<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Want Wind Power? Need Turbines.</title>
	<atom:link href="http://ecotality.com/life/2007/12/15/want-wind-power-need-turbines/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://ecotality.com/life/2007/12/15/want-wind-power-need-turbines/</link>
	<description>EcoDevelopments you can use and invest in.</description>
	<pubDate>Sun, 12 Oct 2008 19:14:28 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: Dan Gurvich</title>
		<link>http://ecotality.com/life/2007/12/15/want-wind-power-need-turbines/#comment-2256</link>
		<dc:creator>Dan Gurvich</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 19 Dec 2007 14:12:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ecotality.com/life/2007/12/15/want-wind-power-need-turbines/#comment-2256</guid>
		<description>Beth,
What about GE? They are the largest US supplier of turbines, and they are going strong!

Dan</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Beth,<br />
What about GE? They are the largest US supplier of turbines, and they are going strong!</p>
<p>Dan</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Beth M</title>
		<link>http://ecotality.com/life/2007/12/15/want-wind-power-need-turbines/#comment-2249</link>
		<dc:creator>Beth M</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 19 Dec 2007 01:36:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ecotality.com/life/2007/12/15/want-wind-power-need-turbines/#comment-2249</guid>
		<description>Gary,

Thanks for the comment -- very informative, not to mention well-written. I totally agree with you. I'm a big solar fan, less so wind, for the reasons you mentioned. That said, I try to "occasionally" take my personal opinion out and present some info for the non-like minded people. 

Thanks for reading and commenting.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Gary,</p>
<p>Thanks for the comment &#8212; very informative, not to mention well-written. I totally agree with you. I&#8217;m a big solar fan, less so wind, for the reasons you mentioned. That said, I try to &#8220;occasionally&#8221; take my personal opinion out and present some info for the non-like minded people. </p>
<p>Thanks for reading and commenting.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gary Abraham</title>
		<link>http://ecotality.com/life/2007/12/15/want-wind-power-need-turbines/#comment-2242</link>
		<dc:creator>Gary Abraham</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 17 Dec 2007 15:25:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://ecotality.com/life/2007/12/15/want-wind-power-need-turbines/#comment-2242</guid>
		<description>Wind power plants operate at between 20% and 40% of their rated capacity, depending on the local wind resource. In the northeast, where installations are booming, operations are at the low end of that range. This means about a dozen wind farms each with about 60 turbines are required to generate as much electricity as a conventional power plant, about 300 MW. However, wind farms produce no electricity when the wind isn't blowing, so they have an even lower reliability factor. In Europe, with much more wind energy experience than the the U.S., no conventional power plant has been displaced by wind power. That's because reliable backup capacity must be maintained, even at a reduced operating level, despite wind power interconnections. In fact, conventional power plants run less efficiently at reduced operating levels, and thus pollute more per unit of energy generated than when operated at maximum capacity. When compared to the land area required, about 10 acres for a conventional plant, at least 5,000 acres for a 60-turbine wind plant, the net benefits and burdens of wind compared to other sources doesn't look so rosy. All that land is subject to habitat fragmentation, bird and bat mortality, drainage alteration, noise pollution, and visual impacts not all people love.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Wind power plants operate at between 20% and 40% of their rated capacity, depending on the local wind resource. In the northeast, where installations are booming, operations are at the low end of that range. This means about a dozen wind farms each with about 60 turbines are required to generate as much electricity as a conventional power plant, about 300 MW. However, wind farms produce no electricity when the wind isn&#8217;t blowing, so they have an even lower reliability factor. In Europe, with much more wind energy experience than the the U.S., no conventional power plant has been displaced by wind power. That&#8217;s because reliable backup capacity must be maintained, even at a reduced operating level, despite wind power interconnections. In fact, conventional power plants run less efficiently at reduced operating levels, and thus pollute more per unit of energy generated than when operated at maximum capacity. When compared to the land area required, about 10 acres for a conventional plant, at least 5,000 acres for a 60-turbine wind plant, the net benefits and burdens of wind compared to other sources doesn&#8217;t look so rosy. All that land is subject to habitat fragmentation, bird and bat mortality, drainage alteration, noise pollution, and visual impacts not all people love.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
