Yeah we should remind each other to try to to win any Darwin Awards.
Maybe a "Don't wind a Darwin" slogan...
For my part, i will remind everyone that spinnning wind turbine rotors will injure or kill if contacted. I almost lost a finger once. Another guy was hit by a blade on his boat and it killed him. Most wind energy deaths, which are rare, involve falls.

I like this idea. I think it would work well with Doug's super turbines among other things. When the list last discussed it I think the criticism was that such a system would pull itself to the ground. I don't think this would happen. It's just a matter of setting the gear ratios.

So here is a fuller idea. Use 4 sets of super turbines, 2 of them going opposite directions. Put collective pitch control on some or all of them. By adjusting the relative pitch of the 4 stacks you can set the angle and rotation of system without using a pilot kite. Translate the torque of the turbines into the loop and you have your system. Collective pitch control is not nearly as hard as cyclic. Just like a quadcopter can do everything that a helicopter can do without cyclic so can this system. You have to have at least 2 stacks to counter the torque. Using 4 lets you control all the motions. This can also be done with just 4 rotors and not super turbine stacks, and I think we have seen as much before. But super turbines sound more fun. ;)

Brian

Compasso   at KiteGen

Soon we'll be trying to prevent a slide into the next ice age.
Meanwhile a warm winter over here masked the recession for a few months.
Sorry about all the people over there who froze to death this year in your unusually-ultra-cold winter.

http://act.climatedots.org/event/impacts_en/3494 

We are presently near the end (11,000 years) of an interglacial period. Interglacial periods alternate between glacial periods. Two Questions:
1) Should we expect to enter another glacial period?
2) When?

I hate to change the subject from warming to cooling, but on the larger scale, we are obviously about ready to descend into the next ice age. The fact that this is not acknowledged by the current "warming" crowd is, to me, evidence that they are not looking at the big picture - not talking about the big picture.

Or does someone want to make the case that the ice-age glaciation cycles will not happen anymore? Why would someone even think that? What evidence is there that somehow, the next glacial period of this ice age won't happen?

Let's be realistic:
Having much of the Northern continents covered with a mile of ice, and sea levels 400 feet lower than today, would seem to me to far outweigh the notion of sea levels rising a few inches, or even a few feet.

In fact, the difference the next glaciation will make for our planet, assuming we don't control the climate by then, is so astronomically huge in comparison to the degree or two of warming we are now talking about that it can only result in denial. The implications are so vast and huge, humanity cannot even consider them. if I had any advice, it would be to buy beachfront property. Any sliver of beach could turn into acres, then miles of property.

Buying beachfront property before the next glaciation is as much of a no-brainer as registering common words for domain names for free when the internet first started, investing in Apple in the 1990's, etc. But people can't wrap their brains around a 400-foot sea-level drop, so they instead fixate on trying to measure and exaggerate slight apparent sea-level rises where in reality the land is meerely still subsiding after the last glaciation! See facts either don't matter, or they can easily be stood on their heads to make a case for the opposite of reality.

Since we represent the more visionary aspect of wind energy, maybe we should be more visionary in looking at climate from a slightly more long-term viewpoint. All anyone has to do is check the facts, look at the charts, and you'll clearly see that the real danger is that we are at the edge of the next glacial abyss in the temperature data.

I think it seriously would make a lot more sense to talk about how we will be able to stave off such cooling, assuming we really want to stop it. Releasing as much of our planet's carbon into the atmosphere as we can could be just such a way. Also remember, we are not sending the carbon out into space - it still stays on Earth, and will still end up underground eventually, as the oceans, plants, etc. suck it up and put it back into the ground.

Part of the solution will be inf someone can figure out a way to make money from it: taxing carbon use is tempting in its simplicity for a carbon-fuel-based economy. What they need is a way to tax NOT using carbon so people will use more.(?) :) Only then can we stop the dreadful impending global cooling! print T-shirts, bumper-stickers, tell your friends, have concerts, "Cool The World!".
:)))))
he he he

I hesitate to dignify this with any response, but an Ice Age is primarily ruinous for Europe.  Far more valuable real estate is created by greening the Sahara, as well as the exposed seabed, fronting cooler oceans teeming with life.  However, we have abruptly veered away from that cycle, as all ice surveys show.  Wind speeds will be up, though.

Doug, this is very much Off-Topic for this group so I am reluctant to
reply. However, you are passing on some very dangerous lies invented by
the hugely powerful fossil fuel industry so I need to respond.

Two Questions:

Your haranguing them and not actually looking for an answer. That is not very scientific. I will take the other side just for the fun of it.

Can you state the source of these "Common Lulls" your claiming will dash their plans?
Perhaps linking to a wikipedia article or some other source besides your anecdotal opinion. Do you have data? Understanding why the wind blows in the ways that it does is helpful for AWE. It is important to remember that what we observe at ground level is not always indicative of what our kites would be experiencing at 500+ feet up.

I would guess that your talking of the lulls caused by ground heating and the breaking off of thermals. This phenomenon is manageable by a number of techniques. If your speaking of something else then I would need to look into it.

Brian

--- In AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com, Bob Stuart <bobstuart@... ***Yes the Sahara will be green once again when temps drop back down, bringing "The Garden of Eden" back to life. That naturally comes with global cooling,. It's actually thousands of years too late to panic over Global Warming. The destruction of The Garden of Eden was over thousands of years ago! (The generals are always fighting the last war)***

****Great Bob, we'll make a note of that (windspeeds... will... be... up...) there! I am so glad to be interacting with so many other people who, like me, know so much about everything. Between us all we are awesome fortune-tellers!****

--- In AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com, Robert Copcutt <r@... *****Yeah but I did not get anything I say from the fossil fuel industry. I've always been skeptical of global warming since I first heard Margaret Thatcher propose carbon taxes decades ago. I predicted the current panic over warming back when the "experts" were still panicking over cooling back in the 1980's! This shit goes by in slow motion for me.
Hey I predicted the housing crash while bernanke was saying he didn't see any possibility of a housing crash. I hate to say it but I usually see through whatever level of self-delusion the "experts" in any such field suffer under at any given moment.

While the average idiot debates the "truth" of impending warming or cooling, more astute people like me study the long-term sociological phenomenon of the highly-reliable 30-year cycle of panic alternating between warming and cooling that has gone on since the invention of the printing press.

The fact that you have been drawn into the argument that CO2 levels have been causative rather than an effect, or even to fixate on CO2 levels as the most significant factor, is just that: you have been drawn into fixating on CO2. How many other factors are at work? Water vapor being many times the greenhouse gas of CO2, same with methane, and so many other factors from orbital cycles to ocean currents, volcanism, and even mineral levels in oceans which affects plankton levels, etc.

It's a shell game where the flim-flam man talks so fast and keeps your eyes focused on the shell he wants you fixated on while the action takes place elsewhere. your head is spinning and you don;t have time to properly analyze it so you retreat to quoting "all experts" etc. Look at history - in big question like this, being an "expert" is likely the first step to being historically wrong.***
-Doug Selsam
:)

Hello Roderick:
Part of the power of suggestion is to suggest that the weather will be "strange". That way, every time it is not 70 degrees and sunny, it MUST be "evidence" - no wait, let's just call it "proof" that all the lies you are told must in reality be truth.

Why did I get into wind energy?
Well it was back when these same "experts" were panicking over "global cooling". Like I say, I PREDICTED with NO DOUBT back during the last "cooling" panic that it would transition to the next "warming" panic within a few years. This stuff is easy to see if you just sit back and relax, and look at the big picture. Just look at all the facts and relax. It will come to you.

Why did you "get into" wind energy Roderick? Because you believe in global warming? That may explain why I have turbines all =over the world powering people's home etc. whereas I don't think you have anything useful so far for producing much of any power whatsoever. Are you really even "into" wind energy, or are you just into thinking about it and building ostensible turbines that don't quite work? Sorry to sound harsh, but you asked... :) (at least you actually build things - better than most)

My interest in wind energy is because I am somewhat on top of things: I "get it" I know "what's up", which is why I was designing airborne wind energy systems in the 1970's before the real wind energy industry had reached even 1% of its current magnitude. During the last "energy crisis" I exposed myself to analyses showing that wind energy offered more energy at lower cost than solar. Wind clearly had better economical promise than solar at that time. Today with the cost of solar panels down to around a buck a watt, the advantage of wind power is less compelling, but now I am in the middle of working on wind energy systems, and am not about to give up just because solar has also improved.

One funny aspect of solar is that even if the panels were free, the support structure is costly, as is the labor, land, and infrastructure. The most humorous aspect is that a solar panel must be able to withstand a 100-mph wind. Hey they didn;t ask for their solar panels to9 have to meet the same structural requirements as a wind turbine but there you have it.

Oh and just to make it fair, a wind turbine must be able to survive full sunlight. Ask yourself if your pet wannabe wind turbine design is even up to this minimal requirement. Can your proposed wind energy device withstand 20 years of solar UV damage? Unlikely for most people on this list. The humor and irony is endless if you know where to look! Solar farms must withstand wind, and windfarms must withstand the sun! Who knew?... "Arggh this is too complicated - I thought my wind turbine just had to handle the gentle winds I imagine in my mind, in the dark!"

The thing I noticed about wind versus solar was that wind could get the same amount of energy by covering 2% of the area, (2% rotor solidity) whereas solar had to cover 100% of any area from which it is to capture energy. That is a 50:1 advantage with both structures required to withstand a 100 mph wind.

I'd say if "global warming" is the only reason you are into AWE, forget it. You will never make any progress unless you are into it because you think it is cool and awesome and fun! :)

Also if you can follow the data. I know a LOT of people who can make wind turbines work and work well. They keep Megawatt-level wind energy machines running, all day, every day. The common thread is they have their feet on the ground and understand reality. I cannot think of a single such person who truly understands how wind turbines work who even believes in global warming. To such practical people, the propaganda sounds like a joke! It's seen as a fortunate delusion. It takes practical people to make wind energy work, not people who can be led by the nose to think anything based on complicated arguments that sneakily depart from reality by constantly repeating a single aspect while constantly injecting emotion-based issues to keep discussions just 51% on the side of emotion versus facts.

I'm not even going to bother the usual labor of looking up and providing links to the historical temperature charts, ice cores, etc. It doesn't matter if people will not look at the facts. I studied ice ages from a young age, having grown up in a region whose geography was sculpted by glaciation.

Here are the simple facts:
1) We are in an "ice age" now.
2) The relatively ice-free period we currently enjoy is called an "interglacial" period.
3) The word "interglacial" means "between glacial periods"
4) If we are "between" glacial periods, that means we will have another glacial period in the future
5) The average length of an interglacial is 11,000 years
6) The age of the current interglacial is 11,000 years.

I'd be interested if anyone would like to acknowledge these simple, most basic facts about ice ages and glacial cycles. Which fact do I have wrong? Is it that we are NOT in an interglacial? Is it that I have the 11,000 years wrong? OK all I am asking for is for anyone to actually talk about facts rather than mindless propaganda.

I just think any such panic is irrelevant - just the stupid being led by the blind. Whatever the "experts" say, just say the opposite and they will agree with you in 30 years!

I don't know if any of you have noticed but we live in an excuse-driven world of lies and inaccuracies, where many if not most predictions by "experts" do not turn out to be true over time.
:)
Doug Selsam

Thanks for the solid slap of reality Doug,

Click for telling text: 

Doug,

The fossil fuel industry has spent billions locating underground assets
worth trillions. It has been a treasure hunt orders of magnitude bigger
than anything seen before. And now the climate scientists are trying to
spoil the party. Do you honestly think such a powerful and wealthy
industry is going to sit on its hands and not challenge the climate
science? By the time of Thatcher the tobacco industry (which is by
comparison tiny) had already clearly demonstrated that a campaign of
lies and misdirection can delay the proper action being taken by
decades. If it was not for the FF industry you would not dare say what
you are saying because everyone would know that we are on a course
towards disaster. We have to change direction. If you bothered to read
my webpage http://www.copcutt.me.uk/globalwarm.htm and other reports
such as the recent
<http://www.climatechange.gov.au/en/climate-change/understanding-climate-change/~/media/climate-change/prof-plimer-101-questions-response-pdf.pdf you would see how misguided your comments are.

The reality of warming has been understood since the 1890's. It was not
until Thatcher's era that it became necessary for us to worry about it.
Thatcher understood the science far better that the vast majority of
politicians before or since.

Robert.

Robert, please don't feel bad if people can actually read your words and not be convinced.  It happens every day, for reasons like this:  

There was never a panic about global cooling. The fossil fuel industry
jumped on the data showing a few years of cooling and milked it as much
as they could. The real experts never doubted their predictions of
long-term warming.

There are many reasons why we should be moving towards renewables, and
global warming is just one. The limited supply of fossil fuel is
another, as well as chemical pollution from its extraction and use, and
energy security. Governments should be doing far more to promote all
renewables with AWE being just one of many facets.

The modern era of cyclical ice ages started because India moved North
into the Asian continental shelf and pushed up the Himalayas. That
caused huge erosion of silicate materials. These silicates gets washed
into the sea at a rate the Earth had not previously experienced. When
suspended in water they slowly react with carbon dioxide in the air
forming carbonates and silica. Over tens of millions of years this
brought atmospheric CO2 levels down to a point where ice ages could
start if the Earth was at a point in its complex orbital pattern where
it received a minimum of solar energy. The cycle of about 100 000 years
of ice ages and interglacials then started.

We have already burned so much ff which has put so much CO2 into the sea
that we are completely protected from sliding into another ice age for
tens of thousands of years. However, in 60 000 years we might have a
problem.

The 800 000 years of ice core data we have shows a reasonable regular
100 000 year cycle but it is nothing like a regular sine wave. Your talk
of 11 000 years from a particular point in that cycle is therefore
completely misguided.

Solar panels do not have to move and they can be mounted close to
structures that are already built to withstand storm winds so support
structures are not as expensive as you imply. Very roughly the cost of
PV is now about 1/3rd for the panels, 1/3rd for installation (mostly
labour but a bit for support structures) and 1/3rd for the electrics.

Yes, and there is also the phenomena of people believing what is
repeated most often. Advertisers and politicians and lobbyists use it
all the time. Warming is such a serious threat I decided it was worth
preparing a web page so that those ready to have their minds changed
could be pointed in the right direction. Gradually those who believe the
lies will get isolated. Truth always prevails in the end, but I believe
it is important to counteract lies as quickly as possible because they
cause suffering.

I often wonder how useful compressed air power could be applied at altitude on our systems...

OK guys, like I said, the simple facts are not discussed, while you diverge into a thousand peripheral emotion-based arguments that amount to name-calling and demonizing. Your brains are all stirred up. Let your head settle, then...

I challenge you to stick to the facts I brought up.
Please address these facts in your reply:
1) The average age of an interglacial is 11,000 years
2) The age of the present interglacial is 11,000 years

Thank you.
:)
Doug Selsam

*****
LINK TO TEMP CHART:
http://freedomkeys.com/global_temp2.jpg
*****

--- In AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com, Robert Copcutt <r@...
*************Were you even alive or out of the crib to remember? There was a special on TV "Nuclear Winter" - the world was going to be covered in ice. RUNAWAY COOLING my friend. That;s what they were trying to tell us. The images, The music, The drama... Roderick you are a bright guy. Try checking into the persistent historical cycle of panic alternating between warming and cooling. It is consistent and persistent. It has been in place for hundreds of years. Anyone can look this up. *****
******Yeah so you know all about it. So what are you arguing about?
:) here's the chart:
http://freedomkeys.com/global_temp2.jpg
*****************
*******
OK now you are starting to think logically about it: At least you are acknowledging the need to burn fossil fuels to prevent the next glacial period of this ice age, which you now admit is impending without our intervention. Very good. *******

However, in 60 000 years we might have a
**********
OK tell me what is completely misguided after looking at this chart
http://freedomkeys.com/global_temp2.jpg
***********
*********
I'm presently in negotiations with a solar company putting in megawatts on 20 acres across the street from my 20 acres. One of our test site is across the street from the world's (formerly?) largest solar plant. Anyone can do the math and realize it will take years to pay for itself only with government subsidies. When real estate prices come back they may tear it down or move it cuz their land will be back up over a million and they could build 8 custom homes on it in this zoning. Meanwhile, we do get 100 mph winds here fairly regularly and the panel support structure will have to handle that.
**********

Robert:
Curious as to what you think of this chart:
http://freedomkeys.com/global_temp2.jpg

Specific Questions:
1) What is the length of the average interglacial?
2) What is the age of the current interglacial?
3) Given the above, when would we expect the next cooling to begin?

:)
Thanks
Doug S.

Doug,

Don't get me confused with Roderick. I well remember the fear of a
nuclear winter during the cold war and the 1973 oil crisis. The oil
crisis triggered a mass a research into renewable energy and good
progress was made. So good that the fossil fuel industry got scared and
by the 1980's its counter fight was well under way. At that time I
started experimenting with ethanol production.

The freedomkeys graph spans over 400 000 years so the temperature
changes look rapid. Replot over the last 20 000 years and you still get
the full temperature range but you would see that the changes were slow.
Slow enough for animals and plants to adapt by migration and evolution.
Humanity is now causing changes far too fast for plant migration and
evolutionary adaptation to keep up. That is why I drew the analogy with
the axe. The soft pressure of our hands on the axe handle (nature) is
transferred into the devastating pressure the blade of the axe can
produce (anthropomorphic).

A nuclear winter is very different from the beginnings of an ice age. It
is a short sharp devastation. With CO2 levels where they are now the
globe would soon be back on a warming trend if anyone was stupid enough
to start a nuclear war.

There is no need to put PV on land that has value for other uses. A roof
has to withstand the wind anyway. Back in the 70's their should have
been a start towards using all sun facing roofing surfaces for solar
energy harvesting. By now PV would have been a similar price to the
inert roofing materials still being used today.

Robert.

How might kite systems utilize upper-air cold?

If the balloon reservoir mechanism was wide... like spring return bellows... it could be actuated remotely with string.

In terms of airborne wind energy development....

A big mesh of smart fibre materials... in a cool environment...

That is the most exciting thing I have heard in ages.

Very interesting news and I wish you every success. My concern is that
the money is going to your head and you are planning on making your
prototypes far far too big. Early prototypes always have problems and
far too often I have seen teams waste an ample research budget by making
things too big. Often it is a constant battle with our own egos, our
team mates, and our sponsors, to get agreement to work on the miniature
scale until all the bugs are worked out. It is a battle worth fighting
tooth and nail.

Robert.

Kite lift a container of air. 

Long booms ... revolving restaurants, revolving buildings ? 

BOREAS

Dear Author,

International Journal of Advanced Renewable Energy (IJARER) is an open
access E-Journal around contents on theoretical and practical
challenges in renewable energy field. It also is aiming at rapid
publication of original researches in form of papers, books,
tutorials, and survey articles.

International authors are invited to submit original works and
researches in renewable energy field. International Journal of
Advanced Renewable Energy includes topics but not limited to: Wind ,
Solar Tidal, Wave, Marine , Geothermal Energies, as well as Hydrogen
and fuel cells.

Important deadlines:

Submission (full paper) : May 28
Notification : May 30
Publication : May 31

You can submit your journal via journal website www.ijarer.org

Regards,
----------------------------
Abbas Rezaey
Editor-in-chief
International Journal of Advanced Renewable Energy Research
WWW.IJARER.ORG