Comments on: Altamont Pass: What’s the Story With Those Windmills?

By: Chris S

Chris S — Thu, 23 Aug 2018 21:05:54 +0000

In reply to Joseph DeMare. I wasn't confused at the end where the author started talking about a different project to make the turbines safer. She said the replacement is still close to the ground but has a shroud to deter the birds and make it safer. Since they aren't the large mono poles they would only produce similar power (50% more in this case).

By: Joseph DeMare

Joseph DeMare — Fri, 27 Apr 2018 00:39:19 +0000

The amount of energy in the wind is the square of the area. In other words, twice the diameter means four times the power, and 3 times the area means 9 times the power, etc. So, a turbine with a 40 foot diameter can only produce about 1/50th the power of a turbine with a 300 foot diameter. SO, the author’s statement that a 41 foot diameter turbine can produce “50% more” power is either an outright lie, or she means that the new design can produce 50% more power than an older turbine with a similar diameter. If that’s the case, the wording is very misleading. Either way, the idea that we can replace large turbines with lots of smaller ones on rooftops is physically impossible.

By: Bob Wallace

Bob Wallace — Wed, 06 Jul 2016 19:53:50 +0000

I found a single study –

“Thousands of older turbines at Altamont Pass have been fast-spinning and low to the ground, while also featuring cage-like lattice towers that were attractive places for birds to land and perch: a bad mix.

Most of these are being replaced by “monopole” towers, some as high as 500 feet (152 meters). The new towers are meant to be safer for wildlife, but a recent study suggests that may not be the case. Looking at hundreds of published reports on bird deaths at 59 wind farms across the United States, Oklahoma State University ecologist Scott Loss says the shift to the new, monopole designs is no simple fix.

The larger, more efficient structures appear to kill more birds per turbine than the windmills they’re replacing—between three and eight birds per turbine per year, according to Loss.”

There’s a problem with data interpretation. The critical metric is not birds killed per turbine but birds killed per GWh of electricity produced.

The original turbines at Altamont were very small compared to today’s turbines. There are several companies that have turbines at Altamont, let’s look at one (the one I quickly found ;o).

Wiki –
” 100kW Kenetech turbines are being taken down. These are older models with lattice towers. It has been proposed to replace them with 27 turbines with rated capacity of 2.1MW”

For each “higher turbine” installed 21 “lower turbines” are being removed. (2.1 MW / 100 kW = 21)

The new, higher turbines would need to kill more than 20x as many birds per tower in order to be equally dangerous for birds. If the lower turbines were killing, on average, 1 bird per year then they were a lot more destructive than the higher turbines that are killing “between three and eight birds per turbine per year.”

less

By: Tony

Tony — Wed, 07 Oct 2015 21:01:25 +0000

Excellent article about everything I wanted to know about the turbines, especially why they never seem to turn anymore when l visit the area. Actually, I’m no longer an advocate of large area wind and solar farms. After reading “The Methanol Economy” I believe our future lies there. Combine CO2 with H only waste is water. Much more efficient electrical generation without using vast tracks of land, and killing off wildlife.

By: John Doe

John Doe — Mon, 28 Sep 2015 23:34:08 +0000

Your article made me do more science homework. Tf.