Giant Windmills Wildly Unpopular

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

6 hours ago, NickW said:

The ability to steer a vessel helps here. 

As the turbines are static, 200ft or more tall and made of steel they are fairly easy to spot either visually on on radar and chart a course around😉

You need to look up the definition of a ‘hazard to navigation’. Most are ‘static’.

[remake it + 288]

6 minutes ago, Douglas Buckland said:

You need to look up the definition of a ‘hazard to navigation’. Most are ‘static’.

And most are UNDER water!

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

2 hours ago, remake it said:

And most are UNDER water!

And somehow that negates the fact that offshore windmills, similar to any other offshore installation on the surface, may be a hazard to navigation?

Please pull your head out of your arse!

[remake it + 288]

28 minutes ago, Douglas Buckland said:

And somehow that negates the fact that offshore windmills, similar to any other offshore installation on the surface, may be a hazard to navigation?

Please pull your head out of your arse!

True to form... but the idea of a navigation hazard is principally to do with what cannot be seen, such as reefs, rocks and sandbars below the waterline, as distinct from what is clearly visible, and in the case of something very large, like an offshore wind turbine, Denmark - as a leading manufacturer - has also set lighting standards for 24/7 visibility:

• Denmark now requires that there must be a regulator for the light intensity and a measurement of the visibility, so that the intensity of the obstruction lights may be adjusted according to the meteorological visibility. Turbines are to be lit day as well as night. Additionally, each offshore wind turbine must be lit with two red lamps, and depending upon the location within the array, the intensity and characteristic will vary with 2000 candela (cd) flashing lights specified for turbines at corners or sharp bends along the periphery of an array and 10 cd steady burning lights specified for turbines along the periphery and inside the perimeter turbines. Turbines with heights greater than 150 m (492 ft.) should also be equipped with a red solid light with an intensity of 32 cd at an intermediate height midway between the sea surface and the nacelle.

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

Horse+Dead+Flogging = remake it

[Rasmus Jorgensen + 1,169]

6 hours ago, Douglas Buckland said:

And somehow that negates the fact that offshore windmills, similar to any other offshore installation on the surface, may be a hazard to navigation?

So you are saying we should build no further offshore oil & gas installations either because they too are hazards for navigation?

Just tryin' to understand the logic. 

Edited November 6, 2019 by Rasmus Jorgensen

[remake it + 288]

1 hour ago, Rasmus Jorgensen said:

So are saying we should build no further oil & gas installations either because they too are hazards for navigation?

Horse+Dead+Flogging = Mr Jorgensen... but the devil is in the detail<full stop>

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

1 hour ago, Rasmus Jorgensen said:

So you are saying we should build no further offshore oil & gas installations either because they too are hazards for navigation?

Just tryin' to understand the logic. 

 

’Keep in mind that these things CAN become ‘hazards to navigation’.

 

I simply stated they they could become hazards to navigation, depending on where they were sited.

 

Keep in mind that unlike a relatively few offshore oil and gas installations, their will be dozens of windmills.

 

Just something to keep in mind, especially for countries with dense shipping areas.

[Rob Plant + 2,756]

37 minutes ago, Douglas Buckland said:

 

’Keep in mind that these things CAN become ‘hazards to navigation’.

 

I simply stated they they could become hazards to navigation, depending on where they were sited.

 

Keep in mind that unlike a relatively few offshore oil and gas installations, their will be dozens of windmills.

 

Just something to keep in mind, especially for countries with dense shipping areas.

I believe these are always built away from normal major shipping lanes to avoid such a problem.

See the world largest off the East Coast of the UK below

https://edition.cnn.com/2019/09/25/business/worlds-largest-wind-farm/index.html

[Rasmus Jorgensen + 1,169]

1 hour ago, Douglas Buckland said:

 

’Keep in mind that these things CAN become ‘hazards to navigation’.

 

I simply stated they they could become hazards to navigation, depending on where they were sited.

 

Keep in mind that unlike a relatively few offshore oil and gas installations, their will be dozens of windmills.

 

Just something to keep in mind, especially for countries with dense shipping areas.

I know you don't like windfarms, but the world has been able to adapt the offshore installation for a long time. Other issues to attack than this. 

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

17 minutes ago, Rasmus Jorgensen said:

I know you don't like windfarms, but the world has been able to adapt the offshore installation for a long time. Other issues to attack than this. 

For f**k sake! Grow up would you! I did not attack wind farms, I simply brought up the fact that depending on where they are sited they could present an issue for shipping.

You are the one that got your knickers in a twist!

[Rasmus Jorgensen + 1,169]

31 minutes ago, Douglas Buckland said:

For f**k sake! Grow up would you! I did not attack wind farms, I simply brought up the fact that depending on where they are sited they could present an issue for shipping.

You are the one that got your knickers in a twist!

OK. I am sorry. Seriously. 
I just want to point out that this as not been a problem in the past.

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

20 minutes ago, Rasmus Jorgensen said:

OK. I am sorry. Seriously. 
I just want to point out that this as not been a problem in the past.

In the southern portion of the Gulf of Mexico there are several burnt up jack-up rigs (abandoned) which are classified as ‘hazards to navigation’. These are rammed repeatedly by fishing vessels or workboats. For the life of me I can’t see how it happens in this day and age -but it does.

[NickW + 2,714]

12 hours ago, Douglas Buckland said:

And somehow that negates the fact that offshore windmills, similar to any other offshore installation on the surface, may be a hazard to navigation?

Please pull your head out of your arse!

How does anyone ever deal with pesky rocks? 

On your logic this must also apply to oil / gas platforms which would be a hazard to navigation. 

[NickW + 2,714]

3 hours ago, Douglas Buckland said:

In the southern portion of the Gulf of Mexico there are several burnt up jack-up rigs (abandoned) which are classified as ‘hazards to navigation’. These are rammed repeatedly by fishing vessels or workboats. For the life of me I can’t see how it happens in this day and age -but it does.

Forest G shouldn't  leave rover the pet dog on the Helm. 

Wind turbines are required (certainly in Europe) to have lights 

[NickW + 2,714]

4 hours ago, Douglas Buckland said:

For f**k sake! Grow up would you! I did not attack wind farms, I simply brought up the fact that depending on where they are sited they could present an issue for shipping.

You are the one that got your knickers in a twist!

Which is why you have a planning process / consultation to hopefully avoid such issues. 

[El Nikko + 2,145]

On 11/1/2019 at 1:42 AM, DayTrader said:

@Jan van Eck  ... thoughts on the thread title..?   

#windmillscheesehookersandweed

Took me a while but I got there in the end lol

[John Foote + 1,135]

On 11/3/2019 at 3:18 PM, footeab@yahoo.com said:

 Why Texas can run HVDC lines(big state),

Texas is a unique best in class in some ways because of ERCOT and owning it's own grid completely (with apologies to a few people in Arkansas, New Mexico, and Oklahoma). Back in the early 90s Texas embarked to seriously upgrade the system and deregulate wholesale power.

That lead to a competitive landscape taking advantage of the wind corridor in the state, a serious uptick in gas turbine. The nuclear runs flat out when available, and of course coal is declining. Better to convert the thing to gas for economics. These is solar in the state on both a utility scale and of course the private rooftop. There are small armies of analysts that go over the next day's weather to bid on buying power from the grid. The basic is max out nuclear take the wind and solar, the small hydro in the state, and flex with solar. And there are investors who own and sell diesel powered, taking advantage of summer short term surges. 

[NickW + 2,714]

5 minutes ago, John Foote said:

Texas is a unique best in class in some ways because of ERCOT and owning it's own grid completely (with apologies to a few people in Arkansas, New Mexico, and Oklahoma). Back in the early 90s Texas embarked to seriously upgrade the system and deregulate wholesale power.

That lead to a competitive landscape taking advantage of the wind corridor in the state, a serious uptick in gas turbine. The nuclear runs flat out when available, and of course coal is declining. Better to convert the thing to gas for economics. These is solar in the state on both a utility scale and of course the private rooftop. There are small armies of analysts that go over the next day's weather to bid on buying power from the grid. The basic is max out nuclear take the wind and solar, the small hydro in the state, and flex with solar. And there are investors who own and sell diesel powered, taking advantage of summer short term surges. 

No point running nuclear any other way. Them Protons and Neutrons fission whether you take the power or not.