This is a classic case of there being so much dishonesty in the world
today that we have a hard time knowing who to believe. The dark
financial clouds over us are another example. Every culture in the world
needs to become rapidly less tolerant of dishonesty.

In the video the science supports what the pilot said, not the film
maker. AgI has been used to seed rain clouds for many decades. We saw a
small scale facility because the process is expensive and is only used
to try to alleviate severe draught situations. If con trails where
really chem trails there would need to be huge storage facilities in
airports all over the world. There are plenty of other probable causes
of the ills falsely attributed to chem trails. The beauty of good
science is that it is totally honest and it allows us to target the real
villains. If we demanded that everyone in authority be immediately
demoted every time they are caught lying we might fix the major problems
we are facing.

Robert.

yes... we spend a nice day in your place... thanks again

Paolo
PM

A comedic caricature cascade of self-defeating green energy concerns, showing that if people are fanatical enough, you can never make them happy, no matter what solutions you may offer. To me, the concern over the occasional bat strike falls into this category too. Their logic is that bats eat insects, including pests, so killing bats will make pest insect populations skyrocket.

The fact is, one of the main problems wind turbines have is killing insects - dead insect buildup on the blades can affect performance.
Of course you never hear anyone cite the insect-killing power of the turbines, or the logic that for every bat a turbine accidentally hits, it probably also takes out the insects that bat would have eaten.

Nobody wants to bring up the insects hit, except the companies making money cleaning blades.
Why? Well of course, the next thing you know the green people will be fixated on ANALyzing just how many of what type of insects are killed in what numbers, so now maybe you have a whole NEW green reason to shut down green energy.
And so it goes.

With the polar bear population now skyrocketing, the global-warming people continue to try and say the population is in jeopardy, despite many warmer periods in the past that they somehow survived, and despite their present thriving population explosion.

Similarly to the Alaska oil pipeline increasing the Caribou population, these wind turbines and their noise probably help the whales in some way.
My dad's company once made some of those sonic cannons for undersea oil exploration. He had whales come up and personally thank him for cleaning out their ears! "Do it again!" the whales would say, like a little kid after you throw them into the air and catch them.

He also once told me there is so much oil out there that wind power was quite likely not worth pursuing. And he was as liberal as one can get. Or so he thought. Go figure. One of the main things holding back faster implementation of wind energy now is excessive regulations, often from the greenies themselves. If you gave them a rifle they would shoot themselves in the foot too. Leading to more restrictive legislation of course.

Yes truth is stranger than fiction. Maybe airborne wind energy will be seen to affect the whales' barnacles, somehow leading to the end of the world. More likely, what I've always thought is, they'd protest that you are slowing the winds. Concerns over slowing the jetstream, valid or not, could be fodder for creating quite a panic. That's what I thought as a lad anyway. One more taxable event, eh? As we know, once they can discern any effect, true or not, they can extrapolate to any level of scare story - there is no limit. Good effects are seldom acknowledged, while bad effects are often exaggerated or completely fabricated.

:)
Doug Selsam

I noticed as a kid that if it's going to get cloudy, that cloudiness can be seen to start with vapor trails. How that is mysterious, in any way, is beyond me. Where else would the clouds start but where there's already more vapor?
Lots of this type of stuff is disinformation, intentionally planted to confuse people with so many fake issues that the real ones get buried in a sea of nonsense.
:O...

The article was carried by many websites. I think the sum total of their feeling about it is thanks for the ad views.

I was unable to figure out who the original author was. Clearly they chose to take the most provocative thing they could say from the study. But they probably did that so that lots of web sites would pick it up.

The study itself is perhaps the real concern. But, as Dave pointed out in a different post just because the jet stream is not the panacea that some of those news releases that Doug hates so much claimed is hardly a dent in the gargantuan resource that wind power represents.

Brian

We were informed today that the FAA's proposed policy for the inclusion of AWE in the national airspace, will be published this week in the federal register, marking the beginning of the public comment period.

I'm sure He Who Knows All can provide a link and further details.

- Dimitri

Thanks, Dimitri, for the heads up.

Yeah let's try and present ourselves as though we are sane.

http://www.energykitesystems.net/FAA/AWES/ForPulblicComment60daysto7Jan2012.htm 

"This is bad news for flygens, conductive tethers, and conductive airframes (alu, carbon fiber, etc)."
 Abd also for piloting device aloft like for SkySails?

PierreB
http://flygenkite.com

Few questions:

1. When is a radar imprint wanted?
    Would offshore upper radar footprint be wanted?
    Are there conceptions that would invite FAA to want definite radar imprint?

2. Robust understanding  and catalog of passive-control tactics
without radar imprint.

3. Extensive collection of control via two lines or more lines.
    Line-tension changes for control?
    Oscillations in lines for control?

4. How might a lofted kite-control unit or kite-steering unit be made
without a radar imprint?

5. How to be invisible to radar? What constructions are invisible to
radar. Which constructions are visible to radar?

6. How to test AWES for radar imprint?

7. Just when would an AWES having radar imprint NOT be considered as
"cluttering" the radar screen?

Some study:
http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/atpubs/aim/Chap4/aim0405.html
Section 5. Surveillance Systems  4-5-1. Radar



Folder has been opened to collect AWES radar notes. Post in group
forum or/and send notes to editor.
http://www.energykitesystems.net/Radar/index.html


On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 12:02 AM, Pierre BENHAIEM
<pierre.benhaiem@orange.fr

http://willthomasonline.net/Nano_Chemtrails.html

Hi David,

You are aware after 45 the U.S. government nuked troops at ground zero, telling them they'd be fine, recently the syphilis debacle has surfaced, there are too many other incidents that have occured. Who gave these people the right to mass experiment,Monsanto, they took the rights away from others. In the present and into the future who is to say "they" are "not"still doing covert activities against the wishes of the peoples of the Earth. Corporations use countries like store fronts until it no longer serves their purpose, then they move on, Haliburton, Blackwater etc...

When the founding Farther and Mothers first conceived our republic they understood it needed to be guarded and protected against foreign and domestic enemies. At what point do the Corporations cross that line? Who is to stop them when they become more powerful then the goverments of the Earth, Hmmmm! You may believe I am fatalistic, that is your prerogative. I am ever watchful and hopefull that common sense may prevail but I do realize there are those in the world who are very powerfull,ruthless, yet lack a common humaity, Koyannisqatsi.

Attachments :

I do not believe radar is a valid reason for resisting AWE.
The idea that radar has rights, that radar is somehow and end-all-be-all technology, are silly. Likely radar can be replaced with something less archaic. Meanwhile, what the radar people have to understand is not that the world will mold itself around the God of existing radar configurations, but rather that such positional sensing systems must evolve along with the rest of civilization to sense what is there. One more reason officialdom can sometimes be counted on the make progress in any field difficult, rather than helping it along. Think about it: One day someone noticed you can sense things by bouncing radio waves. Is it realistic to say we will design all of future civilization based on how it affects our current bouncing radio wave trick?

If anything, working their systems around AWE systems, assuming any were in the air to worry about in the first place, which makes the whole question moot anyway, might help them fine-tune their sensing system so it could not be foiled by someone flying kites.

If smart people truly believed in runaway global warming, you would see working AWE systems in the air. Either nobody believes it, or there are no truly smart people left.

If anyone DOES believe in it AND is actually looking for configurations that could work now - heck even if you don't "believe" but just like clean energy and want an AWE configuration that will definitely work well, without computers even, please get ahold of me. I've got about 10 workable configurations in my back pocket. I know, I know, nobody actually cares because the whole idea that we nedd to stop global warming is all bullshit anyway, they know it, and their lack of action is the proof.

If my house was burning down and someone said they had a way to put out the fire, I would listen quite eagerly. On the other hand, if I just SAID my house was burning down, but didn't really believe it, I'd be acting like the big bureaucrats are now: ignoring people with the solution. Taking that next vacation...
Hey go buy some natural gas stock and get back to sleep!
:)

Makani, Do notice tweets, (see they're trendy)

So when they asked...
makanipower Makani Power
RT @emilychangtv: Could this flying wing be the future of wind energy? Shooting a story at @MakaniPower bit.ly/ryQYq9 (We think so!)

and I replied
not a hope
then gave the address of this post

Was I being really unprofessional?

Bureaucracy is one of the slowest reacting creatures on the planet.

NAS controllers would like to be quick reacting.
A small metallic foil section sewn inside every 4th kite will help their huge ATC efforts.

Radar can be hard to interpret.  However, GPS and computers are getting cheap, so it should be possible to either use regular transponders on the kites, or feed their data into the screens through a separate channel.  We just have to negotiate over the use of airspace for power instead of transport realistically, instead of chasing the red herring of safety around first.

Shall do, Dave
I'm very new to twitter. Still a bit chirpy.

Apologies also to all good folks keeping AWEIA's draft Ethics Code.

I was much more upfront in MP face last time I twattured them.

I really must get a grip on the terminology.

Well, of course safety has to be addressed, but not from the position that the status quo is sacred because of the current budget for new hardware at ATC.  We are trying to save the country, and using the precedent of flying schools for Air Force pilots, we should have no trouble getting chunks of airspace allocated.  If the transport pilots want some of it back, part time, they can ask the Kite operators for clearance when they can settle on a new protocol.  

  

DaveS,BobS,

Can Makani tether and motors-propellers be or become invisible to radar with appropriate protective coat if necessary (the wing being not taken into account) ?

PierreB

Dave S.
Glad to hear you are flying every day.
Come and visit sometime!
:)
Doug S.

 

Aggregate stability.

Cousin: Recall 4T:
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/AirborneWindEnergy/message/4105

What technical hurdles remain for AWES?

How might those technical hurdles be overcome?

 

 

Tactical occasional use of brass eyelets instead of webbing and knot connectors, could give a kite stack just enough of a reflection to be visible.

Spreading deployment of the eyelets in a standard pattern on array layers ensures standardised weakpoints in the rigging.
If we design for minor failures to allow gradual degredation of array performance. This alerts a need for inspection maintenance. And also helps avoid catastrophic single point failures.

More than just radar covered there.

I'm really glad you mentioned the microchip array and bus communication comparison, Dave.

I'd suggested before addressing of kites in an array can be done with vga methods.

I wonder what the latency of a bussed Dyneema® tension signal is at 10 km high 50 m to the left?

Rod Read in another topic thread: