<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_07_08_2213252</id>
	<title>US Offering $45M For Huge Wind Energy Test Bed</title>
	<author>samzenpus</author>
	<datestamp>1247052060000</datestamp>
	<htmltext><a href="mailto:mcooney@nww.com" rel="nofollow">coondoggie</a> writes <i>"On a day when one of the largest wind farm plans <a href="//hardware.slashdot.org/story/09/07/08/167212">bit the dust</a>, the US Department of Energy is offering up a five-year, $45 million grant to <a href="http://www.networkworld.com/community/node/43381">design and build a large dynamometer facility</a> for testing 5 to 15 MW rated wind turbines and equipment. The DOE says such a facility is needed as the US has fallen behind other countries in the race to build ever-larger wind turbines for energy production.  According to the DOE, the average size of wind turbines installed in the United States in 2007 increased to roughly 1.65 MW.  Additionally, turbines already developed range in the 2.5 MW to 3.5 MW capacity sizes; with plans being developed for even greater power ratings.  The larger wind turbines have outpaced the availability of US-based testing facilities, the DOE stated."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>coondoggie writes " On a day when one of the largest wind farm plans bit the dust , the US Department of Energy is offering up a five-year , $ 45 million grant to design and build a large dynamometer facility for testing 5 to 15 MW rated wind turbines and equipment .
The DOE says such a facility is needed as the US has fallen behind other countries in the race to build ever-larger wind turbines for energy production .
According to the DOE , the average size of wind turbines installed in the United States in 2007 increased to roughly 1.65 MW .
Additionally , turbines already developed range in the 2.5 MW to 3.5 MW capacity sizes ; with plans being developed for even greater power ratings .
The larger wind turbines have outpaced the availability of US-based testing facilities , the DOE stated .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>coondoggie writes "On a day when one of the largest wind farm plans bit the dust, the US Department of Energy is offering up a five-year, $45 million grant to design and build a large dynamometer facility for testing 5 to 15 MW rated wind turbines and equipment.
The DOE says such a facility is needed as the US has fallen behind other countries in the race to build ever-larger wind turbines for energy production.
According to the DOE, the average size of wind turbines installed in the United States in 2007 increased to roughly 1.65 MW.
Additionally, turbines already developed range in the 2.5 MW to 3.5 MW capacity sizes; with plans being developed for even greater power ratings.
The larger wind turbines have outpaced the availability of US-based testing facilities, the DOE stated.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28630587</id>
	<title>Insert Taco Bell joke here</title>
	<author>crunchly</author>
	<datestamp>1247060040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wait for it...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wait for it.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wait for it...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28649265</id>
	<title>Re:So if I understand this correctly...</title>
	<author>Deth\_Master</author>
	<datestamp>1247238720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Save the money for nuclear plants.

<a href="http://mises.org/story/3536" title="mises.org">http://mises.org/story/3536</a> [mises.org]</htmltext>
<tokenext>Save the money for nuclear plants .
http : //mises.org/story/3536 [ mises.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Save the money for nuclear plants.
http://mises.org/story/3536 [mises.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28630191</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28633943</id>
	<title>Re:Why?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247136660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Bigger turbines produce more power.  No, not just like that.  The sweep area of the blade is related to the amount of power.  Since area=pi*r^2, then power=pi*r^2 (or at least the power from the wind available, when comparing a big turbine to a small one).  You can get more power from one big turbine, than from three or four small ones, and also you only have one turbine to maintain, not three or four.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Bigger turbines produce more power .
No , not just like that .
The sweep area of the blade is related to the amount of power .
Since area = pi * r ^ 2 , then power = pi * r ^ 2 ( or at least the power from the wind available , when comparing a big turbine to a small one ) .
You can get more power from one big turbine , than from three or four small ones , and also you only have one turbine to maintain , not three or four .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Bigger turbines produce more power.
No, not just like that.
The sweep area of the blade is related to the amount of power.
Since area=pi*r^2, then power=pi*r^2 (or at least the power from the wind available, when comparing a big turbine to a small one).
You can get more power from one big turbine, than from three or four small ones, and also you only have one turbine to maintain, not three or four.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28629933</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28635549</id>
	<title>I'd like to work on those</title>
	<author>gr8\_phk</author>
	<datestamp>1247150280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I presently work in the Detroit area on software to control ~100kW motor/generators for cars. I'd like to move up to the megawatt range, where do I go? BTW IPM motors are the way to go IMO.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I presently work in the Detroit area on software to control ~ 100kW motor/generators for cars .
I 'd like to move up to the megawatt range , where do I go ?
BTW IPM motors are the way to go IMO .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I presently work in the Detroit area on software to control ~100kW motor/generators for cars.
I'd like to move up to the megawatt range, where do I go?
BTW IPM motors are the way to go IMO.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28630261</id>
	<title>Re:So if I understand this correctly...</title>
	<author>markk</author>
	<datestamp>1247058000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How much do you think it will cost to fully instrument an experimental Turbine in the field, then tear it down and build a different one? Now, how much for the equipment to stress the turbine at various loads, to manufacture wind speed conditions that mimic many different places around the country, and different loadings, look at various types of network interconnects... We might as well build a testbed location to do this. It might cost 40 or 50 million even eh?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How much do you think it will cost to fully instrument an experimental Turbine in the field , then tear it down and build a different one ?
Now , how much for the equipment to stress the turbine at various loads , to manufacture wind speed conditions that mimic many different places around the country , and different loadings , look at various types of network interconnects... We might as well build a testbed location to do this .
It might cost 40 or 50 million even eh ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How much do you think it will cost to fully instrument an experimental Turbine in the field, then tear it down and build a different one?
Now, how much for the equipment to stress the turbine at various loads, to manufacture wind speed conditions that mimic many different places around the country, and different loadings, look at various types of network interconnects... We might as well build a testbed location to do this.
It might cost 40 or 50 million even eh?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28629925</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28630997</id>
	<title>Just one question: Why?</title>
	<author>WheelDweller</author>
	<datestamp>1247062740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why offer a $45m bounty on something like this, that they can build themselves, when nuclear power is strong (as the French, using it for 70\% of their power) and viable, while wind power is less certain than solar. (i.e., how do we save and re-generate as the wind stops moving, etc?)</p><p>Nuclear power is now clean, has no nuclear-waste bugaboo anymore, and is about as tested as anything.  Doesn't pollute, doesn't even spew CO2.</p><p>So why aren't liberals getting on the bandwagon?</p><p>I'd tell you, but you won't believe it, so nevermind.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why offer a $ 45m bounty on something like this , that they can build themselves , when nuclear power is strong ( as the French , using it for 70 \ % of their power ) and viable , while wind power is less certain than solar .
( i.e. , how do we save and re-generate as the wind stops moving , etc ?
) Nuclear power is now clean , has no nuclear-waste bugaboo anymore , and is about as tested as anything .
Does n't pollute , does n't even spew CO2.So why are n't liberals getting on the bandwagon ? I 'd tell you , but you wo n't believe it , so nevermind .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why offer a $45m bounty on something like this, that they can build themselves, when nuclear power is strong (as the French, using it for 70\% of their power) and viable, while wind power is less certain than solar.
(i.e., how do we save and re-generate as the wind stops moving, etc?
)Nuclear power is now clean, has no nuclear-waste bugaboo anymore, and is about as tested as anything.
Doesn't pollute, doesn't even spew CO2.So why aren't liberals getting on the bandwagon?I'd tell you, but you won't believe it, so nevermind.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28630223</id>
	<title>Re:So if I understand this correctly...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247057880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>You raise good points that I won't argue with, so I'll raise my own.<br> <br>

Most wind farms are in the middle of nowhere (for example, the one an hour outside the LA area on the I-10).  Building a test location here requires a) the R&amp;D staff relocate or b) the R&amp;D staff drive potentially hours to work and then back.  Neither of those is attractive to potential hires.  If you were generous and decided to include their commute as paid time out of their 8 hour day, this could result in 4 or 6 hour work days.  To offset the reduced productivity (in pure hours), the team needs to be doubled.  Then there is more overhead (meetings, admin, recruiting, lower hiring standards, etc) due to the higher headcount.  As painful as it might sound, $45M to build this in a population center might actually be cheaper.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You raise good points that I wo n't argue with , so I 'll raise my own .
Most wind farms are in the middle of nowhere ( for example , the one an hour outside the LA area on the I-10 ) .
Building a test location here requires a ) the R&amp;D staff relocate or b ) the R&amp;D staff drive potentially hours to work and then back .
Neither of those is attractive to potential hires .
If you were generous and decided to include their commute as paid time out of their 8 hour day , this could result in 4 or 6 hour work days .
To offset the reduced productivity ( in pure hours ) , the team needs to be doubled .
Then there is more overhead ( meetings , admin , recruiting , lower hiring standards , etc ) due to the higher headcount .
As painful as it might sound , $ 45M to build this in a population center might actually be cheaper .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You raise good points that I won't argue with, so I'll raise my own.
Most wind farms are in the middle of nowhere (for example, the one an hour outside the LA area on the I-10).
Building a test location here requires a) the R&amp;D staff relocate or b) the R&amp;D staff drive potentially hours to work and then back.
Neither of those is attractive to potential hires.
If you were generous and decided to include their commute as paid time out of their 8 hour day, this could result in 4 or 6 hour work days.
To offset the reduced productivity (in pure hours), the team needs to be doubled.
Then there is more overhead (meetings, admin, recruiting, lower hiring standards, etc) due to the higher headcount.
As painful as it might sound, $45M to build this in a population center might actually be cheaper.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28629925</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28629913</id>
	<title>Re:Go for it.</title>
	<author>j0hnyquest</author>
	<datestamp>1247056140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>"For its part, the DOE has ambitious plans saying it expects wind to provide up to 20\% of the nation's total electricity needs by 2030."

There is no way that will happen.

But this will definitely help with getting rid of those pesky birds and bats.</htmltext>
<tokenext>" For its part , the DOE has ambitious plans saying it expects wind to provide up to 20 \ % of the nation 's total electricity needs by 2030 .
" There is no way that will happen .
But this will definitely help with getting rid of those pesky birds and bats .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"For its part, the DOE has ambitious plans saying it expects wind to provide up to 20\% of the nation's total electricity needs by 2030.
"

There is no way that will happen.
But this will definitely help with getting rid of those pesky birds and bats.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28629837</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28630525</id>
	<title>Cheaper Solution</title>
	<author>Nom du Keyboard</author>
	<datestamp>1247059620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>such a facility is needed as the US has fallen behind other countries in the race to build ever-larger wind turbines for energy production.</p></div></blockquote><p>
Wouldn't it be cheaper in these days of cutting back to piggyback off of their research instead. NIH is the biggest waster of money ever. Study success everywhere you find it.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>such a facility is needed as the US has fallen behind other countries in the race to build ever-larger wind turbines for energy production .
Would n't it be cheaper in these days of cutting back to piggyback off of their research instead .
NIH is the biggest waster of money ever .
Study success everywhere you find it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>such a facility is needed as the US has fallen behind other countries in the race to build ever-larger wind turbines for energy production.
Wouldn't it be cheaper in these days of cutting back to piggyback off of their research instead.
NIH is the biggest waster of money ever.
Study success everywhere you find it.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28634509</id>
	<title>Re:Why?</title>
	<author>MrKaos</author>
	<datestamp>1247142960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Also, bring on the inevitable "ditch wind, go nuclear" stuff. I can has mod points now?</p></div></blockquote><p>
Well, it's been proven in test after test that Nuclear powered windmills will generate more spin and hot air than wind powered Nuclear plants.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Also , bring on the inevitable " ditch wind , go nuclear " stuff .
I can has mod points now ?
Well , it 's been proven in test after test that Nuclear powered windmills will generate more spin and hot air than wind powered Nuclear plants .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Also, bring on the inevitable "ditch wind, go nuclear" stuff.
I can has mod points now?
Well, it's been proven in test after test that Nuclear powered windmills will generate more spin and hot air than wind powered Nuclear plants.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28629933</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28630053</id>
	<title>Ames Research Center....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247057100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... has large wind tunnels that are little- or un-used these days that could be fitted with the necessary test and safety equipment and already have the infrastructure to supply airflow on demand.</p><p>This is really a no brainer.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... has large wind tunnels that are little- or un-used these days that could be fitted with the necessary test and safety equipment and already have the infrastructure to supply airflow on demand.This is really a no brainer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... has large wind tunnels that are little- or un-used these days that could be fitted with the necessary test and safety equipment and already have the infrastructure to supply airflow on demand.This is really a no brainer.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28629851</id>
	<title>This...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247055780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>This blows!</htmltext>
<tokenext>This blows !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This blows!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28635227</id>
	<title>Downtown Detroit</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247148600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There are enough crackhouses.. uh.. I mean "abandoned buildings" in Detroit they could bulldoze and put all the turbines there!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There are enough crackhouses.. uh.. I mean " abandoned buildings " in Detroit they could bulldoze and put all the turbines there !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are enough crackhouses.. uh.. I mean "abandoned buildings" in Detroit they could bulldoze and put all the turbines there!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28647075</id>
	<title>Bigger turbines are cheaper per watt</title>
	<author>olau</author>
	<datestamp>1247218800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Energy is extracted from the area that the blades cover. Twice as long blades means four times the area (pi * r ^ 2), which in turn means four times the energy. Of course, it's much more complicated than that, you can't just make double the blade length for twice the cost (must be stronger, etc.) but still.</p><p>Here's some info:</p><p><a href="http://www.windpower.org/en/tour/wtrb/size.htm" title="windpower.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.windpower.org/en/tour/wtrb/size.htm</a> [windpower.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Energy is extracted from the area that the blades cover .
Twice as long blades means four times the area ( pi * r ^ 2 ) , which in turn means four times the energy .
Of course , it 's much more complicated than that , you ca n't just make double the blade length for twice the cost ( must be stronger , etc .
) but still.Here 's some info : http : //www.windpower.org/en/tour/wtrb/size.htm [ windpower.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Energy is extracted from the area that the blades cover.
Twice as long blades means four times the area (pi * r ^ 2), which in turn means four times the energy.
Of course, it's much more complicated than that, you can't just make double the blade length for twice the cost (must be stronger, etc.
) but still.Here's some info:http://www.windpower.org/en/tour/wtrb/size.htm [windpower.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28629933</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28630219</id>
	<title>Re:So if I understand this correctly...</title>
	<author>Romancer</author>
	<datestamp>1247057820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Two small issues as well:</p><p>The creation date for this bid is after the posting date:<br><a href="http://www.grants.gov/search/search.do?mode=VIEW&amp;oppId=48091" title="grants.gov">http://www.grants.gov/search/search.do?mode=VIEW&amp;oppId=48091</a> [grants.gov]</p><p>And really... In a bid description we need to say this?<br>"It is envisioned that the facility will include sufficient office space for permanent staff and visiting users as well as conference rooms, lunch room, restrooms, computer stations, etc."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Two small issues as well : The creation date for this bid is after the posting date : http : //www.grants.gov/search/search.do ? mode = VIEW&amp;oppId = 48091 [ grants.gov ] And really... In a bid description we need to say this ?
" It is envisioned that the facility will include sufficient office space for permanent staff and visiting users as well as conference rooms , lunch room , restrooms , computer stations , etc .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Two small issues as well:The creation date for this bid is after the posting date:http://www.grants.gov/search/search.do?mode=VIEW&amp;oppId=48091 [grants.gov]And really... In a bid description we need to say this?
"It is envisioned that the facility will include sufficient office space for permanent staff and visiting users as well as conference rooms, lunch room, restrooms, computer stations, etc.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28629925</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28630273</id>
	<title>Re:So if I understand this correctly...</title>
	<author>willy\_me</author>
	<datestamp>1247058060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Why do we need a giant test facility to create what's out there already and is the final place these things will be operating in anyway?</p></div><p>
A static environment is required to observe the effects of different designs.  Tests in a real environment are also important - but they do not negate the need for a static test environment.
</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why do we need a giant test facility to create what 's out there already and is the final place these things will be operating in anyway ?
A static environment is required to observe the effects of different designs .
Tests in a real environment are also important - but they do not negate the need for a static test environment .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why do we need a giant test facility to create what's out there already and is the final place these things will be operating in anyway?
A static environment is required to observe the effects of different designs.
Tests in a real environment are also important - but they do not negate the need for a static test environment.

	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28629925</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28629893</id>
	<title>US... Huge Wind...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247056020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Hopefully they'll be able to test in the House of Congress because all that hot air is going to increase efficiency.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hopefully they 'll be able to test in the House of Congress because all that hot air is going to increase efficiency .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hopefully they'll be able to test in the House of Congress because all that hot air is going to increase efficiency.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28629925</id>
	<title>So if I understand this correctly...</title>
	<author>Romancer</author>
	<datestamp>1247056260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So if I understand this correctly...</p><p>We are looking for an artificial environment to test devices that specifically will be used in the natural unpredictable outdoor environment as their sole purpose?</p><p>Why not put them in a large windy area and map out their performance with actual gusty conditions and directional changes like they will be subject to in practice.</p><p>You'd get better data by skipping the artificial step.</p><p>If you really need the extremes to be on demand for destruction testing then put a big fan in front and a shroud around the device to be stress tested. Ramp it up and see how she performs.<br>Cost wise you could be selling all the energy that the time tests generate to pay for the spot testing and cleanup of the stress tests that fail.</p><p>Why do we need a giant test facility to create what's out there already and is the final place these things will be operating in anyway?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So if I understand this correctly...We are looking for an artificial environment to test devices that specifically will be used in the natural unpredictable outdoor environment as their sole purpose ? Why not put them in a large windy area and map out their performance with actual gusty conditions and directional changes like they will be subject to in practice.You 'd get better data by skipping the artificial step.If you really need the extremes to be on demand for destruction testing then put a big fan in front and a shroud around the device to be stress tested .
Ramp it up and see how she performs.Cost wise you could be selling all the energy that the time tests generate to pay for the spot testing and cleanup of the stress tests that fail.Why do we need a giant test facility to create what 's out there already and is the final place these things will be operating in anyway ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So if I understand this correctly...We are looking for an artificial environment to test devices that specifically will be used in the natural unpredictable outdoor environment as their sole purpose?Why not put them in a large windy area and map out their performance with actual gusty conditions and directional changes like they will be subject to in practice.You'd get better data by skipping the artificial step.If you really need the extremes to be on demand for destruction testing then put a big fan in front and a shroud around the device to be stress tested.
Ramp it up and see how she performs.Cost wise you could be selling all the energy that the time tests generate to pay for the spot testing and cleanup of the stress tests that fail.Why do we need a giant test facility to create what's out there already and is the final place these things will be operating in anyway?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28629961</id>
	<title>I find this hard to believe...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247056560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I used to work for an aircraft engine company (Pratt &amp; Whitney). They had lots of test cells for engine testing &amp; research. This was a big heavy block of reinforced concrete with lots of instruments attached, and you bolt the engine to it.</p><p>I really doubt a wind turbine generates more power. I'm sure you could build one on the edge of a cliff so you don't need to worry about the wind turbine blades hitting something.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I used to work for an aircraft engine company ( Pratt &amp; Whitney ) .
They had lots of test cells for engine testing &amp; research .
This was a big heavy block of reinforced concrete with lots of instruments attached , and you bolt the engine to it.I really doubt a wind turbine generates more power .
I 'm sure you could build one on the edge of a cliff so you do n't need to worry about the wind turbine blades hitting something .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I used to work for an aircraft engine company (Pratt &amp; Whitney).
They had lots of test cells for engine testing &amp; research.
This was a big heavy block of reinforced concrete with lots of instruments attached, and you bolt the engine to it.I really doubt a wind turbine generates more power.
I'm sure you could build one on the edge of a cliff so you don't need to worry about the wind turbine blades hitting something.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28630887</id>
	<title>$45 million over 5 years?</title>
	<author>Animats</author>
	<datestamp>1247061960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
It's so government.
</p><p>
I once worked in an R&amp;D facility for heavy hydraulic equipment.  They had about fifty test
cells of different sizes, the largest of which was used for hydraulic transmissions for medium-sized  locomotives.  Those test setups used a big motor and a water-cooled brake; the hot water went through a cooling tower, and then to sprinklers in what appeared to be a decorative lake out front but was really a heat sink.  That gear was in the 5MW range, somewhat smaller than what's being described here, but not a lot smaller.
</p><p>
That setup was where it belonged, near the engineers who designed the things and the machinists who built the prototypes.  When the big test cell was put in, it took a few months to build.  Not five years.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's so government .
I once worked in an R&amp;D facility for heavy hydraulic equipment .
They had about fifty test cells of different sizes , the largest of which was used for hydraulic transmissions for medium-sized locomotives .
Those test setups used a big motor and a water-cooled brake ; the hot water went through a cooling tower , and then to sprinklers in what appeared to be a decorative lake out front but was really a heat sink .
That gear was in the 5MW range , somewhat smaller than what 's being described here , but not a lot smaller .
That setup was where it belonged , near the engineers who designed the things and the machinists who built the prototypes .
When the big test cell was put in , it took a few months to build .
Not five years .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
It's so government.
I once worked in an R&amp;D facility for heavy hydraulic equipment.
They had about fifty test
cells of different sizes, the largest of which was used for hydraulic transmissions for medium-sized  locomotives.
Those test setups used a big motor and a water-cooled brake; the hot water went through a cooling tower, and then to sprinklers in what appeared to be a decorative lake out front but was really a heat sink.
That gear was in the 5MW range, somewhat smaller than what's being described here, but not a lot smaller.
That setup was where it belonged, near the engineers who designed the things and the machinists who built the prototypes.
When the big test cell was put in, it took a few months to build.
Not five years.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28630641</id>
	<title>And</title>
	<author>Sycraft-fu</author>
	<datestamp>1247060340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So a gigantic blade doesn't go flying in to someone's house.</p><p>When you are talking machines as big and as heavy as this, you want to test outside conditions in a safe environment to make sure it won't fail. You do not want to discover later that oh, maybe it WASN'T as strong as we thought.</p><p>Same reason why the bend wings on an airplane. No, they will never face stresses that high in the real world. However, we don't want to just fly it around and say "ok, that's probably good" only to find out later that no, it really isn't. You test an outside case, and you do it somewhere that nobody gets hurt.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So a gigantic blade does n't go flying in to someone 's house.When you are talking machines as big and as heavy as this , you want to test outside conditions in a safe environment to make sure it wo n't fail .
You do not want to discover later that oh , maybe it WAS N'T as strong as we thought.Same reason why the bend wings on an airplane .
No , they will never face stresses that high in the real world .
However , we do n't want to just fly it around and say " ok , that 's probably good " only to find out later that no , it really is n't .
You test an outside case , and you do it somewhere that nobody gets hurt .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So a gigantic blade doesn't go flying in to someone's house.When you are talking machines as big and as heavy as this, you want to test outside conditions in a safe environment to make sure it won't fail.
You do not want to discover later that oh, maybe it WASN'T as strong as we thought.Same reason why the bend wings on an airplane.
No, they will never face stresses that high in the real world.
However, we don't want to just fly it around and say "ok, that's probably good" only to find out later that no, it really isn't.
You test an outside case, and you do it somewhere that nobody gets hurt.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28630191</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28632975</id>
	<title>Mar'e</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247081700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><A HREF="http://goat.cx/" title="goat.cx" rel="nofollow">have the energy percent of the *BSD that support The point 8ore not so bad.  To the FreeBSD showed declined in market</a> [goat.cx]</htmltext>
<tokenext>have the energy percent of the * BSD that support The point 8ore not so bad .
To the FreeBSD showed declined in market [ goat.cx ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>have the energy percent of the *BSD that support The point 8ore not so bad.
To the FreeBSD showed declined in market [goat.cx]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28647981</id>
	<title>Personal Turbines Arrive</title>
	<author>Doc Ruby</author>
	<datestamp>1247231400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How about this Honeywell <a href="http://blog.mapawatt.com/2009/06/16/earthtronics-honeywell-wind/" title="mapawatt.com">Windgate</a> [mapawatt.com] "personal" turbine, under 6 feet across and under 100 pounds, generating power at as little as 2MPH (about 6W), up over 45MPH (over 2.4KW). It's $4500 at Ace Hardware, but the IRS will refund 30\% of its price under the Obama Stimulus programme, $1350 for a net $3150 price (and your state might rebate another 20-50\%+). In NYC (average wind speed <a href="http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/online/ccd/avgwind.html" title="noaa.gov">12.2MPH at LGA</a> [noaa.gov] producing about 200W), $3150 takes about 7.5 years to break even. Which is about how long all these consumer-grade energy generation or efficiency products take to break even, except CFLs which pay off after about 8 months.</p><p>That means the Windgate is the watershed: it marks the price:generation efficiency point past which harnessing wind through your hardware store is affordable. Further improvements will be in reference to today's breakthroughs.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How about this Honeywell Windgate [ mapawatt.com ] " personal " turbine , under 6 feet across and under 100 pounds , generating power at as little as 2MPH ( about 6W ) , up over 45MPH ( over 2.4KW ) .
It 's $ 4500 at Ace Hardware , but the IRS will refund 30 \ % of its price under the Obama Stimulus programme , $ 1350 for a net $ 3150 price ( and your state might rebate another 20-50 \ % + ) .
In NYC ( average wind speed 12.2MPH at LGA [ noaa.gov ] producing about 200W ) , $ 3150 takes about 7.5 years to break even .
Which is about how long all these consumer-grade energy generation or efficiency products take to break even , except CFLs which pay off after about 8 months.That means the Windgate is the watershed : it marks the price : generation efficiency point past which harnessing wind through your hardware store is affordable .
Further improvements will be in reference to today 's breakthroughs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How about this Honeywell Windgate [mapawatt.com] "personal" turbine, under 6 feet across and under 100 pounds, generating power at as little as 2MPH (about 6W), up over 45MPH (over 2.4KW).
It's $4500 at Ace Hardware, but the IRS will refund 30\% of its price under the Obama Stimulus programme, $1350 for a net $3150 price (and your state might rebate another 20-50\%+).
In NYC (average wind speed 12.2MPH at LGA [noaa.gov] producing about 200W), $3150 takes about 7.5 years to break even.
Which is about how long all these consumer-grade energy generation or efficiency products take to break even, except CFLs which pay off after about 8 months.That means the Windgate is the watershed: it marks the price:generation efficiency point past which harnessing wind through your hardware store is affordable.
Further improvements will be in reference to today's breakthroughs.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28629933</id>
	<title>Why?</title>
	<author>Dripdry</author>
	<datestamp>1247056320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>IANAE (Engineer, yes) however I seem to recall the energy generation from wind turbines being a fairly simple function of the size. Although I understand there is an acreage issue is it truly necessary to develop bigger and bigger turbines? Can someone explain this? Is it simply that we should optimize the land useage?</p><p>Also, bring on the inevitable "ditch wind, go nuclear" stuff. I can has mod points now?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>IANAE ( Engineer , yes ) however I seem to recall the energy generation from wind turbines being a fairly simple function of the size .
Although I understand there is an acreage issue is it truly necessary to develop bigger and bigger turbines ?
Can someone explain this ?
Is it simply that we should optimize the land useage ? Also , bring on the inevitable " ditch wind , go nuclear " stuff .
I can has mod points now ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>IANAE (Engineer, yes) however I seem to recall the energy generation from wind turbines being a fairly simple function of the size.
Although I understand there is an acreage issue is it truly necessary to develop bigger and bigger turbines?
Can someone explain this?
Is it simply that we should optimize the land useage?Also, bring on the inevitable "ditch wind, go nuclear" stuff.
I can has mod points now?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28632579</id>
	<title>RE: Obana Administration ... Dead!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247076840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Obama Climate Change (Ponzi Scheme)<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... Dead!</p><p>Obama Supreme Court Nomination<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.. Dead!</p><p>Obama Pre-Crime Perminate Detention without Cause<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.. Dead!</p><p>Obama Executive Order positioning himself as above all State and Federal laws<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... Dead!</p><p>Obama Executive Order recinding the Constitution of the United States of America<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... Dead!</p><p>Obama Bailout of Financial System with payback to Obama in cash Executive Order<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... Dead!</p><p>Obama Amnisty for Telecoms who abided Criminal George Walker Bush Lawlessness (and cash paybacks)<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... Dead!</p><p>What is the name of "Dead Duck"?  Answer: Barak Hussein Obama<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.. aka "Barry"!</p><p>Welcome to Chicago Barry<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... A-Hole!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Obama Climate Change ( Ponzi Scheme ) ... Dead ! Obama Supreme Court Nomination .. Dead ! Obama Pre-Crime Perminate Detention without Cause .. Dead ! Obama Executive Order positioning himself as above all State and Federal laws ... Dead ! Obama Executive Order recinding the Constitution of the United States of America ... Dead ! Obama Bailout of Financial System with payback to Obama in cash Executive Order ... Dead ! Obama Amnisty for Telecoms who abided Criminal George Walker Bush Lawlessness ( and cash paybacks ) ... Dead ! What is the name of " Dead Duck " ?
Answer : Barak Hussein Obama .. aka " Barry " ! Welcome to Chicago Barry ... A-Hole !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Obama Climate Change (Ponzi Scheme) ... Dead!Obama Supreme Court Nomination .. Dead!Obama Pre-Crime Perminate Detention without Cause .. Dead!Obama Executive Order positioning himself as above all State and Federal laws ... Dead!Obama Executive Order recinding the Constitution of the United States of America ... Dead!Obama Bailout of Financial System with payback to Obama in cash Executive Order ... Dead!Obama Amnisty for Telecoms who abided Criminal George Walker Bush Lawlessness (and cash paybacks) ... Dead!What is the name of "Dead Duck"?
Answer: Barak Hussein Obama .. aka "Barry"!Welcome to Chicago Barry ... A-Hole!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28630443</id>
	<title>Re:So if I understand this correctly...</title>
	<author>wizardforce</author>
	<datestamp>1247059080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>where did it say that testing meant controlled conditions?  wouldn't it have made more sense for them to have done precisely what you are suggesting?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>where did it say that testing meant controlled conditions ?
would n't it have made more sense for them to have done precisely what you are suggesting ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>where did it say that testing meant controlled conditions?
wouldn't it have made more sense for them to have done precisely what you are suggesting?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28629925</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28631445</id>
	<title>Re:So if I understand this correctly...</title>
	<author>tuxgeek</author>
	<datestamp>1247066520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm with you on this one<br>We already have some areas that do very well generating wind power<br>One that comes to mind is in southern California and the valley is wall to wall wind turbines.<br>Why not experiment there? Nobody will mind</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm with you on this oneWe already have some areas that do very well generating wind powerOne that comes to mind is in southern California and the valley is wall to wall wind turbines.Why not experiment there ?
Nobody will mind</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm with you on this oneWe already have some areas that do very well generating wind powerOne that comes to mind is in southern California and the valley is wall to wall wind turbines.Why not experiment there?
Nobody will mind</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28629925</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28634073</id>
	<title>Re:Go for it.</title>
	<author>Big Hairy Ian</author>
	<datestamp>1247138040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Typical Government Agency offering $45 million for something that can suck &amp; blow at the same time when they already have it it's called congress!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Typical Government Agency offering $ 45 million for something that can suck &amp; blow at the same time when they already have it it 's called congress !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Typical Government Agency offering $45 million for something that can suck &amp; blow at the same time when they already have it it's called congress!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28629837</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28629989</id>
	<title>You know...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247056740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Those 687 wind turbines in Pickens' garage are laying there doing nothing...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Those 687 wind turbines in Pickens ' garage are laying there doing nothing.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Those 687 wind turbines in Pickens' garage are laying there doing nothing...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28629969</id>
	<title>Re:Why?</title>
	<author>XPeter</author>
	<datestamp>1247056560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Also, bring on the inevitable "ditch wind, go nuclear" stuff. I can has mod points now?</p></div><p>IANAA (Adult, yes) Nuclear is much more efficient when compared to wind farms, but nuclear energy hasn't been developed enough for it to be used as a main energy source. There are many advances and safety precautions to be made before nuclear goes to the big leagues. Intermittently though. we need to drastically cut our addiction to oil and go after power like wind and solar.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Also , bring on the inevitable " ditch wind , go nuclear " stuff .
I can has mod points now ? IANAA ( Adult , yes ) Nuclear is much more efficient when compared to wind farms , but nuclear energy has n't been developed enough for it to be used as a main energy source .
There are many advances and safety precautions to be made before nuclear goes to the big leagues .
Intermittently though .
we need to drastically cut our addiction to oil and go after power like wind and solar .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Also, bring on the inevitable "ditch wind, go nuclear" stuff.
I can has mod points now?IANAA (Adult, yes) Nuclear is much more efficient when compared to wind farms, but nuclear energy hasn't been developed enough for it to be used as a main energy source.
There are many advances and safety precautions to be made before nuclear goes to the big leagues.
Intermittently though.
we need to drastically cut our addiction to oil and go after power like wind and solar.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28629933</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28632487</id>
	<title>Re:So if I understand this correctly...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247075880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Having just visited a wind farm today, I can tell you that the gearboxes are what fail most often. The wind facility I visited had 44 older wind turbines (starting from 1998) and those gearboxes cost around $150,000 to $200,000 plus a significant amount for the cranes and man hours ($1000/day for the large crane required + $10,000 setup and $10,000 tear down, and they can only operate in low wind conditions). Those gearboxes, however, are supposed to last, IIRC, 10 to 15 years, but typically last less than 5, simply because of the stresses caused by starting and stopping (according to the mechanic there).</p><p>The NWTC is putting in a test gearbox at the same site to collect data for (hopefully) a year, but I really don't know anything about that facility. I guess they don't have what the DOE is looking for here?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Having just visited a wind farm today , I can tell you that the gearboxes are what fail most often .
The wind facility I visited had 44 older wind turbines ( starting from 1998 ) and those gearboxes cost around $ 150,000 to $ 200,000 plus a significant amount for the cranes and man hours ( $ 1000/day for the large crane required + $ 10,000 setup and $ 10,000 tear down , and they can only operate in low wind conditions ) .
Those gearboxes , however , are supposed to last , IIRC , 10 to 15 years , but typically last less than 5 , simply because of the stresses caused by starting and stopping ( according to the mechanic there ) .The NWTC is putting in a test gearbox at the same site to collect data for ( hopefully ) a year , but I really do n't know anything about that facility .
I guess they do n't have what the DOE is looking for here ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Having just visited a wind farm today, I can tell you that the gearboxes are what fail most often.
The wind facility I visited had 44 older wind turbines (starting from 1998) and those gearboxes cost around $150,000 to $200,000 plus a significant amount for the cranes and man hours ($1000/day for the large crane required + $10,000 setup and $10,000 tear down, and they can only operate in low wind conditions).
Those gearboxes, however, are supposed to last, IIRC, 10 to 15 years, but typically last less than 5, simply because of the stresses caused by starting and stopping (according to the mechanic there).The NWTC is putting in a test gearbox at the same site to collect data for (hopefully) a year, but I really don't know anything about that facility.
I guess they don't have what the DOE is looking for here?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28630191</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28630353</id>
	<title>I don't know about test beds....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247058420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>but I know this guy down in Texas with plenty of spare units to test...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>but I know this guy down in Texas with plenty of spare units to test.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>but I know this guy down in Texas with plenty of spare units to test...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28637887</id>
	<title>Re:Is testing the limiting factor?</title>
	<author>T Murphy</author>
	<datestamp>1247159520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Easy, just take a helicopter and switch out the rotors with the turbine blades.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Easy , just take a helicopter and switch out the rotors with the turbine blades .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Easy, just take a helicopter and switch out the rotors with the turbine blades.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28635609</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28629837</id>
	<title>Go for it.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247055720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Build it, I say. That'll teach those birds to crap on my car!</htmltext>
<tokenext>Build it , I say .
That 'll teach those birds to crap on my car !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Build it, I say.
That'll teach those birds to crap on my car!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28635863</id>
	<title>Re:So if I understand this correctly...</title>
	<author>CompMD</author>
	<datestamp>1247151660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I did a LOT of work in wind energy while I was more an aerospace R&amp;D guy.</p><p>1) Tell an aerospace engineer not to test something, and he will try not to bludgeon you with a cluebat.  As an engineer, you are negligent if you do not consider every possible situation the turbine could experience.  A wind turbine's natural environment can be reproduced in laboratory conditions for scale models.  This reduces testing time and thus cost.  It also allows for testing in conditions that the turbine will not experience, thus providing valuable data to determine safety and efficiency factors.</p><p>2) Full scale models are insanely expensive.  Building a small scale model of turbine blades can cost thousands of dollars for an FDM model whose longest dimension is 15".  Just using a rapid prototyping 3D printer to make one model whose longest dimension is 8" can cost several hundred dollars.</p><p>3) Wind tunnels are extremely helpful.  The $300-$1000 per hour you spend in a wind tunnel testing your turbine will be much cheaper than the payout you make to some family because one of your turbines experienced some mode you didn't predict that caused it to destroy itself and send a blade into a minivan on a highway.  Computer simulations can't do it all.  And yes, I've witnessed a turbine hit a certain windspeed in a wind tunnel, and I heard the sounds change, and then saw the entire turbine shatter and blow down the tunnel.</p><p>When I tested turbines, I had a test stand that would tell you the turbine speed, forces and moments on the stand (axial, sideforce, lift, drag, pitching moment, yawing moment, rolling moment), power output, load, wind speed, and ambient temperature.  The wind tunnel time was roughly $10,000 per week, but if you don't do this for a megawatt-class turbine, you risk destroying the turbine or killing someone.</p><p>When you are harnessing *megawatts* of power, for God's sake, you just don't leave things to chance.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I did a LOT of work in wind energy while I was more an aerospace R&amp;D guy.1 ) Tell an aerospace engineer not to test something , and he will try not to bludgeon you with a cluebat .
As an engineer , you are negligent if you do not consider every possible situation the turbine could experience .
A wind turbine 's natural environment can be reproduced in laboratory conditions for scale models .
This reduces testing time and thus cost .
It also allows for testing in conditions that the turbine will not experience , thus providing valuable data to determine safety and efficiency factors.2 ) Full scale models are insanely expensive .
Building a small scale model of turbine blades can cost thousands of dollars for an FDM model whose longest dimension is 15 " .
Just using a rapid prototyping 3D printer to make one model whose longest dimension is 8 " can cost several hundred dollars.3 ) Wind tunnels are extremely helpful .
The $ 300- $ 1000 per hour you spend in a wind tunnel testing your turbine will be much cheaper than the payout you make to some family because one of your turbines experienced some mode you did n't predict that caused it to destroy itself and send a blade into a minivan on a highway .
Computer simulations ca n't do it all .
And yes , I 've witnessed a turbine hit a certain windspeed in a wind tunnel , and I heard the sounds change , and then saw the entire turbine shatter and blow down the tunnel.When I tested turbines , I had a test stand that would tell you the turbine speed , forces and moments on the stand ( axial , sideforce , lift , drag , pitching moment , yawing moment , rolling moment ) , power output , load , wind speed , and ambient temperature .
The wind tunnel time was roughly $ 10,000 per week , but if you do n't do this for a megawatt-class turbine , you risk destroying the turbine or killing someone.When you are harnessing * megawatts * of power , for God 's sake , you just do n't leave things to chance .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I did a LOT of work in wind energy while I was more an aerospace R&amp;D guy.1) Tell an aerospace engineer not to test something, and he will try not to bludgeon you with a cluebat.
As an engineer, you are negligent if you do not consider every possible situation the turbine could experience.
A wind turbine's natural environment can be reproduced in laboratory conditions for scale models.
This reduces testing time and thus cost.
It also allows for testing in conditions that the turbine will not experience, thus providing valuable data to determine safety and efficiency factors.2) Full scale models are insanely expensive.
Building a small scale model of turbine blades can cost thousands of dollars for an FDM model whose longest dimension is 15".
Just using a rapid prototyping 3D printer to make one model whose longest dimension is 8" can cost several hundred dollars.3) Wind tunnels are extremely helpful.
The $300-$1000 per hour you spend in a wind tunnel testing your turbine will be much cheaper than the payout you make to some family because one of your turbines experienced some mode you didn't predict that caused it to destroy itself and send a blade into a minivan on a highway.
Computer simulations can't do it all.
And yes, I've witnessed a turbine hit a certain windspeed in a wind tunnel, and I heard the sounds change, and then saw the entire turbine shatter and blow down the tunnel.When I tested turbines, I had a test stand that would tell you the turbine speed, forces and moments on the stand (axial, sideforce, lift, drag, pitching moment, yawing moment, rolling moment), power output, load, wind speed, and ambient temperature.
The wind tunnel time was roughly $10,000 per week, but if you don't do this for a megawatt-class turbine, you risk destroying the turbine or killing someone.When you are harnessing *megawatts* of power, for God's sake, you just don't leave things to chance.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28629925</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28630977</id>
	<title>informativE Fuckerfucker</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247062620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm sick of it. of The Xfounders of</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm sick of it .
of The Xfounders of</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm sick of it.
of The Xfounders of</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28634347</id>
	<title>Re:So if I understand this correctly...</title>
	<author>TheRaven64</author>
	<datestamp>1247140800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There's a great video of a wind turbine exploding which you can probably find if you look.  Once it went past a certain speed, the tensile strength of one of the blades was exceeded and it split.  The turbine then became unbalanced and quickly pulled itself apart.</p><p>
This turbine, if I remember correctly, had been in use for two year when it happened.  It only broke because the winds were much higher than average for the area.  If you're testing in a wind tunnel, you can keep turning up the wind speed until the turbine explodes and get an accurate measure of how much energy it produces at each wind speed and how much it can take so, when you deploy it, you can shut it down when the wind speed approaches the maximum.  If you test it in the real world and 'skip the artificial step', you may need to wait several years to get wind speeds that high.  </p><p>
From your post, it seems like you've never designed anything for real-world deployment.  You always want to control the test conditions so you can see exactly which variable is causing failures in your prototype.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's a great video of a wind turbine exploding which you can probably find if you look .
Once it went past a certain speed , the tensile strength of one of the blades was exceeded and it split .
The turbine then became unbalanced and quickly pulled itself apart .
This turbine , if I remember correctly , had been in use for two year when it happened .
It only broke because the winds were much higher than average for the area .
If you 're testing in a wind tunnel , you can keep turning up the wind speed until the turbine explodes and get an accurate measure of how much energy it produces at each wind speed and how much it can take so , when you deploy it , you can shut it down when the wind speed approaches the maximum .
If you test it in the real world and 'skip the artificial step ' , you may need to wait several years to get wind speeds that high .
From your post , it seems like you 've never designed anything for real-world deployment .
You always want to control the test conditions so you can see exactly which variable is causing failures in your prototype .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's a great video of a wind turbine exploding which you can probably find if you look.
Once it went past a certain speed, the tensile strength of one of the blades was exceeded and it split.
The turbine then became unbalanced and quickly pulled itself apart.
This turbine, if I remember correctly, had been in use for two year when it happened.
It only broke because the winds were much higher than average for the area.
If you're testing in a wind tunnel, you can keep turning up the wind speed until the turbine explodes and get an accurate measure of how much energy it produces at each wind speed and how much it can take so, when you deploy it, you can shut it down when the wind speed approaches the maximum.
If you test it in the real world and 'skip the artificial step', you may need to wait several years to get wind speeds that high.
From your post, it seems like you've never designed anything for real-world deployment.
You always want to control the test conditions so you can see exactly which variable is causing failures in your prototype.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28629925</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28635609</id>
	<title>Is testing the limiting factor?</title>
	<author>Thelasko</author>
	<datestamp>1247150460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Seriously, I don't think adequate test facilities are the constraint in wind turbine size.  Have you seen one of these larger turbines being built?  The limiting factor is not the DOE, it's the DOT.  There is simply no way to get something that big to the construction site.  There aren't roads, or trucks large enough to handle anything bigger.  Once it's there, you have to find a crane big enough to lift it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Seriously , I do n't think adequate test facilities are the constraint in wind turbine size .
Have you seen one of these larger turbines being built ?
The limiting factor is not the DOE , it 's the DOT .
There is simply no way to get something that big to the construction site .
There are n't roads , or trucks large enough to handle anything bigger .
Once it 's there , you have to find a crane big enough to lift it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seriously, I don't think adequate test facilities are the constraint in wind turbine size.
Have you seen one of these larger turbines being built?
The limiting factor is not the DOE, it's the DOT.
There is simply no way to get something that big to the construction site.
There aren't roads, or trucks large enough to handle anything bigger.
Once it's there, you have to find a crane big enough to lift it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28631097</id>
	<title>Re:Why?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247063640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I'm sorry but that is BS, the tech from nucelar has been pretty much perfected for 15 years, its just after chernobel and 3mile island everyone would shit a brick if someone even wispered nucelar.  So no one built any, in the us anyway, it's there are too many people in this country that say they want these things, just not in their back yard.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm sorry but that is BS , the tech from nucelar has been pretty much perfected for 15 years , its just after chernobel and 3mile island everyone would shit a brick if someone even wispered nucelar .
So no one built any , in the us anyway , it 's there are too many people in this country that say they want these things , just not in their back yard .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm sorry but that is BS, the tech from nucelar has been pretty much perfected for 15 years, its just after chernobel and 3mile island everyone would shit a brick if someone even wispered nucelar.
So no one built any, in the us anyway, it's there are too many people in this country that say they want these things, just not in their back yard.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28629969</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28630191</id>
	<title>Re:So if I understand this correctly...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247057700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Why do we need a giant test facility to create what's out there already and is the final place these things will be operating in anyway?</p></div><p>a) To catch obvious design flaws early,<br>b) To test the device over the entire range of possible operation,<br>c) To provide a benchmark that remains static from one test to the next,<br>d) To control all external variables so as to create a consistent frame of reference,<br>e) To save a few bucks because it's really f----ing expensive to test every design as a full-scale prototype.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... Or to pull a page from our own industry, what's wrong with the following statement: "It compiles, ship it!"</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why do we need a giant test facility to create what 's out there already and is the final place these things will be operating in anyway ? a ) To catch obvious design flaws early,b ) To test the device over the entire range of possible operation,c ) To provide a benchmark that remains static from one test to the next,d ) To control all external variables so as to create a consistent frame of reference,e ) To save a few bucks because it 's really f----ing expensive to test every design as a full-scale prototype .
... Or to pull a page from our own industry , what 's wrong with the following statement : " It compiles , ship it !
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why do we need a giant test facility to create what's out there already and is the final place these things will be operating in anyway?a) To catch obvious design flaws early,b) To test the device over the entire range of possible operation,c) To provide a benchmark that remains static from one test to the next,d) To control all external variables so as to create a consistent frame of reference,e) To save a few bucks because it's really f----ing expensive to test every design as a full-scale prototype.
... Or to pull a page from our own industry, what's wrong with the following statement: "It compiles, ship it!
"
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28629925</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28631017</id>
	<title>Re:Go for it.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247062860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, here in Spain we already produce 20\% of our electricity needs with wind, and it wasn't very hard or ultra-expensive:</p><p>https://demanda.ree.es/demanda.html</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , here in Spain we already produce 20 \ % of our electricity needs with wind , and it was n't very hard or ultra-expensive : https : //demanda.ree.es/demanda.html</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, here in Spain we already produce 20\% of our electricity needs with wind, and it wasn't very hard or ultra-expensive:https://demanda.ree.es/demanda.html</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28629913</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28633647</id>
	<title>Re:Why?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247133960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Although I understand there is an acreage issue is it truly necessary to develop bigger and bigger turbines? Can someone explain this? </p></div><p>The reason for bigger and bigger turbines is economy of scale. The larger the rotor blades are, the more couple is transferred to the rotor axis, so more power is gained by using material to extend the blades than to use it for additional blades. Moreover, the wind is stronger at greater heights. Of course, this is a very short and incomplete answer, but it is the core. More information can be found on<br>http://www.windpower.org/en/tour/design/index.htm. I am not affiliated with the site; however I work in the wind turbine industry</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Although I understand there is an acreage issue is it truly necessary to develop bigger and bigger turbines ?
Can someone explain this ?
The reason for bigger and bigger turbines is economy of scale .
The larger the rotor blades are , the more couple is transferred to the rotor axis , so more power is gained by using material to extend the blades than to use it for additional blades .
Moreover , the wind is stronger at greater heights .
Of course , this is a very short and incomplete answer , but it is the core .
More information can be found onhttp : //www.windpower.org/en/tour/design/index.htm .
I am not affiliated with the site ; however I work in the wind turbine industry</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Although I understand there is an acreage issue is it truly necessary to develop bigger and bigger turbines?
Can someone explain this?
The reason for bigger and bigger turbines is economy of scale.
The larger the rotor blades are, the more couple is transferred to the rotor axis, so more power is gained by using material to extend the blades than to use it for additional blades.
Moreover, the wind is stronger at greater heights.
Of course, this is a very short and incomplete answer, but it is the core.
More information can be found onhttp://www.windpower.org/en/tour/design/index.htm.
I am not affiliated with the site; however I work in the wind turbine industry
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28629933</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28633007</id>
	<title>Re:So if I understand this correctly...</title>
	<author>apez1267</author>
	<datestamp>1247082300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>mars , were else are we suposed to get the electricity to make water when ww3 ( the war for gas )
ends and the last surviving humans leave earth now that it's a nuclear wast land</htmltext>
<tokenext>mars , were else are we suposed to get the electricity to make water when ww3 ( the war for gas ) ends and the last surviving humans leave earth now that it 's a nuclear wast land</tokentext>
<sentencetext>mars , were else are we suposed to get the electricity to make water when ww3 ( the war for gas )
ends and the last surviving humans leave earth now that it's a nuclear wast land</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28629925</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28630919</id>
	<title>Dynamometer != Wind tunnel</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247062200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Most of the posters seem to be under the false impression that this will be some huge wind tunnel facility.  One of the difficult problems in designing a wind turbine is that the shaft turns very slowly, but electrical generators operate much more efficiently at higher shaft velocities.  With the sort of dynamometer they are talking about, you use a very large motor to spin the generator (and possibly the attached drivetrain) and measure how its efficiency throughout its speed range.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Most of the posters seem to be under the false impression that this will be some huge wind tunnel facility .
One of the difficult problems in designing a wind turbine is that the shaft turns very slowly , but electrical generators operate much more efficiently at higher shaft velocities .
With the sort of dynamometer they are talking about , you use a very large motor to spin the generator ( and possibly the attached drivetrain ) and measure how its efficiency throughout its speed range .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Most of the posters seem to be under the false impression that this will be some huge wind tunnel facility.
One of the difficult problems in designing a wind turbine is that the shaft turns very slowly, but electrical generators operate much more efficiently at higher shaft velocities.
With the sort of dynamometer they are talking about, you use a very large motor to spin the generator (and possibly the attached drivetrain) and measure how its efficiency throughout its speed range.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28629941</id>
	<title>Simple</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247056380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>1. Attach windmill to treadmill</p><p>2. Attach CowboyNeal to treadmill</p><p>3. Profit!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>1 .
Attach windmill to treadmill2 .
Attach CowboyNeal to treadmill3 .
Profit !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>1.
Attach windmill to treadmill2.
Attach CowboyNeal to treadmill3.
Profit!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28633065</id>
	<title>why we need testing facilities??</title>
	<author>apez1267</author>
	<datestamp>1247169840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>why do we need these testing facilities?



the answer...

turbines on mars , were else are we suposed to get the electricity to make water when ww3 ( the war for gas )
ends and the last surviving humans leave earth now that it's a nuclear wast land and go to live on terraformed mars</htmltext>
<tokenext>why do we need these testing facilities ?
the answer.. . turbines on mars , were else are we suposed to get the electricity to make water when ww3 ( the war for gas ) ends and the last surviving humans leave earth now that it 's a nuclear wast land and go to live on terraformed mars</tokentext>
<sentencetext>why do we need these testing facilities?
the answer...

turbines on mars , were else are we suposed to get the electricity to make water when ww3 ( the war for gas )
ends and the last surviving humans leave earth now that it's a nuclear wast land and go to live on terraformed mars</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28631155</id>
	<title>New Gravity Discovery Produces Limitless Energy</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1247064060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>New theory shows how everything starts with gravity.  We live in a gravity-driven universe where gravity isn&#226;(TM)t just another force, it is actually the dominant, driving force that shapes all the others.  Gravity is not a property of matter.  It is not even a property of space.  In fact, space, time and matter are all properties of gravity."</p><p><a href="http://www.fhu.com/gravity-driven-universe.html" title="fhu.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.fhu.com/gravity-driven-universe.html</a> [fhu.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>New theory shows how everything starts with gravity .
We live in a gravity-driven universe where gravity isn   ( TM ) t just another force , it is actually the dominant , driving force that shapes all the others .
Gravity is not a property of matter .
It is not even a property of space .
In fact , space , time and matter are all properties of gravity .
" http : //www.fhu.com/gravity-driven-universe.html [ fhu.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>New theory shows how everything starts with gravity.
We live in a gravity-driven universe where gravity isnâ(TM)t just another force, it is actually the dominant, driving force that shapes all the others.
Gravity is not a property of matter.
It is not even a property of space.
In fact, space, time and matter are all properties of gravity.
"http://www.fhu.com/gravity-driven-universe.html [fhu.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28635319</id>
	<title>Has anyone thought about this?</title>
	<author>elrous0</author>
	<datestamp>1247149140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>All this talk about solar and wind eneergy being "free" and building these giant wind farms and turbines has had me wondering about something that I never see addressed. Has anyone considered the meteorological effects of removing all that energy from the atmosphere? I mean wind and solar energy serve a FUNCTION, they move our weather systems around, melt our snow, power our rivers, etc. You start taking a significant chunk of that energy out of the atmosphere, couldn't you end up with climate changes that could be even more devestating than the global warming you're trying to avoid?
</p><p>
No energy is truly "free," after all. But environmentalists keep talking about wind and solar as if there's NO downside whatsoever. It seems to me that there might be a pretty big one.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>All this talk about solar and wind eneergy being " free " and building these giant wind farms and turbines has had me wondering about something that I never see addressed .
Has anyone considered the meteorological effects of removing all that energy from the atmosphere ?
I mean wind and solar energy serve a FUNCTION , they move our weather systems around , melt our snow , power our rivers , etc .
You start taking a significant chunk of that energy out of the atmosphere , could n't you end up with climate changes that could be even more devestating than the global warming you 're trying to avoid ?
No energy is truly " free , " after all .
But environmentalists keep talking about wind and solar as if there 's NO downside whatsoever .
It seems to me that there might be a pretty big one .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>All this talk about solar and wind eneergy being "free" and building these giant wind farms and turbines has had me wondering about something that I never see addressed.
Has anyone considered the meteorological effects of removing all that energy from the atmosphere?
I mean wind and solar energy serve a FUNCTION, they move our weather systems around, melt our snow, power our rivers, etc.
You start taking a significant chunk of that energy out of the atmosphere, couldn't you end up with climate changes that could be even more devestating than the global warming you're trying to avoid?
No energy is truly "free," after all.
But environmentalists keep talking about wind and solar as if there's NO downside whatsoever.
It seems to me that there might be a pretty big one.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28629933</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_08_2213252_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28633647
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28629933
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_08_2213252_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28631097
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28629969
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28629933
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_08_2213252_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28633943
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28629933
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_08_2213252_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28630273
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28629925
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_08_2213252_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28631017
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28629913
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28629837
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_08_2213252_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28634073
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28629837
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_08_2213252_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28630443
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28629925
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_08_2213252_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28630223
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28629925
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_08_2213252_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28637887
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28635609
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_08_2213252_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28631445
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28629925
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_08_2213252_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28649265
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28630191
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28629925
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_08_2213252_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28630641
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28630191
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28629925
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_08_2213252_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28635863
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28629925
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_08_2213252_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28630261
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28629925
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_08_2213252_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28633007
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28629925
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_08_2213252_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28634509
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28629933
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_08_2213252_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28635319
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28629933
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_08_2213252_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28630219
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28629925
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_08_2213252_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28634347
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28629925
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_08_2213252_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28647075
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28629933
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_08_2213252_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28632487
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28630191
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28629925
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_08_2213252.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28629961
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_08_2213252.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28630919
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_08_2213252.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28630053
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_08_2213252.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28629933
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28647075
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28633943
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28629969
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28631097
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28634509
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28633647
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28635319
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_08_2213252.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28630587
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_08_2213252.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28630997
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_08_2213252.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28629851
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_08_2213252.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28630887
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_08_2213252.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28629893
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_08_2213252.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28635609
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28637887
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_08_2213252.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28629925
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28633007
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28630223
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28634347
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28630219
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28630261
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28630191
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28649265
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28632487
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28630641
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28635863
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28631445
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28630273
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28630443
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_08_2213252.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28630353
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_08_2213252.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28629837
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28629913
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28631017
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_08_2213252.28634073
</commentlist>
</conversation>
