Are Windmills worth it?

Question

I mean with the initial cost.... and is there any down side other than that? Have you had any direct experience with them?

Answer 1

If we can lower the cost of electricity and do it cleaner they have something going for them  On the downside, one IS the initial cost, two, they demand a lot of land area, and three, they only work when the wind blows.

Answer 2

Only if it's windy.

Answer 3

The problem is their efficiency.  It will cost something like $20,000 to install a windmill and will take years before the profits flow in.  I would like to see my local energy company develop the wind turbines (and I think they are creating them currently).  There is an area a little north of me where the mountain air comes flowing down and the normal wind speed is around 15 mph.  If they developed their turbine system there, they could produce a lot of wind energy and drive the price of local electric bills down drastically.

If you have a house in an area that has a fair amount of wind and plan to stay there for at least another decade, it will be worth it.  You can also sell the house with the cost of the turbine included.  I do plan to have one installed when I get into my long term house in the next year or two.  Does the energy still flow when the "power goes out" in a storm???

Answer 4

Probably not in most places.

Typical capacity factors for wind power are around 20% (if that) with there being little predictive ability as to when you'll have the power.  This means that for wind to be able to do more than have a token effect you have to be able to store the power from the wind turbine and right now we don't have a decent technology for doing that on the scales at which you'd need.

Whilst some will try saying that wind is cheap and clean, once you factor in energy storage and the overcapacity to charge the energy storage (and we haven't got anything decent for that so we can only guess at the cost of it) you'll probably find it's not really all that good.  Right now wind power is typically backed up with fossil fuels which means that it's not a solution to the problem of global warming (we can't afford half-measures, nor can we afford distractions like wind power).

There are a few places that have reliable wind although those places tended to be the first to get wind turbines such that about the only sites left are the c**p ones.

Of course if you put the wind turbines off shore you can get much better reliability but then you've got corrosion issues of the salt water along with making the maintenance much more dangerous (the safety record of wind power does leave something to be desired).

Answer 5

A reliable one in a windy area has to be worth it.

Answer 6

Yes-- they are all over West Texas-- Texas leads the nation in wind power; and it will double again in the next 2 years. The Texas Public Utilities Commission recently funded the transmission towers to the tune of 5 Billion Dollars!

http://www.austinchronicle.com/gyrobase/...

Answer 7

I have a windfarm near my house. It is very pretty looking.

In the long term they provide electricity far cheaper than oil, gas or coal can, with less waste than nuclear.

Don't forget too that wind is renewable.. this means we will never run out of wind.

We can certainly run out of oil, gas, coal and eventually uranium (for nuclear power)

Answer 8

I saw a wind farm in action the last time I went to Maui.  I believe it supplies about 15% of the electricity for the entire island.  The initial cost may be high, but no worse than a nuclear plant.  I would think the maintenance costs would be minimal and of course there's no cost for fuel, so in the long run it's economical.  Of course it's probably most effective on islands and in other areas that get constant or nearly constant winds.  In other areas it would only be a part-time supplement to other power sources.

Answer 9

They are worth it, but they won't solve our energy problems.  A few of them of them give an interesting appearance to the landscape; many of them can seriously detract from it.

Answer 10

They make a great business plan right now and have a return of 20 - 30% on a businessman's investment.  They will be going up like mushrooms.  If u don't believe me ask T Boone Pickens.

Answer 11

No; windmills are known to be inadequate in their ability to generate abundant energy and are just a distraction to keep us from getting our own oil and solving the problem.

Short term (10 years) - Drill

Long term - Nuclear power with Hydrogen fuel home power plants and vehicles.

Elitists (Demopublicans) don't want a solution for our nation's energy problems.  They offer only distractions while selling the idea of radically reducing our living standard.

Answer 12

I know farmers in the midwest you successfully power their farm with wind energy.  Their initial inestment has paid off after some 20 - 25 years.  They also sell electricity into the grid.  Now that wind technology has advanced and costs have come down, the investment should even pay off faster, particularly with energy prices increasing

Answer 13

Absolutely.  Wind farms provide very cheap energy because their maintenance costs are so low (and fuel costs are zero).  They're much cheaper per energy produced than nuclear, for example.

http://www.greens.org/s-r/11/11-09.html

Some people complain that they're ugly or too loud if you live nearby, but I think that's just ridiculous.  I've driven past some wind farms and think they look cool.  They provide clean, cheap energy.  You can't beat that.

Answer 14

It appears that they are, time will tell, like Boatman said Texas leads the country in wind power, all made possible by a little known Texas governor named Bush.

"Bush also helped make Texas the leading producer of wind powered electricity in the US. In 1995 Bush made wind power a key facet of Texas' renewable energy policy. Under a 1999 Texas state law, electric retailers are obliged to buy a certain amount of energy from renewable sources. This environmentally progressive legislation is a striking counterpoint the energy policies of his presidency that favored the status quo"