[at-l] 'Bout time. {Wind}

[KGJ]

Got caught up in trying to think and my English skills got left behind.  The first couple of sentences should read:

At first it sounded nutty to me.  I'll try to look up the reference.  But when I read it, it seemed to make a little more sense: the turbines run all the time, the wind downstream of them is turbulent, unlike undisturbed wind. 

Jim Lynch
______________________________________________
"I'll leave the doomsaying to others, I'm too busy working on the future" 
Ed Jones, 2009
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: KGJ 
  To: Tom McGinnis ; Sly 
  Cc: at-l at backcountry.net 
  Sent: Tuesday, April 07, 2009 1:03 PM
  Subject: Re: [at-l] 'Bout time. {Wind}


  It sounded nutty to me.  I'll try to look up the reference.  When I read it, it seemed to make sense to me: the turbines run all the time, the wind downstream of them is turbulent, not like undisturbed wind.  The structure isn't the issue as you or someone pointed out.  Not to change the subject, but something else I've read is that folks are starting to look at having the oil platforms do double duty as fish farms.  Just an idea at this point; don't think anyone's done anything specific yet.

  Jim Lynch
  ______________________________________________
  "I'll leave the doomsaying to others, I'm too busy working on the future" 
  Ed Jones, 2009
    ----- Original Message ----- 
    From: Tom McGinnis 
    To: Sly ; KGJ 
    Cc: at-l at backcountry.net 
    Sent: Tuesday, April 07, 2009 8:32 AM
    Subject: Re: [at-l] 'Bout time. {Wind}



    -- On Mon, 4/6/09, KGJ <jplynch at crosslink.net> wrote:

    > As with most things, there are unintended 
    > consequences. The wind farms in the North Sea create
    > turbulence that stirs up the water, bringing deep water up to the surface. 
    > I haven't read anything about that for awhile, but scientists didn't
    > know what the long term effects were.

    ### This just sounds nuts, Jim -- that's probably why you haven't heard anything. Think about it -- there are way too many perturbations on surface waters that result in zero effect, decades of powered shipping, precipitation, and *including* the wind being farmed itself. (In other words, to support an idea that a wind farm would cause turnover (waters of different temps or salinity flipping), you'd have to first explain why/how the wind itself didn't cause total mixing in the first place.)

    If I put a fan next to a pan of water, at the bottom of which I'd put a sprinkling of food coloring, and then turned the fan on, I'm betting the food coloring would mix. But as a kid, I'd watch my dad sprinkling chlorine in the pool, and some good New England shore winds going by, and no amount of that was going to mix that powder. Either we had to jump in, or grab the vacuum and scrub it and move it and suck it up, for anything to happen.

    As a reasonable guy, which one of those scenarios would you say was more analogous to the North Sea and some big, *passive* impellers on top?


------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  _______________________________________________
  at-l mailing list
  at-l at backcountry.net
  http://mailman.backcountry.net/mailman/listinfo/at-l
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://patsy.hack.net/pipermail/at-l/attachments/20090407/38ac4d68/attachment.html