Producing wind-energy even if there is no natural wind

[Stephi Job]

Does this really work:

http://www.smart-urban-stage.com/blog/future-of-the-city/natural-wind/

???

[zararina]

I doubt if it was possible just by reading the thread title.

But reading the article about it, I think there could be a possibility if all those written there could be true. Just like the turbine will be made from a very light weight material and that the tunnel could really get the winds and/or forces from the passing vehicles above it. I think it will be best placed in a very busy highway.

[sillylucy]

I have my doubts that it could be done in places with no wind. I wish there that the wind generated near busy highways was put to use just like zararina suggested. I can't wait for the day we have cleaner energy.

[NoNukes]

Why not? Could work. Unless it creates more carbon to construct those things than it would actually save.

[Esperahol]

I dislike wind energy and I really wish people would stop pushing it. I mean have you seen how huge these things are? Or how much of the enviroment is iether displaced or destroyed to make way for the construction of these things? I would much rather focus on something with a smaller footprint and a bigger more reliable production - like nuclear power.

[NoNukes]

I dislike wind energy and I really wish people would stop pushing it. I mean have you seen how huge these things are? Or how much of the enviroment is iether displaced or destroyed to make way for the construction of these things? I would much rather focus on something with a smaller footprint and a bigger more reliable production - like nuclear power.

Huh!?! Nuclear power is not a reliable energy source and it has a huge ecological footprint which we could all see from the fukushima nuclear accident.

[Milton Banana]

There is a brand new Vestas plant south of my town. Tried to get a job there two years ago. Now there is talk that if government subsidies dont come through they will have to reduce their workforce by half. Limited energy assisted by the government is not the answer. When a 747 is flown from New York to Frankfurt using another form of energy I'll look at it. Nuclear is an option. The Navy solved their propulsion problem with it all right. All the light water reactors were pushed and put in place because the government could make bombs with them. Look into a new plant type that could be the wave of the future. Thorium reactors.

http://thoriummsr.com/

[media=]

The difference simply put is that when a light water reactor is set up all the procedures are set up to keep the reactor from melting down. If the reactor was in use and everybody just got up and walked away this type would probably melt down.

The LFTR reactor all the time and effort is put into keeping it reacting. If everybody got up and walked out this reactor would stop reacting.

[shilpa]

There are high chances that it might work very well for a lot of reasons. However, one can never say what difficulties they might come across while building it, hence it is impossible to say whether they can build it or not just by seeing the theory. This might be the future of our people and also if it really happens as they say, then it would be the solution for lots of problems. I hope that one fine day something similar to this would be built for the betterment of the people. 

[ericdesuza]

On 5/26/2012 at 9:29 PM, NoNukes said:

 

 

Huh!?! Nuclear power is not a reliable energy source and it has a huge ecological footprint which we could all see from the fukushima nuclear accident.

Yes, i agreed with you. We need to think of stop using these source of energy and find out a sustainable source of energy that does not affect environment.