Rob Plant + 2,756 RP February 10, 2023 13 minutes ago, footeab@yahoo.com said: @Rob Plant My bad, I thought you were an adult who could do basic math. Guess not Adios So does 45% better mean 100% superior? you really are a footinmouth! 🤡 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron Wagner + 706 February 11, 2023 On 2/10/2023 at 1:05 AM, notsonice said: California totally failed at building normal speed rail through the central valley to San Francisco from Los Angeles. It is the same reason that you may never see offshore wind take off in California??? Huh.......comparing a rail project to wind projects is just silly I would oppose any wind turbines within sight of the coast.???well why are you not protesting against Oil platforms in California you can see them all over the coastline in Southern California.... Reality today Biden-Harris Administration Announces Winners of California Offshore Wind Energy Auction First offshore wind lease sale in the Pacific results in over $757 million in winning bids for five lease areas, which have the potential to power over 1.5 million homes 12/7/2022 Last edited 12/7/2022 Date: Wednesday, December 7, 2022 Contact: Interior_Press@ios.doi.gov WASHINGTON — The Department of the Interior today announced results from the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management’s wind energy auction for five leases offshore California. The lease sale represents the third major offshore wind lease sale this year and the first ever for the Pacific region. Today’s sale drew competitive high bids from 5 companies totaling $757.1 million, well exceeding the first lease sales that were held in the Atlantic. “The Biden-Harris administration believes that to address the climate crisis head on, we must unleash a new era of clean, reliable energy that serves every household in America. Today’s lease sale is further proof that industry momentum – including for floating offshore wind development – is undeniable,” said Secretary Deb Haaland. “A sustainable, clean energy future is within our grasp and the Interior Department is doing everything we can to ensure that American communities nationwide benefit.” The interest and success of today’s sale represents a significant milestone toward achieving President Biden’s goal of deploying 30 gigawatts of offshore wind energy capacity by 2030 and 15 gigawatts of floating offshore wind capacity by 2035. “The innovative bidding credits in the California auction will result in tangible investments for the floating offshore wind workforce and supply chain in the United States, and benefits to Tribes, communities, and ocean users potentially affected by future offshore wind activities. This auction commits substantial investment to support economic growth from floating offshore wind energy development – including the jobs that come with it,” said BOEM Director Amanda Lefton. “These credits and additional lease stipulations demonstrate BOEM’s commitment to responsibly grow the offshore wind industry to achieve our offshore wind goals.” BOEM’s lease sale offered five lease areas covering 373,268 total acres off central and northern California. The leased areas have the potential to produce over 4.6 gigawatts of offshore wind energy, enough to power over 1.5 million homes. Provisional Winner Lease Area Acres High Bid RWE Offshore Wind Holdings, LLC OCS-P 0561 63,338 $157,700,000 California North Floating, LLC OCS-P 0562 69,031 $173,800,000 Equinor Wind US, LLC OCS-P 0563 80,062 $130,000,000 Central California Offshore Wind, LLC OCS-P 0564 80,418 $150,300,000 Invenergy California Offshore LLC OCS-P 0565 80,418 $145,300,000 The lease sale included a 20-percent credit for bidders who committed to a monetary contribution to programs or initiatives that support workforce training programs for the floating offshore wind industry, the development of a U.S. domestic supply chain for the floating offshore wind energy industry, or both. This credit will result in over $117 million in investments for these critical programs or initiatives. The auction also included 5% credits for bidders who committed to entering community benefit agreements (CBAs). The first type of agreement is a Lease Area Use CBA with communities, stakeholder groups, or Tribal entities whose use of the lease areas or use of the resources harvested from the lease areas is expected to be impacted by offshore wind development. The second type of agreement is a General CBA with communities, Tribes, or stakeholder groups that are expected to be affected by the potential impacts on the marine, coastal or human environment from lease development. Under stipulations in the leases, lessees are required to engage with Tribes, ocean users, and local communities that may be affected by their lease activities. Lessee engagement must allow for early and active information sharing, focused discussion of potential issues, and collaborative identification of solutions. These communication and engagement activities must be routinely reported to BOEM. These lease stipulations are intended to promote offshore wind energy development in a way that coexists with other ocean uses, addresses potential impacts and benefits, and protects the ocean environment, while also facilitating our nation’s energy future for generations to come. More information about today’s sale, including a map of the lease areas and requirements regarding the bidding credits, can be found on BOEM’s website. That is one of the most scenic areas of the California coastline, so it needs to be far enough out to be unseen from the beaches and hills. Otherwise it should not be allowed. It would, as it says, need to be agreed to by various groups. There is no real need for the electricity in the area, which is mostly supported by tourism. I say put it off San Francisco where the electricity could be used locally, but it must be out of sight anywhere on the Pacific Coast, or any coast for that matter. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
notsonice + 1,255 DM February 11, 2023 (edited) 1 hour ago, Ron Wagner said: That is one of the most scenic areas of the California coastline, so it needs to be far enough out to be unseen from the beaches and hills. Otherwise it should not be allowed. It would, as it says, need to be agreed to by various groups. There is no real need for the electricity in the area, which is mostly supported by tourism. I say put it off San Francisco where the electricity could be used locally, but it must be out of sight anywhere on the Pacific Coast, or any coast for that matter. the lease areas are over 20 miles off the coast...... did you bother to look at the map that I posted?? or do you not understand how to read one???? Can you see 20 miles??? lol have you heard about tramsission cables??? the can extend hundreds of miles on the bottom of the ocean... Clean Electricity produced on the open ocean (far away from people) tranmitted onshore and then used everywhere.... Beats the hell out of Coal or Nat Gas Enjoy the transition....Coal and Nat Gas is being replaced one solar panel at a time and one wind turbine at a time Only idiots are against renewables...especially offshore wind turbines Edited February 11, 2023 by notsonice 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turbguy + 1,543 February 12, 2023 (edited) 7 hours ago, notsonice said: the lease areas are over 20 miles off the coast...... did you bother to look at the map that I posted?? or do you not understand how to read one???? Can you see 20 miles??? lol have you heard about tramsission cables??? the can extend hundreds of miles on the bottom of the ocean... Clean Electricity produced on the open ocean (far away from people) tranmitted onshore and then used everywhere.... Beats the hell out of Coal or Nat Gas Enjoy the transition....Coal and Nat Gas is being replaced one solar panel at a time and one wind turbine at a time Only idiots are against renewables...especially offshore wind turbines 20 miles really ain't that far. Those tall wind turbines would probably be easily visible (albeit, tiny) on the sea's horizon. The farther, the better. Offshore wind, while very promising and quite possible, is going to be almost as expensive (LCOE) as nuclear generation. Edited February 12, 2023 by turbguy 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
notsonice + 1,255 DM February 12, 2023 (edited) 40 minutes ago, turbguy said: 20 miles really ain't that far. Those tall wind turbines would probably be easily visible (albeit, tiny) on the sea's horizon. The farther, the better. Offshore wind, while very promising and quite possible, is going to be almost as expensive (LCOE) as nuclear generation. 20 miles really ain't that far????........Good luck seeing turbine blades from 20 miles away....they are such a slim profile white against a light blue background............good luck ...unless you are thinking they will paint the blades red or black...ha ha ha I do not see you posting any numbers with your costing babble............ these are real bids for the rights ....not quite possible...but will happen...unless you think that the winners will not pony up the cash and not proceed with their plans and bids. Did you notice the amount of money the US sold the lease areas for???? $750 million is not chump change........obviously some money to be made by the lessors for the sale of the electricity that they will generate in todays market if they are willing to put up $750 million Edited February 12, 2023 by notsonice Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turbguy + 1,543 February 12, 2023 (edited) 9 hours ago, notsonice said: 20 miles really ain't that far????........Good luck seeing turbine blades from 20 miles away....they are such a slim profile white against a light blue background............good luck ...unless you are thinking they will paint the blades red or black...ha ha ha I do not see you posting any numbers with your costing babble............ these are real bids for the rights ....not quite possible...but will happen...unless you think that the winners will not pony up the cash and not proceed with their plans and bids. Did you notice the amount of money the US sold the lease areas for???? $750 million is not chump change........obviously some money to be made by the lessors for the sale of the electricity that they will generate in todays market if they are willing to put up $750 million Oh, they will be visible, particularly when they spin. Also, they will require nighttime aircraft (and perhaps marine) avoidance lighting (think, flashing red lights), although there are some systems available that only energize that avoidance lighting with aircraft detected in the area. As for LCOE, that's been a subject of some controversy. That said, just go here for some numbers: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source Edited February 12, 2023 by turbguy Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turbguy + 1,543 February 14, 2023 (edited) Now that nat gas prices have fallen, look for far less coal being consumed for Power Generation in the coming months. Some coal plants will operate since they are required for longer-term grid stability, but they cannot respond with the higher speed loading rates that nat gas plants can. Nat gas today, about $2.50 per million BTU's Coal today, about $5 per million BTU (for good grades of eastern steam coal, say 13,000 BTU/pound (NOT PRB coal, about 8500 BTU/pound). Edited February 14, 2023 by turbguy 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
specinho + 470 February 14, 2023 (edited) On 2/9/2023 at 7:27 AM, Jay McKinsey said: Oh the footjob speaks. The US has outstanding wind resources on both coasts, close to our major population centers. Scale, always has a thing onto how we interpret.... Majority of the highlighted areas might be in orange and pink....... Edited February 14, 2023 by specinho Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
notsonice + 1,255 DM February 14, 2023 (edited) On 2/11/2023 at 10:47 PM, turbguy said: Oh, they will be visible, particularly when they spin. Also, they will require nighttime aircraft (and perhaps marine) avoidance lighting (think, flashing red lights), although there are some systems available that only energize that avoidance lighting with aircraft detected in the area. As for LCOE, that's been a subject of some controversy. That said, just go here for some numbers: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source Oh, they will be visible, particularly when they spin??? lots of ocean front property in Wyoming where you can look out 20 miles and spot anything floating???? have you ever lived on the ocean or a sea and tried to spot anything large 20 miles out??? you will never see the bases of the wind turbine masts....and you will have to use binoculars to spot the white blades against a background of hazy horizon/sea (whiteish blue at 20 miles out).....you will at best see a flashing light at night...then again you see lights of ships all the time along the coast...no one complains of the few lights you see..... Ever been to Morro Bay????.....my last visit was just a few weeks ago.....the power plant that is there is a great addition to the shoreline, Isn't it? great view , isnt it???? of a monster power plant in the harbor and its triple stacks (yep flashing red lights on the stacks and the plants is lit up all night like a prison....) the trade for wind turbines 20 miles out ....or the power plant that exists????? which will you want in your front yard????? Check out the photo.....real scenic ..... Edited February 14, 2023 by notsonice 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
specinho + 470 February 14, 2023 (edited) On 2/10/2023 at 2:58 PM, notsonice said: floating offshore ...California will employ it...get used to it From the pattern of waves formed, the wind is hitting directly at direction onto the core of blades... Bypassing above, below of the blades and may be hit right at the blades. The design catches wind not.... Low efficiency is probably not unusual? Edited February 14, 2023 by specinho Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turbguy + 1,543 February 14, 2023 (edited) 13 hours ago, notsonice said: Oh, they will be visible, particularly when they spin??? lots of ocean front property in Wyoming where you can look out 20 miles and spot anything floating???? have you ever lived on the ocean or a sea and tried to spot anything large 20 miles out??? you will never see the bases of the wind turbine masts....and you will have to use binoculars to spot the white blades against a background of hazy horizon/sea (whiteish blue at 20 miles out).....you will at best see a flashing light at night...then again you see lights of ships all the time along the coast...no one complains of the few lights you see..... Ever been to Morro Bay????.....my last visit was just a few weeks ago.....the power plant that is there is a great addition to the shoreline, Isn't it? great view , isnt it???? of a monster power plant in the harbor and its triple stacks (yep flashing red lights on the stacks and the plants is lit up all night like a prison....) the trade for wind turbines 20 miles out ....or the power plant that exists????? which will you want in your front yard????? Check out the photo.....real scenic ..... They will be visible, and TINY, as I said. You WILL see them (weather permitting). Will they disturb you? I do not know. I can easily see semi-trucks traveling I-80, 15 miles away. They TINY, and you need to know where to look. Yeah, fossil power plants can be ugly, and disturbing. So are freeways, big box stores, and port-o-lets. YMMV Edited February 14, 2023 by turbguy Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TailingsPond + 1,006 GE February 15, 2023 Thankfully oil never reduces the beauty of shorelines... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron Wagner + 706 February 15, 2023 On 2/11/2023 at 3:44 PM, notsonice said: the lease areas are over 20 miles off the coast...... did you bother to look at the map that I posted?? or do you not understand how to read one???? Can you see 20 miles??? lol have you heard about tramsission cables??? the can extend hundreds of miles on the bottom of the ocean... Clean Electricity produced on the open ocean (far away from people) tranmitted onshore and then used everywhere.... Beats the hell out of Coal or Nat Gas Enjoy the transition....Coal and Nat Gas is being replaced one solar panel at a time and one wind turbine at a time Only idiots are against renewables...especially offshore wind turbines As I said, out of sight. That means beyond the horizon. Simple, but should overcome most objections. You should understand that, but maybe not. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turbguy + 1,543 February 15, 2023 48 minutes ago, Ron Wagner said: As I said, out of sight. That means beyond the horizon. Simple, but should overcome most objections. You should understand that, but maybe not. Those "20 mile" nacelles will not be "beyond the horizon". They will be visible from shore (and more visible from elevated positions near shore). They WILL be "tiny". The farther out from shore, the better. 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
notsonice + 1,255 DM February 15, 2023 7 hours ago, Ron Wagner said: As I said, out of sight. That means beyond the horizon. Simple, but should overcome most objections. You should understand that, but maybe not. why are you not employing the same criteria for Coal fired or nat gas fired power plants???? beyond the horizon??? if you would apply your out of sight rule you would not have any land based power plants at all. I grew up within 5 miles of a huge power plant...over 2 GW....it was never out of sight 24/7..... 20 miles offshore and you still have the fruitcakes bellyaching that it is too close......... 1 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jay McKinsey + 1,490 February 15, 2023 (edited) On 2/11/2023 at 12:19 PM, Ron Wagner said: That is one of the most scenic areas of the California coastline, so it needs to be far enough out to be unseen from the beaches and hills. Otherwise it should not be allowed. It would, as it says, need to be agreed to by various groups. There is no real need for the electricity in the area, which is mostly supported by tourism. I say put it off San Francisco where the electricity could be used locally, but it must be out of sight anywhere on the Pacific Coast, or any coast for that matter. So there are these things called power lines that run for hundreds or even thousands of miles. In the case at hand the wind farms off of Morro Bay will be connected to the grid at the Diablo Canyon nuclear plant where their electricity will be distributed across the whole state. Diablo Canyon: Edited February 15, 2023 by Jay McKinsey 1 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turbguy + 1,543 February 16, 2023 3 hours ago, Jay McKinsey said: So there are these things called power lines that run for hundreds or even thousands of miles. In the case at hand the wind farms off of Morro Bay will be connected to the grid at the Diablo Canyon nuclear plant where their electricity will be distributed across the whole state. Diablo Canyon: Re-using existing grid infrastructure is always an idea worthy of serious consideration when an existing generating facility is retired. THAT particular location has some obvious "considerations". Roll the dice by extending it's license and wait for "the big one", or replace it with another form of generation. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TailingsPond + 1,006 GE February 16, 2023 23 hours ago, turbguy said: They will be visible from shore (and more visible from elevated positions near shore). Old people tend to have poor eyesight. They could be visible but probably won't be to the fossil humans. I am blessed with extraordinary vision (way better than 20/20), when I go on road trips I point out things I see to others and they can't see them until much closer. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Rob Plant + 2,756 RP February 16, 2023 4 hours ago, TailingsPond said: Old people tend to have poor eyesight. They could be visible but probably won't be to the fossil humans. I am blessed with extraordinary vision (way better than 20/20), when I go on road trips I point out things I see to others and they can't see them until much closer. Maybe you have 20/10 eyesight, the best anyone can have. Mine definitely isnt lol Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron Wagner + 706 February 20, 2023 On 2/15/2023 at 4:47 AM, notsonice said: why are you not employing the same criteria for Coal fired or nat gas fired power plants???? beyond the horizon??? if you would apply your out of sight rule you would not have any land based power plants at all. I grew up within 5 miles of a huge power plant...over 2 GW....it was never out of sight 24/7..... 20 miles offshore and you still have the fruitcakes bellyaching that it is too close......... Bad luck to have your bad attitude. Nobody wants to look at the most beautiful parts of the world and be distracted by wind turbines that could easily be moved beyond the horizon. They can be made to float so that is not an issue. Also, they don't need to be so damn tall in those locations. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron Wagner + 706 February 20, 2023 On 2/14/2023 at 4:56 PM, turbguy said: They will be visible, and TINY, as I said. You WILL see them (weather permitting). Will they disturb you? I do not know. I can easily see semi-trucks traveling I-80, 15 miles away. They TINY, and you need to know where to look. Yeah, fossil power plants can be ugly, and disturbing. So are freeways, big box stores, and port-o-lets. YMMV You must be at a higher elevation than they are then. https://www.livescience.com/32111-how-far-away-is-the-horizon.html Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron Wagner + 706 February 20, 2023 On 2/15/2023 at 4:47 AM, notsonice said: why are you not employing the same criteria for Coal fired or nat gas fired power plants???? beyond the horizon??? if you would apply your out of sight rule you would not have any land based power plants at all. I grew up within 5 miles of a huge power plant...over 2 GW....it was never out of sight 24/7..... 20 miles offshore and you still have the fruitcakes bellyaching that it is too close......... Such plants are rarely seen because they are in spots that are not scenic. They also take up far less space than wind farms or solar farms. Solar can be placed efficiently on the roofs of flat warehouses and big box stores or make shade and rain protection in parking lots. They can be tastefully added to architectural plans also. That eliminates the need for many of the long distance power lines. The electricity can be used locally and added to the grid. I agree that ugly power plants, of any kind, should not be on the beaches. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron Wagner + 706 February 20, 2023 On 2/11/2023 at 11:36 PM, notsonice said: 20 miles really ain't that far????........Good luck seeing turbine blades from 20 miles away....they are such a slim profile white against a light blue background............good luck ...unless you are thinking they will paint the blades red or black...ha ha ha I do not see you posting any numbers with your costing babble............ these are real bids for the rights ....not quite possible...but will happen...unless you think that the winners will not pony up the cash and not proceed with their plans and bids. Did you notice the amount of money the US sold the lease areas for???? $750 million is not chump change........obviously some money to be made by the lessors for the sale of the electricity that they will generate in todays market if they are willing to put up $750 million Chump change compared to the value of the real estate and tourism all along the coast, especially as the coast is developed for more tourism from all around the world. It is presently relatively undeveloped. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turbguy + 1,543 February 20, 2023 1 hour ago, Ron Wagner said: You must be at a higher elevation than they are then. https://www.livescience.com/32111-how-far-away-is-the-horizon.html Perhaps, by 100' or so. In any event, your link didn't factor in the height of the nacelle. For offshore turbines, that will be about 400+ feet. Go here instead, enter 20 miles distance, 6' standing height, and you will see that about 1/2 the mast and all of the nacelle will be above the horizon: https://www.omnicalculator.com/physics/earth-curvature Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
notsonice + 1,255 DM February 20, 2023 (edited) 1 hour ago, turbguy said: Perhaps, by 100' or so. In any event, your link didn't factor in the height of the nacelle. For offshore turbines, that will be about 400+ feet. Go here instead, enter 20 miles distance, 6' standing height, and you will see that about 1/2 the mast and all of the nacelle will be above the horizon: https://www.omnicalculator.com/physics/earth-curvature what does a 20 foot by 20 foot white box with 2--- 200 foot blades attached (size of the end of a nacelle is 20 feet by 20 feet at most) look like from 20 miles away on the horizon??????? ...... the nacelle smaller than the dot ..... 0 ..........as you see it on your screen (which should be around 3 feet from your face) the blade less than a tenth of an inch --.-- (...2 blades with a nacelle in the center shown in black) ...now the same in gray --.-- (can you see it????????) oh the horror that you might be able to see a white dot looking out on the horizon..if you are able to make it out a white nacelle and blades against a white/blueish background and all the water vapor between you . Yeesh now the math for the math challenged dummies who are crying about the coast and the views So, say an object that is 20 feet tall is 100 feet away. If I hold up a ruler 3 feet away, then the object in the distance would correspond to about how many inches? use the intercept theorem, this is indeed a simple ratio: x/3feet =20feet tall nacelle/100feet away⟹x=0.6feet or 7.2 inches now make it 1000 feet away =.06 feet or .72 inches now 10000 feet away =.006 feet or .072 inches now 100000 feet which is a little less than 20 miles x/3feet=20/100000 =.0006 feet or.0072 inches now if you gomers can make out something that looks like it is .0072 inches tall looking out on the horizon 20 miles away .....give yourself a prize and a 20 foot wide-200 foot blade .072inches or less than a 1/10th of an inch tall by 1/100th of an inch wide oh the horror to those starring out on the ocean Edited February 20, 2023 by notsonice Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Most Active Members
Recently Online
Popular Members
Most Active Members
Recently Online
Popular Members
