"Earth Getting Mysteriously Windier"

[Jeff]

Some mystery.

Unexplained trend maybe due to warming, natural cycles, expert says.

Mason Inman for National Geographic News
Published March 28, 2011

The world has gotten stormier over the past two decades—and the reason is a mystery, a new study says.

In the past 20 years, winds have picked up around 5 percent on average.

Extremely strong winds caused by storms have increased even faster, jumping 10 percent over 20 years, according to the new analysis of global satellite data.

The study, the first to look at wind speeds across such a large swath of the planet, bolsters some earlier findings, according to study leader Ian Young, of the Swinburne University of Technology in Melbourne, Australia.

"Some regional studies had found similar results, so we suspected there may be an increasing trend," Young said.

...

"If this is related to global warming—and this is speculation—it indicates that either the intensity of storms is increasing or the frequency of storms is increasing," he said.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news ... vironment/

[JackRiddler]

.

I don't know Jeff, the air was awfully still today.

[brainpanhandler]

On the bright side wind power will become more productive.

[Jeff]

.

I don't know Jeff, the air was awfully still today.

But what we really need is mysterious stillness.

[anothershamus]

Mysteriously wavier!

In conjunction with the wind, or perhaps because of it, I heard about a study of the wave height average going from 5ft to 6ft. Since I have been contemplating getting a sailboat for a 'getaway pod', this makes a big difference in boat design and size. It's probably a product of the global climate change.

[JackRiddler]

So all this extra wave and wind activity from the warming can be applied toward replacing hydrocarbons but what do you do if that works and things cool down again and the waves go down and suddenly you don't have enough power for your hippie stereo, huh? Huh?

[barracuda]

I don't know about you, but I've been blown away for years now.

[Hammer of Los]

On the bright side wind power will become more productive.

And Jack mentioned wave power too!

You guys beat me to it!

I like to look on the bright side. Otherwise, I'd be really depressed.

I guess I'm just an an incautious optimist.

[leobloom23]

...I blame it on all the cable talk shows!!

[gnosticheresy_2]

Sales of baked beans increase during recession. Therefore in conclusion: it's all the bankers fault.

[JackRiddler]

...I blame it on all the cable talk shows!!

Damn, I was just coming in to make another dumb crack along those lines.



.

[Bruce Dazzling]

Purely anecdotal, but my girlfriend and I have noticed that its been significantly windier here in NYC for going on three years, but this year has been the craziest. It seems like there's always at least a 15 mph wind (which is currently the case), but 2 or 3 times per week we have 20 - 30 mph gusts, and two or three times in 2011 alone we've experienced the newly coined phenomenon known as "windpocalypse."

Honestly, it's what I used to imagine living in Chicago would be like.

[Stephen Morgan]

On the bright side wind power will become more productive.

Only when producing. The problem with wind-power is that there are periods when it produces no power at all, at which times other production methods have the be used. As it can take several days to cycle up a gas turbine plant, this means that as long as there is a possibility of a windless period in the next few days you need to keep the gas plants going, even if you don't need the power they're generating, meaning wind power is of absolutely no use at all. You have to keep the other plants going all the time anyway. Similar calculations apply to coal and nuclear plants, for those of you in foreign parts where gas isn't the main fuel for electricity suppliers.

[wintler2]

Only when producing. The problem with wind-power is that there are periods when it produces no power at all, at which times other production methods have the be used.

All other forms of electricity generation also suffer outages, only renewables get noticed. Our children will comes to terms with 'not always on', and will save themselves much wasted capital and resource consumption.

As it can take several days to cycle up a gas turbine plant,

False, curious since the truth is widely known & easily checkable..

Gas fired power plants of Steam and Gas fired power plants have a startup time of, respectively, less than one hour and two hours. http://www.energypolicyblog.com/2010/06 ... y-markets/

this means that as long as there is a possibility of a windless period in the next few days you need to keep the gas plants going, even if you don't need the power they're generating, meaning wind power is of absolutely no use at all.

Just like cash is useless because you sometimes use a credit card?

You have to keep the other plants going all the time anyway. Similar calculations apply to coal and nuclear plants, for those of you in foreign parts where gas isn't the main fuel for electricity suppliers.

Your certitude is in inverse proportion to your knowledge.

[JackRiddler]

.

The argument that preventing power outages with wind means we need to keep coal or gas plants running reminds me of the false dichotomy between coal and nuclear. Such concerns would be rendered moot through a mix of different renewable and ecological forms of power production.

Solar roof panels + solar plants producing hydrogen + ocean-wave capture hydropower + wind + secondary biomass (of shit and waste) + geothermal. All in a new smart grid.

Not all of these can go out very often at the same time, and then, so what? We also have blackouts under the present system.

In the cities, build light rail, create covered bike lanes and redesign to cut commuting needs. Convert buildings to cut down on heating costs. End the empire (biggest waste of energy of all). Stop subsidizing agribusiness corn-for-meat and put that into subsidies for more localized, organic agriculture using modern means to raise density. It's all technologically doable today. You could throw a couple of hundred billion saved off the war machinery into Apollo projects for developing the various technological wild-cards.

The only "problem" is that it would take an enormous investment and many years of full employment to install enough of these facilities and convert the infrastructure. You'd also have to fund giant new departments at the universities to educate the new specialists. All of which, of course, is not a problem at all, except to the economic libertarians. All this is the solution to the economic depression. There is no downside, except to the balance sheets of certain currently dominant institutions that rely on monopoly power over highly centralized forms of energy production, run by fools who care only about their own pecuniary interests, to the point of killing their own grandchildren.

.