Skip to content Skip to main navigation

Opinion

Expert strata, facilities & building management services

Wind turbine blades to move through a relative dimension in space?

By Professor - 21 October 2014 16

What other explanation could there be?

The Canberra Times reports there will be 63m long blades on towers near Lake George. An increase of 6m from the current 57m.

The towers will be the same height at 94 metres according to the report attributing that statement to Mr Griffiths.  However he also claims the overall height will be the same.

The radius of the circle they describe will be increased by 6m.

Unless there is some extraordinary manipulation of space dimensions so the tip of the rotating blades rotates into another dimension at the top arc, and returns to normal space on further rotation, the effective height of the whole tower plus rotating blade will also increase by 6m.

What’s Your opinion?


Post a comment
Please login to post your comments, or connect with
16 Responses to
Wind turbine blades to move through a relative dimension in space?
dungfungus 10:01 am 23 Oct 14

HenryBG said :

OK, so apparently you will respire on average about 200ml of CO2 per minute.
x60 x24 x365 = about 200kg/year.

(And leaving aside where this C is coming from for the minute…)

Multiply this by 7 billion people and you get:
Human beings breathe out 1.5 Gt/year of CO2.

What about everything else?

The sea releases and absorbs around 330Gt/year (absorbs about 6Gt more than it emits)
The land (incl vegetation) releases 440Gt and absorbs 450Gt per year
Human industrial and agricultural activity emits 30Gt per year.

Ok, so human breathing is less inconsequential than I expected, but it remains very close to inconsequential.

As usual, when one of Dungfungus’s climate-denying talking points is examined, it is found wanting.

*** Of course, the C in the CO2 that we breathe out is all C that we have obtained from eating food and drinking fine wines – this C is C that was fixed recently (or maybe a couple of decades ago in the case of that disappointing Grange you had last weekend) and it is C that will probably be rixed again not long after you breathe it out.
The C in coal is C that was fixed many millins of years ago. All *that* C was fixed a very long time ago and it is the re-release of this C that was removed from the system all that time ago that is reponsible for raising atmospheric CO2 levels to a level that is higher than any CO2 levels for many millions of years.
Last time CO2 levels were as high as they are right now, sea levels were 40m higher than they are now. Antarctica and Greenland are both responding to this increased CO2 by busily shedding ice into the ocean. The $#@% is hitting the fan, while some of the less well-endowed among us – intellectually-speaking – are still repeating their Murdoch-supplied talking points. You will remember this moment in decades to come…..

I really haven’t got a clue what you are talking about but whatever it is it is not working because nothing is changing. Who is Professor Murdoch BTW?
I don’t drink anything either (have a crook liver). What is wrong with Co2? Why does it have to be fixed all the time?

shauno 6:46 pm 22 Oct 14

HenryBG said :

Canberroid said :

I’d rather replace coal power stations with wind farms than stop breathing to reduce CO2 emissions. I fail to see what part of my comment was “wild”.

The added benefit of replacing coal with wind is that it will bring power prices down, as it has done in South Australia.

We have a comedian on Riotact haha. Ive got a Bridge I can sell you going cheap if you believe heavily subsidized wind power is cheaper than coal. SA has the highest power prices in Australia and its the tax payer that has to subsidize every one of the wind turbines at around $400,000 per turbine.

HenryBG 5:01 pm 22 Oct 14

Canberroid said :

I’d rather replace coal power stations with wind farms than stop breathing to reduce CO2 emissions. I fail to see what part of my comment was “wild”.

The added benefit of replacing coal with wind is that it will bring power prices down, as it has done in South Australia.

Canberroid 10:38 am 22 Oct 14

dungfungus said :

Canberroid said :

dungfungus said :

These things really mess up the weather radar.
Why the hell are they putting more of these things in when electricity consumption is falling?

Because CO2 emissions from coal power stations really mess up the weather.

You have no idea how weather radar works, do you?
If Co2 emissions “mess up the weather” why blame only coal power stations or do you breath out a type of Co2 that is “clean & green”?
Another wild statement from a warmist without any evidence.

I never mentioned weather radar.

I’d rather replace coal power stations with wind farms than stop breathing to reduce CO2 emissions. I fail to see what part of my comment was “wild”.

Nice work HenryBG.

HenryBG 9:21 pm 21 Oct 14

OK, so apparently you will respire on average about 200ml of CO2 per minute.
x60 x24 x365 = about 200kg/year.

(And leaving aside where this C is coming from for the minute…)

Multiply this by 7 billion people and you get:
Human beings breathe out 1.5 Gt/year of CO2.

What about everything else?

The sea releases and absorbs around 330Gt/year (absorbs about 6Gt more than it emits)
The land (incl vegetation) releases 440Gt and absorbs 450Gt per year
Human industrial and agricultural activity emits 30Gt per year.

Ok, so human breathing is less inconsequential than I expected, but it remains very close to inconsequential.

As usual, when one of Dungfungus’s climate-denying talking points is examined, it is found wanting.

*** Of course, the C in the CO2 that we breathe out is all C that we have obtained from eating food and drinking fine wines – this C is C that was fixed recently (or maybe a couple of decades ago in the case of that disappointing Grange you had last weekend) and it is C that will probably be rixed again not long after you breathe it out.
The C in coal is C that was fixed many millins of years ago. All *that* C was fixed a very long time ago and it is the re-release of this C that was removed from the system all that time ago that is reponsible for raising atmospheric CO2 levels to a level that is higher than any CO2 levels for many millions of years.
Last time CO2 levels were as high as they are right now, sea levels were 40m higher than they are now. Antarctica and Greenland are both responding to this increased CO2 by busily shedding ice into the ocean. The $#@% is hitting the fan, while some of the less well-endowed among us – intellectually-speaking – are still repeating their Murdoch-supplied talking points. You will remember this moment in decades to come…..

HenryBG 9:05 pm 21 Oct 14

dungfungus said :

Canberroid said :

dungfungus said :

These things really mess up the weather radar.
Why the hell are they putting more of these things in when electricity consumption is falling?

Because CO2 emissions from coal power stations really mess up the weather.

You have no idea how weather radar works, do you?
If Co2 emissions “mess up the weather” why blame only coal power stations or do you breath out a type of Co2 that is “clean & green”?
Another wild statement from a warmist without any evidence.

Let’s see, shall we Dungfungus, whether the CO2 that we are respiring is at levels that warrant concern….be back in a tick.

farnarkler 6:06 pm 21 Oct 14

I hope they let the Lake George zebra man loose with paint on them so we can have the World’s biggest pinwheels.

Antagonist 5:51 pm 21 Oct 14

HenryBG said :

Antagonist said :

“The radius of the circle they describe will be increased by 6m.”

Nope.

The radius increases by the same amount the blade length increases by, which is 6m.

Right you are. I got muddled when trying to figure out what the whinge was (between redundant clauses) in the hysterical carry-on of the OP.

dungfungus 4:59 pm 21 Oct 14

Canberroid said :

dungfungus said :

These things really mess up the weather radar.
Why the hell are they putting more of these things in when electricity consumption is falling?

Because CO2 emissions from coal power stations really mess up the weather.

You have no idea how weather radar works, do you?
If Co2 emissions “mess up the weather” why blame only coal power stations or do you breath out a type of Co2 that is “clean & green”?
Another wild statement from a warmist without any evidence.

HenryBG 4:12 pm 21 Oct 14

Antagonist said :

“The radius of the circle they describe will be increased by 6m.”

Nope.

The radius increases by the same amount the blade length increases by, which is 6m.

And the tower height stays the same because the blade is not part of the tower.

Canberroid 3:20 pm 21 Oct 14

dungfungus said :

These things really mess up the weather radar.
Why the hell are they putting more of these things in when electricity consumption is falling?

Because CO2 emissions from coal power stations really mess up the weather.

pajs 1:18 pm 21 Oct 14

Mount at different height on the big pole thing. That would be the other explanation.

I think you might not be a real Professor, somehow.

teddyhb 1:18 pm 21 Oct 14

If you had actually looked at the article you are referring too, you would have noticed that in the handy diagram located in the article that the tower height for a wind turbine is actually referring to the hight of the tower, you know, the bit that the blades connect to. Obviously pictures with dimension lines drawn on them are too hard for you to understand….

Antagonist 1:13 pm 21 Oct 14

“The radius of the circle they describe will be increased by 6m.”

Nope. Radius is measure from the centre of the circle to any point on the edge of the circle. That would be an increase in radius of 3m. Double it to get a 6m increase in diameter.

You also assume the blades will be mounted to towers in the same way. A change in gearbox design could allow the rotating assembly to be mounted 3m (or more) lower allowing for the overall same height.

I don’t know the specifics of the article you are referring to, but it is possible that Mr Griffiths is right. I don’t think you should be using the name ‘Professor’ 🙂

dungfungus 12:02 pm 21 Oct 14

More bird-blending throughput.
I am sure they would be higher if there were not aviation safety issues.
These things really mess up the weather radar.
Why the hell are they putting more of these things in when electricity consumption is falling?

Related Articles

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top
Copyright © 2017 Riot ACT Holdings Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.
www.the-riotact.com | www.b2bmagazine.com.au | www.thisiscanberra.com

Search across the site