LATEST NEWS:      4/9/10 : Stateline SA: http://www.abc.net.au/news/video/2010/09/03/3002379.htm         1/9/10 : Not blowinĄŻ in the wind, just blowing earnings         1/9/10 : Wind farm investment runs out of puff         31/8/10 : Guardians have a win         28/8/10 : Court upholds wind farm appeal        
Spa Country Landscape Guardians...

LOVE TO HEAR FROM YOU

NAME
Email Address:
Content
Total messages are 451
No. 451 messages from bertie at 2010-09-09 08:27:42

Mick, Thanks for your reply. Sorry but I dont have the skills to analyse the data. You need training to do that with rigour.

But anyone can see from the turbine specification sheet (publicly available) that Bossinger got it very wrong. He assumed that turbines dont produce any power below their rated wind speed, where in fact thats where many of them generate most of their energy.

Simple mistake. Big error. The honourable thing to do would be to admit the error.
No. 450 messages from Mick at 2010-08-30 12:32:20

maybe you could analyse it bertie? you seem to be some kind of expert as you profess to know more than the person who has analysed the data.
No. 449 messages from bertie at 2010-08-25 12:44:11

Mick, You should ask the Hepburn Renewable people for the data. However who would analyse it for you? As I have pointed out, theres no one here who knows how to analyse it.

Your expert argues that turbines produce nothing when the wind is blowing at less than the rated wind speed, when, in fact, thats when turbines produce the majority of their energy!
No. 448 messages from mick at 2010-08-24 13:56:57

Bertie, you still havnt provided the wind speed data over a yearly period, until you do your arguments are futile.
You can claim the high moral ground if you like, but inevitably like all other wind projects the truth will slip out(if it ever gets built)and we will all get to see what a fraud it is, just like at waubra, toora, cape bridgewater etc.
Did you happen to notice the report that came out last week stateing emmisions from coal use had continued to rise? I would have thought they should have dropped according to the wind propaganda from waubra that stated it would save 6500000 tons of co2! just another labor scam.
No. 447 messages from Marty at 2010-08-15 19:16:43

Great victory at Smeaton for the people with the guts to stand their ground and openly express their views, unlike the dills secretly trying to get turbines who never show their faces!!!
No. 446 messages from Matthew at 2010-08-15 19:15:16

The silent majority knows that wind turbines are not popular, just look at the election Julia Gillard won even mention wind energy! Its a politial vote killer. toss turbines go solar
No. 445 messages from bertie at 2010-08-15 19:13:07


For those who came in late, 10 months ago (November 2009) I started asking questions about Dr Bossingers paper on this website that predicts a 4% capacity factory for the Hepburn Renewable Association project.

Bossingers analysis relies heavily on the false assumption that wind turbines don generate any power below their rated wind speed, when i fact thats where most of their energy comes from.

While I received plenty of noisy responses from Mick, Mac, Eric, Sam, Greg, Tom, Glen, Nikki, Terry, Vic, Brian and Brain, not a single one of them has been able to address the flaw that invalidates Bossingers analysis head-on. Plenty of hot headed playground bullying talk, but not discussion.

While its clear that some rowdy folks opposing wind farm hang out here, theres no evidence of anyone else with the intellectual rigour or honesty to stand by the assertions.
No. 444 messages from bertie at 2010-07-10 12:29:33

[For the record, I meant 25% - 35%.]
No. 443 messages from bertie at 2010-07-09 07:10:51

Nikki and Terry, I think you have misinterpreted me. I am not taking the side of wind farms here. This is not a matter of opinion. Im only saying that the analysis in the report is fatally flawed.

The report assumed that wind turbines produce no energy below the rated wind speed, however turbines generally produce most of their energy between the cut-in and rated speeds. If the analysis was redone, on the same data, without this misconception, your the SCLG engineer would have come up with a number much closer to normal values of 25 - 25%.

Thats the issue: using the data provided the analysis is wrong.
No. 442 messages from nikki at 2010-07-08 08:10:44

bertie, you have your head in the sand if you support windfarms. windfarms are on the nose in rural australia, youd be hard pressed to get anyone to even sign up to them these days after the way so many people close to them are getting sick.
Go back to the inner city where its ok to shove shit on rural people, and you can feel good about renewable energy, even if it doesnt work!

Page   1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46


Leave comment
Email us