK THE LAWS OF PHYSICS as they are taught today.
jamesgreenidge said:
And! You haven’t seen anything so ugly as abandoned wind farms! Grease dripping down the support shaft, propellers missing, other parts rusting away. (South Point, Big Island Hawaii).
Right up the hill they’ve built another farm with, I suspect Federal $$$.
Ok, it’s a battery.
Okay. Put down the big, heavy, physics books and take three steps back…
I think you misunderstandimated one of the earlier parts of the books and should start over. Either that, or you fell and suffered a serious head injury and should seek prompt medical care. Oh, and if a guy in a tin suit shows up tell him Dorothy is looking for him.
And for the record, many physics courses start with the Newtonian model and then proceed to Einstein’s theories of special and general relativity. Then, you might get in to quantum theory…
But if you want to discuss your theories on the “SOURCE of energy for gravity” I think you should go look for ZeroAngel in New Jersey. I am sure he would LOVE to discuss this with you at length…
It is this amazing new technology called “Everreadybunnygizer.” It is amazing and you can buy them at the drug store for only, like 2 bucks!
It’s gonna change the world!
That’s likely because everyone, (but you), knows that none of the four known natural forces expend any energy in order to exist.
Or maybe a big rubber band stretched around the shaft of a generator?
Didn’t the guy who built Coral Castle in Florida create a perpetual motion rocking chair. Only problem was, he had to set it in motion to begin with. He wrotes books on magnetism that no one else could understand. Maybe a combination of magnetism and gravity could create sustainable power.
Give me some tax dollars and I’ll study it for you. I want to go $green$.
That was Whistler’s Mother.
A battery? That’s funny! I thought for sure one of you would come back at me with that one. No. I’m talking about a device that…somehow…utilizes…”tunes-in” if you will…to certain frequencies of the vast spectrum of frequecies arriving from space in so many different ways.. (which would be KINETIC) into flowing electricity for power. not a battery.
As for the Newtonian model. What did he model exactly? I’ll tell you. Newtons theory of gravity does not explain WHY objects attract one another. It simply Models this observation.
There is no known power source supporting the gravitational
field that Newton claims to be emanating from our planet and
from all objects.
Despite the ongoing energy expended by Earth’s gravity to
hold objects down and the moon in orbit, this energy never
diminishes in strength or drains a power source – in violation
of one of our most fundamental laws of physics: the Law of
Conservation of Energy.
Yes.
This is the current state of affairs in the Standard Model.
But…if you start out assuming you have correctly identified the fundamental forces of nature to begin with, then you end up with largely flawed models of the physical world.
Dude, a solar cell does that with the frequency of visible light.
And dude, an RFID chip uses the electro-magnetic energy in the radio frequency spectrum to power itself.
What type of crazy are you talking about?
Actually, we’ve successfully modeled gravity pretty darned well – even given the fact that we don’t know what causes it.
I think you’re right.
Several expensive weapon systems use atomic batteries. I think this is what Surveyor may be confusing.
And Westinghouse didn’t want to develop this wonder product even throughout all the years of fierce competitive battles with GE.
Surveyor, the ability to actually build an invention isn’t a requirement for receiving a patent.
Theory people, theory. It is different than fact. What is taught today is only theory. Again, no known power source for any force is unacceptable in todays science but yet readily accepted as just the way it is. Thats sad.
Dude this and dude that.
First “photovoltaic” (solar cells) dont receive any certain frequency from light but simply are bombarded with energetic light packets from the visible light spectrum (many frequencies), known as photons, which react with the cells to produce current.
Secondly, RFID chips do not power themselves unless they have an on-board battery (active RFID). The other type needs an outside source for them to operate. (passive RFID). What kind of crazy are you talking?
Third, a good “model” of gravity, or any of the other forces requires one single theory to blend all of these forces together into a single unified theory of everything. Unfortunately, when the current theories don’t pan out, instead of looking at the flawed assumptions in the current theory (or patchwork of theories that make up physics today) they simply create a new theory to explain the inconsistencies with the old theory. In the end…it’s all theory…not necessarily what is happening.
What gets me laughing is the gall of scientists to come up with the LAWS of physics after having only been studying this stuff for a mere 300 years or so. The universe (as far as einsteins theory has led scientists to assume) is about 15-18 billion years old. But we humans, man, we wrote the LAWS on physics after a couple hundred.
Now that.is.funny.
Again. We’ve modeled gravity quite well. The models work. The models have allowed man to land on the moon and reenter earth’s atmosphere. The models have accurately predicted when satellites will fall from the sky.
We might not know what causes gravity, but we’ve modeled it really, really, really good.
Solar cells are designed with absorber materials which maximizes the band gap for, you know, solar light. The energy of solar light is centered within the visible light spectrum. In other words, the frequency of visible light.
That’s dead wrong. Passive RFID chips are powered by the energy they receive from the transmitter.
Surveyor, I don’t think you know what a model is.
I can model the passage of time without knowing what causes the passage of time.
I can model someone’s mortgage payments even if I don’t know why they have a mortgage.
I can model the tides even if I don’t know what causes the tides.
Just because you see a wind turbine spinning, it doesn’t mean that it’s generating electricity.
ECS
No, that’s absolutely right. Passive RFID chips don’t power themselves. They require energy from the transmitter. No transmission = no power.
ECS
Not sure who you’re agreeing/disagreeing with, but passive RFID chips do “power themselves.” They power themselves utilizing the RF energy from the transmitter.
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice. But, in practice, there is…
I am only up to chapter 9 or so in “The Fabric of the Cosmos: Space, Time, and the Texture of Reality” by Brian Greene. Dr. Green writes a good book.
I am guessing someone here is getting his “physics” from Dr. Seuss.
Surveyor,
At best what you have is a transducer, a device that can transform one type of energy to another. A solar cell is one such device, a sonar transceiver is another. The difficulty is capturing enough of one energy and transforming it into enough electrical energy to be usable and useful.
But even if Westinghouse has mastered such a device, I bet it will be sometime before one can generate enough electrical energy to run my air conditioner in Arizona during July.
In addition, I would challenge that the transfer of energy from whatever Westinghouse uses (x-rays, cosmic radiation, Bruce Banner’s gamma rays)is still not 100% efficient. This will still not qualify as a perpetual motion device.
Corkie, the transmitter sends the frequency to the RFID to power it. The tranmitter is plugged in to a power source. It does not power itself.
Now if you could scale this up, there is no reason why we couldn’t build a transmitter that transmits directly to the devices in your home to power them right? Which is what Tesla was up to when he passed away. As per some earlier posts from today where I spoke about Tesla.
And as for NASA using Newton or Einsteins theories for space travel, perhaps you should read up on that a little.
Central to our space programs is Kepler, not Newton or Einstein.
His 3 laws of planetary motion, basic geometry, is what NASA relies on…not some mystical “force” such as gravity. In fact, during the Mercury missions, Von Braun actually said that scientists should take another look at the whole gravity situation as the orbital calculations they derived from Newton caused early satellites to fall prematurely. So they went back to regular geometry (Kepler’s laws of planetary motion) to calculate orbital trajectories.
“If a proton meets a photon where a graviton shrinks a quark would a collapsing probability wave cause a salami tsunami in Miami?”
WE82,
Hope it’s dry salami and not that greasy Genoa salami. It always causes a bit of indigestion when discussing scientific matters.
What, you don’t like Genoa salami? What do you suppose the effects of the “mystical force of gravity” would be on, say, mortadella? Would the absence or presence of rye bread and mustard make a difference? And what if it were traveling at light speed?
Ok if the mustard is Deli-style Brown Mustard and on Jewish Rye (lightly toasted) in a 0.8G environment at speeds approaching Warp 1.
Nonsense! Everybody knows that lightly toasted Jewish Rye would disintegrate at 0.8Gs at Mach 3! Unless of course it was seedless and then it would hold together until Mach 4 or maybe even Mach 6 unless you went heavy on the mayo, but it would have to be that really creamy mayo with a lot of egg and maybe just a touch of paprika sprinkled in. And yu call yourself a physicist…
Actually, just a lowly engineer. But you are assuming it to be in its original form. Ever since the early days of NASA, I have always taken my nutrition from the squeeze tubes.
Especially my Tang orange-flavored drink
“Texture of reality”?
Seriously?
I’m familiar with the book. Also based on Einsteins theories.
WarEagle82 & cabrerski, I recommend a different book. Please check it out and let me know what you think. It’s written by a fellow mechanical engineer named Mark McCutcheon.
The book is called “The Final Theory”. It is the simplest, most straight forward explanation of the world around us.
I’m happy you finally figured this out.
I used the term “itself” as in “it powers itself using the RF energy from the transmitter.” Also as in “we power ourselves by eating food.” Also as in “a solar car powers itself using electromagnetic energy from the sun.” Itself never meant “self contained.”
Um, this type of system has been built dozens of times. It’s inefficient as hell and wouldn’t eliminate anything except the curb-to-home wiring. Everything else about power generation and transmission would remain the same. Maybe this is why the concept was shelved.
It’s ok for small loads. Recharging mats are cool products, but the concept sucks for large loads (e.g. a house or even a small remote controled aircraft).
Orbital trajectory calculations don’t help calculate escape and orbit velocities for the earth or moon.
Surveyor, it’s asinine to suggest that gravitational formulas (which are essentially models) weren’t used to get a man to the moon and back.
Surely you’ll concede that the force of gravity has been accurately modeled for ballistics calculations. And you must agree that artillery can be quite accurate, right?
No, Surveyor, you are OBVIOUSLY NOT FAMILIAR with Greene’s book based on your one line summary of “based on Einstein’s theories.”
And you are going to take issue with it over the title?
Best line from a review of Surveyor’s book: “I could go on and on and on myself…but it all comes down to this: were Einstein, Oppenheimer, Heisenberg, John Bell, David Bohm, Neils Bohr, von Neumann, Max Planck, etc., etc. all out to lunch…or is McCutcheon?”
I might browse through it if I could find it at a public library but I won’t be spending money on it…
It might have to wait a bit as my reading dance card is a bit full right now (but I will check it out). I am in the middle of “Freakonomics”. Then the new WEB Griffith offering.
In other news, can some one give Chapoitier a call. I am trying to get my Coq au Vin, Harcot Verts, Pomme Aligot, and Creme Brulee into the squeeze tube but cannot figure out which wine to squeeze in with it.
How about it Chappy…a 2005 Louis Jadot PPuligny-Montrachet or a 2007 Domain de la Perriere Sancerre?
Sorry, Chap…its Chapoutier
What wine did you use to make the Coq au Vin? Seems like using the rest of that bottle might be a good choice…
This is Julia’s recipe: http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/recipe?id=7113750
She recommends 3 cups young red wine (Zinfandel, Macon or Chianti type)and
1/3 cup good brandy (optional).
If she were cooking with Jacques Pepin they would drink twice that much before the dish was done!
Of course they did! After all, the Coq in the course is an old tough rooster and needed to be tenderized. Of course, Julia and Jacques always thought the tenderizing was something they had to internalize…
Those two wines you listed were quite different in price range… $64 vs $19 a bottle…
I don’t buy a lot of $64 bottles of wine…
Nor I…I save the big bucks for my precious single malts. Besides (Chappy, plug your ears), I prefer the California wines that I have tried to date.
I have tried several California red wines lately and have found several I like.
Crane Lakes makes a nice and inexpensive Cabernet Sauvignon and Sangiovese that are very nice. I get them for about $5 a bottle locally and could probably get a discount if I wanted a case but I just don’t drink that much wine.
Oak Hill is another good California red. And there is one other that escapes my memory right now. They are available at the local Whole Foods for less than $7 a bottle.
But, I almost never drink liquor and haven’t bought a bottle since shortly after college which was a long time ago…
I prefer the quality over the quantity. I do the Malt Advocate Whisky Fest every year in either Chicago or now San Francisco. A great night with a lot of quality stuff and no hangover.