Offshore wind farms could tame hurricanes before they reach land, study says

[ScienceRocks]

Offshore wind farms could tame hurricanes before they reach land, study says

Offshore wind farms could tame hurricanes before they reach land, study says

For the past 24 years, Mark Z. Jacobson, a professor of civil and environmental engineering at Stanford, has been developing a complex computer model to study air pollution, energy, weather and climate. A recent application of the model has been to simulate the development of hurricanes. Another has been to determine how much energy wind turbines can extract from global wind currents.


In light of these recent model studies and in the aftermath of hurricanes Sandy and Katrina, he said, it was natural to wonder: What would happen if a hurricane encountered a large array of offshore wind turbines? Would the energy extraction due to the storm spinning the turbines' blades slow the winds and diminish the hurricane, or would the hurricane destroy the turbines?

So he went about developing the model further and simulating what might happen if a hurricane encountered an enormous wind farm stretching many miles offshore and along the coast. Amazingly, he found that the wind turbines could disrupt a hurricane enough to reduce peak wind speeds by up to 92 mph and decrease storm surge by up to 79 percent.

Depending on who you're...Well, being that many republicans build on the coast....A reason to support. If you're a sick storm lover like me = reason to oppose.

 

[flacaltenn]

Stupid ass computer modeling. This is ludicrous.
The headline would be Katrina EATS offshore wind turbine farm..
Guy needs to have his credentials reviewed..

 

[PredFan]

Anyone who says something like that has never been in a hurricaine. Anyone who believes it, would believe that man is warming the planet.

 

[flacaltenn]

Exactly.. ^^^^^^^^ what PredFan said..

If it were that simple -- we could run a few large Boeing jets thru the storm periphery and kill hurricanes
just as efficiently.. This guy is an educated moron..

And I'm doubting that you have chased many hurricanes Matthew..

 

[SSDD]

Having been through a few while I lived in Florida including Hugo, I have to wonder if jacobson has any idea what a hurricane is. After even a cat 3 storm, the debris from a wind farm would be washing ashore for weeks....

 

[flacaltenn]

Well SSDD -- the guy is from Stanford.. They declare emergencies with a 1" rainfall out there.
Now -- it's TRUE that any minor landfall or even a marginal brush with a Cuban mountain range
will beat the crap out of hurricane.. But a couple dozen wind turbines are no more than a formation
of hurricane hunter P3 Orions..

He should get a grant to send 5 or 6 of those multi-engine aircraft into the edge of a hurricane and PERSONALLY position his-bad-self in the path of the eye to measure the "kill factor"..

 

[Abraham3]

Did anyone bother to read his paper?

His simulation made use of 78,000 wind turbines. It (the article - couldn't find a link to the actual paper) didn't say how large, but I'd assume they were at least as large as the largest in existence. And since wind turbines will barely survive a Category 2 storm, he was simply assuming that they'd all survive. He did make the comments that if you had enough turbines out there, it could prevent a storm from getting large enough to take down the turbines.

 

[skookerasbil]

The point of the thread is moot.

Too expensive.


Wont happen.


And lets not forget........none of the AGW crusaders ever take "costs" into consideration = an afterthought. Which is why none of their dream agenda ever comes true.



fAiL

 

[eagle1462010]

LOL

This guy is really out there. Are we sure he hasn't escaped his padded cell..............

 

[flacaltenn]

Did anyone bother to read his paper?

His simulation made use of 78,000 wind turbines. It (the article - couldn't find a link to the actual paper) didn't say how large, but I'd assume they were at least as large as the largest in existence. And since wind turbines will barely survive a Category 2 storm, he was simply assuming that they'd all survive. He did make the comments that if you had enough turbines out there, it could prevent a storm from getting large enough to take down the turbines.

Here's the prob with all that.. The lazy media will MULTILATE that study, make bratwurst out of it, and GUARANDAMNTEED -- the impression will be that offshore wind farms are an insurance policy against hurricanes..

 

[william the wie]

Offshore wind farms could tame hurricanes before they reach land, study says

Offshore wind farms could tame hurricanes before they reach land, study says

For the past 24 years, Mark Z. Jacobson, a professor of civil and environmental engineering at Stanford, has been developing a complex computer model to study air pollution, energy, weather and climate. A recent application of the model has been to simulate the development of hurricanes. Another has been to determine how much energy wind turbines can extract from global wind currents.


In light of these recent model studies and in the aftermath of hurricanes Sandy and Katrina, he said, it was natural to wonder: What would happen if a hurricane encountered a large array of offshore wind turbines? Would the energy extraction due to the storm spinning the turbines' blades slow the winds and diminish the hurricane, or would the hurricane destroy the turbines?

So he went about developing the model further and simulating what might happen if a hurricane encountered an enormous wind farm stretching many miles offshore and along the coast. Amazingly, he found that the wind turbines could disrupt a hurricane enough to reduce peak wind speeds by up to 92 mph and decrease storm surge by up to 79 percent.

Depending on who you're...Well, being that many republicans build on the coast....A reason to support. If you're a sick storm lover like me = reason to oppose.

Sorry, Matthew just like the Gulf stream current turbines ideas of the past this would heat up and dry out FL while causing glaciation in Europe, just slower. Ice age in Italy in three decades instead of one maybe but still a bad idea. Jerry Pournelle's advocacy of Ocean Thermal Systems might be the most disastrous but this Gulf Stream as power source concept has global sideeffects.

 

[Abraham3]

What percentage of the Gulf Stream's energy could we reasonably remove?

 

[hjmick]

History shows again and again how nature points out the folly of men...

 

[PredFan]

History shows again and again how nature points out the folly of men...

Deserving of 10,000 rep for that BOC reference and the timeliness of it. Considering the new movie coming soon.

 

[Abraham3]

Possible renewable power source

From Wikipedia's article on the Gulf Stream

The volume of the Gulf Stream dwarfs all rivers that empty into the Atlantic combined, which barely total 0.6 million cubic metres per second. It is weaker, however, than the Antarctic Circumpolar Current.[19]

The Gulf Stream is typically 100 kilometres (62 mi) wide and 800 metres (2,600 ft) to 1,200 metres (3,900 ft) deep. The current velocity is fastest near the surface, with the maximum speed typically about 2.5 metres per second (5.6 mph).[20]

The Gulf Stream delivers about 1.4 petawatts (10^15 W) of heat, equivalent to 100 times more than the world power demand, and research into different ways to tap this power is being undertaken. One idea, which would supply the equivalent power of several nuclear power plants, would deploy a field of underwater turbines placed 300 meters (980 ft) under the center of the core of the Gulf Stream.[35] Ocean thermal energy could also be harnessed to produce electricity utilizing the temperature difference between cold deep water and warm surface water.[36]
**************************************************************************

So, the thermal flux is noted above (100 times the total world demand, available for an OTEC system). For kinetic energy, we have E=1/2 mv^2 or:

0.5 * (100 km x 1 km x ~1.75 m)*1.035 gm/cc at 1.75^2 m/s. [taking 1.75 m/S as a conservative average velocity]

0.5 * 10,000,000cm x 100,000cm * 175cm *1.035 gm/cc *(175^2) = 27,734,765,625,000 = 27.7 TW (2.7x10^13 Watt-seconds). Total world demand in 2012 was ~7.5 terawatt-seconds. So the kinetic energy of the gulf stream is about 4 times the total world energy demand. It think it unlikely we would siphon off enough of that to hurt much of anything. But if you have other calculations I'd like to see them.

 

[skookerasbil]

Just thinking.......this may well be the stoopidest thread of the year to date on this forum. Its early in the year but gotta figure it will be in the top 5 by years end.

If this thread goes anywhere, it will become very telling what I refer to when I say "climate k00ks". Watch the posts........there will be some decidedly University of Mars standouts.

 

[william the wie]

What percentage of the Gulf Stream's energy could we reasonably remove?

No one can tell without checking on other solutions that might do the same things. For example adding iron, oil wells, to the Indian and and South Pacific oceans could drop global temperatures a lot and quickly. The December, summer time, Antarctica freeze being coincident with a lag to drilling as is also true of northern European waters, that is known. If the New Zealand initiative of surpassing Australia in per capita GDP catches fire then a lot of rigs will go up off shore and 3-5 years later we will have a much better idea of what all of those steel pontoons will do to the energy of the Gulf over and above the reduction of warm air rising from the Gulf.

 

[Abraham3]

What percentage of the Gulf Stream's energy could we reasonably remove?

No one can tell without checking on other solutions that might do the same things.

What do other solutions tell us? We need to know what would be the impact of removing various amounts of thermal and/or kinetic energy from the Gulf Stream.

For example adding iron, oil wells, to the Indian and and South Pacific oceans could drop global temperatures a lot and quickly.

Matthew's article concerned the effect of massive wind farms on hurricanes, not cooling the planet.

The December, summer time, Antarctica freeze being coincident with a lag to drilling as is also true of northern European waters, that is known.

A lag to drilling? For oil? WTF are you talking about?

If the New Zealand initiative of surpassing Australia in per capita GDP catches fire then a lot of rigs will go up off shore and 3-5 years later we will have a much better idea of what all of those steel pontoons will do to the energy of the Gulf over and above the reduction of warm air rising from the Gulf.

You believe offshore oil rigs change the climate? I'm sorry, but that's absolute nonsense. And what does "...do to the energy of the Gulf over and above the reduction fo warm air rising from the Gulf" refer to? What reduction in warm air are you talking about? And what does that have to do with oil rigs, drilling, Antarctic summers or wind farms?

If you think this has something to do with steel in the rigs... the proposal to pour iron into the oceans was based on fertilizing phytoplankton with massive amounts of powdered iron oxide which could sequester CO2 in the ocean bottom when the blooming plankton die and sink. Oil rigs do NOT cause plankton blooms.

 

[Pop23]

Offshore wind farms could tame hurricanes before they reach land, study says

Offshore wind farms could tame hurricanes before they reach land, study says

For the past 24 years, Mark Z. Jacobson, a professor of civil and environmental engineering at Stanford, has been developing a complex computer model to study air pollution, energy, weather and climate. A recent application of the model has been to simulate the development of hurricanes. Another has been to determine how much energy wind turbines can extract from global wind currents.


In light of these recent model studies and in the aftermath of hurricanes Sandy and Katrina, he said, it was natural to wonder: What would happen if a hurricane encountered a large array of offshore wind turbines? Would the energy extraction due to the storm spinning the turbines' blades slow the winds and diminish the hurricane, or would the hurricane destroy the turbines?

So he went about developing the model further and simulating what might happen if a hurricane encountered an enormous wind farm stretching many miles offshore and along the coast. Amazingly, he found that the wind turbines could disrupt a hurricane enough to reduce peak wind speeds by up to 92 mph and decrease storm surge by up to 79 percent.

Depending on who you're...Well, being that many republicans build on the coast....A reason to support. If you're a sick storm lover like me = reason to oppose.

Wow, that is simply stupid. You can't really believe this?

Nature would destroy them little sticks THEN with ease.

 

[Kosh]

Depending on who you're...Well, being that many republicans build on the coast....A reason to support. If you're a sick storm lover like me = reason to oppose.

More far left propaganda.

So much for the discussion of your AGW laced topic.