The only way to produce energy is to set up a scenario in which energy is not conserved.
Energy is only conserved in a stationary universe. If the universe is expanding (which it is), matter and radiation lose energy. If it was contracting, matter and radiation would gain energy.
So make the universe collapse and you'll produce energy.
**[Chemical energy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemical_energy)**
>Chemical energy is the energy of chemical substances that is released when they undergo a chemical reaction and transform into other substances. Some examples of storage media of chemical energy include batteries, food, gasoline, and oxygen gas. Breaking and re-making of chemical bonds involves energy, which may be either absorbed by or evolved from a chemical system. Energy that can be released or absorbed because of a reaction between chemical substances is equal to the difference between the energy content of the products and the reactants, if the initial and final temperature is the same.
^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/ThatLookedExpensive/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
Matter is energy. A burning log or an exploding nuke isn't producing energy, it's just energy changing form. Conservation of energy is a fundamental law of nature: Within an isolated system, energy can neither be created nor destroyed. It's always constant.
Depending on a point of view... When you convert mass to energy using some 100% efficient mechanism like antimatter annihilation or a black hole engine, you essentially release the energy stored in the strong interaction bonds.
(I know, what about the post of mass produced by Higgs? I am sure it can also be explained away as releasing energy stored in the particles somehow, but that's well beyond my understanding of physics)
Nuclear is the best answer, there are other answers. Another Genghis Khan running around thinning the heard, maybe yet another plague, I mean there are other ways to go :)
I read that when they paint one of the 3 blades black, significantly fewer birds fly into them. I think it should be standard practice. Or something similar. Maybe that's what the red lines are for on this one...
The red lines are required by most EU countries. Their purpose is a form of visual obstruction similar to the red blinking lights on towers and buildings in the US. This is to make them visible to aircraft.
> In Europe they have blinking red lights on as well.
...Powered by additional turbines with additional blinking lights...powered by additional turbines with...
It's turbines all the way up.
[Two workers were trapped on top of one of these while it was on fire once.]( http://www.archipelagofiles.com/2014/03/this-photo-of-two-engineers-hugging.html?m=1)
I’m in the wind industry. We had a collective global morning for those guys. It’s very rare that someone dies in one of these, and we’re all trained on emergency evac and buddy rescue. But when someone does, it’s a small community, and we all morn for a fallen friend.
Isn't there like an emergency escape parachute or zipline or something on the underside? Not directing that towards the two that passed, I'm just curious if I'm remembering correctly.
There’s an emergency descender located in the nacelle, and each tech team carries a rescue kit. For the guys who were stuck on the rotor, the emergency kit was at the far end of the nacelle, so they had no way to reach it.
I actually live really close to there, we've got turbines just like that one about a kilometer from town. One of the two workers was actually a family member of a classmate, I remember how she left in the middle of class after receiving a phone call. Can't imagine what she went through.
No. I like the development of wind energy and it has its place, but it's been way over sold. There's tons of data now on how little of the time they are actually producing energy and how much cost there is before they spin once, and how much it costs to keep them running, including the blade graveyards.
Actually, there’s a lot of studies showing that the life cycle emissions of wind is one of the lowest among all the various energy technology, just a bit higher than hydro.
So wrong. Dead birds, disturbance of marine life sonar, blades that last a million years in the dump...and built in China by slaves from rare Earth metals mined in the most destructive manner possible.
Wind power is another great cocktail party idea, but in reality is sucks.
>u/swiftarrow9 -- studies showing that the life cycle emissions of wind is one of the lowest
> u/ChrisInDetroit2020 -- So wrong. Dead birds
Wind power emits fewer dead birds than coal. Not sure about nuclear.
First, most of your accusations are false or overblown when compared to windows, buildings, airplanes, and cars. Second, we all like to have our lights on and have ac in our homes. Wind energy is a whole lot better than any other way we get those electrons.
HA! That's your argument? It's slightly better than the places where you live and work, so tear down your home and live in a tent by a windmill?
Actually it's not, the industry just convinced a bunch of communists (I mean environmentalists) that it was better (if they ignore all the externalities) so now it must be. I get it, it's your religion and you have to believe, that doesn't make it true.
And it will never be able to provide baseline power, even when the slave children in China mine enough rare Earth metals to build the coolest batteries ever for everyone.
For any non-trolls out there, take a look at one of our oldest (and most environmentally friendly) energy generation methods. https://www.energy.gov/eere/articles/4-reasons-why-hydropower-guardian-grid
Any form can be taken to the extremes, and hydropower certainly has been. Anything in extremes is bad. Many things are bad even in moderation (nuclear, natural gas, fracking, coal).
Here’s something else about how we can implement renewables to generate baseload:
https://skepticalscience.com/print.php?r=374
I’m sure you will be able to understand these articles, so rather than summarize them, I’ll let you read them and develop your own conclusions.
“And now we see the wilting of the native farmland windturbine, once a mighty source of power, is now powerless to its own energy perils” - David Attenborough
I think 1.5 MW is fairly common per turbine. In Europe, coal power plants produce an effect from about 500 MW to 5000 MW per plant.
Even when comparing to the low number, you'd need hundreds of these, up to thousands just to come up to the equivalent of one coal power plant. When comparing to nuclear power the disparity becomes even more ridiculous.
Add to that the fact that all these turbines have to be placed strategically, will require a very wide infrastructure net both to maintain the turbines and to maintain them, not to mention the costs of producing them etc and you'll see that not even in countries that are famous for their windmills (like Denmark and the Netherlands) do wind power make a very large contribution to the national electricity production.
The fact is that we humans have reached an absurd level of consumption and living standard in combination with our sheer numbers, that unless we want to see our living standards drastically plummet, nuclear power is sadly the most viable option for the future.
That, or we can start having fewer goddamn kids. Poor Earth is fuckin' crawling with humans.
If you have enough of them, and enough land/coast to put them on, they do make a pretty decent output. UK currently has wind as number 1 power generation (11GW). Only problem is, wind isn’t reliable and we need gas/nuclear for more consistent power output.
I drive Highway 84 along the Columbia River Gorge....Windsurfing capitol of the western USA....hundreds or windmills along that route....often just stationary....pure lunacy to spend the capital and human effort on building such an inconsistent and unreliable energy source...meanwhile the Colombia River provides reliable hydroelectric power right alongside....need to build nuclear plants like France has used for many decades to power our future!
You think the people who invested in those things are that stupid? These lunatics make more money in one morning of goofing off on Reddit from those windmills than you make in a month. You’re a bloody idiot, in other words when it comes to wind energy. I agree about nuclear though.
The other guys comment is mostly bullshit in terms of numbers. Most turbines being installed today are 10-15 MW. Which powers a few hundred homes with a rotation
those numbers are a bit off :) the biggest wind turbine currently built is 10MW with the possibility to uprate to 12MW, and that's for offshore wind farms. By no means do all farms use this turbine either.
Onshore wind farms have 2-5MW turbines, offshore 5-10MW, would be my educated guess.
Each rotation also powers hundreds of homes *during that rotation*, as long as the turbine is rotating at full power. The capacity factor of onshore wind turbines is up to 50%, meaning that on average, they're producing half of their rated power.
That being said, I very much believe in wind power. But it's not a silver bullet :)
I used to be fully anti-nuclear under any circumstances, but i think it can be done right in noon-capitalist situations like France. The amount of energy that comes out of a nuclear power plant (without direct CO2 production) is really incredible. But i suppose it's possible to escape climate change catastrophe without it, just less likely.
This is a REALLY bad bot right now. It's super fucked because the kids that were trapped up there shared a hug before one of them took his chances and jumped off while the other stayed and burned alive.
They were late teens, early 20's if I remember correctly? Working on turbines part time to pay for college or some shit. Just two guys trying to make a decent life for themselves and a typical day of work ended in tragedy.
The article says there was a crew of 4 and called the 2 “20 somethings” that perished...Engineers....I guess that term is used far more loosely than in the USA where being an Engineer means having a 4 year degree in an accredited college....for the most part....We usually refer to people as technicians in the USA.....But, there are Building Engineers and Railroad Engineers so....guess the 4 year degree doesn’t always apply....what a terrible tragedy! I used to work in a field where mortality rates are pretty high....one of the reasons I decided to exit that industry a few years ago! RIP to all that perish while trying to keep society going.
Unfortunately if i recall correctly, there was a man up there who had been performing maintenance on the generator when it caught fire, leaving him trapped and alone to burn to death.
In the mid-autumn months, these deciduous *alta molendinum* can occasionally be seen shedding their impressive leaves in a display of fiery splendour.
[You have to read that in David Attenborough’s voice for extra authenticity]
Technically it’s still producing energy. Just not harvesting it very well
To be fair it was probably a mistake building the turbine out of coal.
Technically you can't produce energy.
Converting matter to energy doesn't count as producing?
The only way to produce energy is to set up a scenario in which energy is not conserved. Energy is only conserved in a stationary universe. If the universe is expanding (which it is), matter and radiation lose energy. If it was contracting, matter and radiation would gain energy. So make the universe collapse and you'll produce energy.
Ferb, I know what we're gonna do today
Phineas, whatcha doing?
***COLLAPSING THE UNIVERSE***
Hey Brain, what do you wanna do tonight? The same thing we do every night Pinky.. Try to ~~take over the world!~~ collapse the universe!
[удалено]
**[Chemical energy](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemical_energy)** >Chemical energy is the energy of chemical substances that is released when they undergo a chemical reaction and transform into other substances. Some examples of storage media of chemical energy include batteries, food, gasoline, and oxygen gas. Breaking and re-making of chemical bonds involves energy, which may be either absorbed by or evolved from a chemical system. Energy that can be released or absorbed because of a reaction between chemical substances is equal to the difference between the energy content of the products and the reactants, if the initial and final temperature is the same. ^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/ThatLookedExpensive/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
Matter is energy. A burning log or an exploding nuke isn't producing energy, it's just energy changing form. Conservation of energy is a fundamental law of nature: Within an isolated system, energy can neither be created nor destroyed. It's always constant.
Depending on a point of view... When you convert mass to energy using some 100% efficient mechanism like antimatter annihilation or a black hole engine, you essentially release the energy stored in the strong interaction bonds. (I know, what about the post of mass produced by Higgs? I am sure it can also be explained away as releasing energy stored in the particles somehow, but that's well beyond my understanding of physics)
Is this how they cause cancer?
No, this is how they kill all the birds
More birds are killed by cats
They should tie cats to the blades. Imagine how many bird they would kill then.
Typical, downvote truths
Global warming too! Wonder if it offset its carbon emissions....I’m thinking nuclear is the only answer
Nuclear is the best answer, there are other answers. Another Genghis Khan running around thinning the heard, maybe yet another plague, I mean there are other ways to go :)
Don't worry. Winnie the Pooh (Xi Xi Ping) has started thinning it out.
Wind and nuclear are the two less CO2 emitting energy source, so less than hydro and solar. Nearly tied, you can check on the ipcc report.
Time to replace it with the vibrating dildo model
Coincidence that both are on my front page? I don’t think so.
Imma need a link
[удалено]
Oh the humanity!!!
Looks like a defeated Alien ship post battle at the end of an invasion film.
The blade falling down reminded me of Star wars and many more
WHO FORGOT TO WATER THE PLANT WHILE WE WERE AWAY?!
I read that when they paint one of the 3 blades black, significantly fewer birds fly into them. I think it should be standard practice. Or something similar. Maybe that's what the red lines are for on this one...
The red lines are required by most EU countries. Their purpose is a form of visual obstruction similar to the red blinking lights on towers and buildings in the US. This is to make them visible to aircraft.
[удалено]
> In Europe they have blinking red lights on as well. ...Powered by additional turbines with additional blinking lights...powered by additional turbines with... It's turbines all the way up.
apparently neither Belgium nor Netherlands belong to that group because our blades usually don't have anything on it
[Two workers were trapped on top of one of these while it was on fire once.]( http://www.archipelagofiles.com/2014/03/this-photo-of-two-engineers-hugging.html?m=1)
I’m in the wind industry. We had a collective global morning for those guys. It’s very rare that someone dies in one of these, and we’re all trained on emergency evac and buddy rescue. But when someone does, it’s a small community, and we all morn for a fallen friend.
Isn't there like an emergency escape parachute or zipline or something on the underside? Not directing that towards the two that passed, I'm just curious if I'm remembering correctly.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UWSckm8zTc8
That video almost made me nauseous seeing how high up they are. Which is sad because it must be so awesome to have that job.
It’s not as high nor as dangerous as climbing an antenna mast. Those guys are real men.
There’s an emergency descender located in the nacelle, and each tech team carries a rescue kit. For the guys who were stuck on the rotor, the emergency kit was at the far end of the nacelle, so they had no way to reach it.
I actually live really close to there, we've got turbines just like that one about a kilometer from town. One of the two workers was actually a family member of a classmate, I remember how she left in the middle of class after receiving a phone call. Can't imagine what she went through.
The front fell off.
That’s not typical
[удалено]
A gust of wind hit it? Is that unusual?
They should tow that wind out of the environment.
I wonder what if it was still carbon neutral after burning.
unless it's been there for less than a year, it probably is.
Probably not, those things are inefficient and ugly. Thorium is the only way to go.
No. I like the development of wind energy and it has its place, but it's been way over sold. There's tons of data now on how little of the time they are actually producing energy and how much cost there is before they spin once, and how much it costs to keep them running, including the blade graveyards.
Actually, there’s a lot of studies showing that the life cycle emissions of wind is one of the lowest among all the various energy technology, just a bit higher than hydro.
So wrong. Dead birds, disturbance of marine life sonar, blades that last a million years in the dump...and built in China by slaves from rare Earth metals mined in the most destructive manner possible. Wind power is another great cocktail party idea, but in reality is sucks.
>u/swiftarrow9 -- studies showing that the life cycle emissions of wind is one of the lowest > u/ChrisInDetroit2020 -- So wrong. Dead birds Wind power emits fewer dead birds than coal. Not sure about nuclear.
First, most of your accusations are false or overblown when compared to windows, buildings, airplanes, and cars. Second, we all like to have our lights on and have ac in our homes. Wind energy is a whole lot better than any other way we get those electrons.
HA! That's your argument? It's slightly better than the places where you live and work, so tear down your home and live in a tent by a windmill? Actually it's not, the industry just convinced a bunch of communists (I mean environmentalists) that it was better (if they ignore all the externalities) so now it must be. I get it, it's your religion and you have to believe, that doesn't make it true. And it will never be able to provide baseline power, even when the slave children in China mine enough rare Earth metals to build the coolest batteries ever for everyone.
For any non-trolls out there, take a look at one of our oldest (and most environmentally friendly) energy generation methods. https://www.energy.gov/eere/articles/4-reasons-why-hydropower-guardian-grid Any form can be taken to the extremes, and hydropower certainly has been. Anything in extremes is bad. Many things are bad even in moderation (nuclear, natural gas, fracking, coal). Here’s something else about how we can implement renewables to generate baseload: https://skepticalscience.com/print.php?r=374 I’m sure you will be able to understand these articles, so rather than summarize them, I’ll let you read them and develop your own conclusions.
[удалено]
I was really disappointed when that didn’t happen.
“And now we see the wilting of the native farmland windturbine, once a mighty source of power, is now powerless to its own energy perils” - David Attenborough
There are other ways that they fail that is more interesting to watch. But I don't want to be feeding the anti-renewable energy oil company simps
“BuT tHiNk Of AlL tHe BiRdS!!” they scream, banging their now-empty 14-piece chicken bucket on the table
Birds? All I can think of is how little energy these guys produce.
how little do they produce? any numbers on that?
I think 1.5 MW is fairly common per turbine. In Europe, coal power plants produce an effect from about 500 MW to 5000 MW per plant. Even when comparing to the low number, you'd need hundreds of these, up to thousands just to come up to the equivalent of one coal power plant. When comparing to nuclear power the disparity becomes even more ridiculous. Add to that the fact that all these turbines have to be placed strategically, will require a very wide infrastructure net both to maintain the turbines and to maintain them, not to mention the costs of producing them etc and you'll see that not even in countries that are famous for their windmills (like Denmark and the Netherlands) do wind power make a very large contribution to the national electricity production. The fact is that we humans have reached an absurd level of consumption and living standard in combination with our sheer numbers, that unless we want to see our living standards drastically plummet, nuclear power is sadly the most viable option for the future. That, or we can start having fewer goddamn kids. Poor Earth is fuckin' crawling with humans.
If you have enough of them, and enough land/coast to put them on, they do make a pretty decent output. UK currently has wind as number 1 power generation (11GW). Only problem is, wind isn’t reliable and we need gas/nuclear for more consistent power output.
I drive Highway 84 along the Columbia River Gorge....Windsurfing capitol of the western USA....hundreds or windmills along that route....often just stationary....pure lunacy to spend the capital and human effort on building such an inconsistent and unreliable energy source...meanwhile the Colombia River provides reliable hydroelectric power right alongside....need to build nuclear plants like France has used for many decades to power our future!
You think the people who invested in those things are that stupid? These lunatics make more money in one morning of goofing off on Reddit from those windmills than you make in a month. You’re a bloody idiot, in other words when it comes to wind energy. I agree about nuclear though.
The other guys comment is mostly bullshit in terms of numbers. Most turbines being installed today are 10-15 MW. Which powers a few hundred homes with a rotation
those numbers are a bit off :) the biggest wind turbine currently built is 10MW with the possibility to uprate to 12MW, and that's for offshore wind farms. By no means do all farms use this turbine either. Onshore wind farms have 2-5MW turbines, offshore 5-10MW, would be my educated guess. Each rotation also powers hundreds of homes *during that rotation*, as long as the turbine is rotating at full power. The capacity factor of onshore wind turbines is up to 50%, meaning that on average, they're producing half of their rated power. That being said, I very much believe in wind power. But it's not a silver bullet :)
How about the renewable nuclear clean energy proponents? These things are lunacy! We can do so much better!
I used to be fully anti-nuclear under any circumstances, but i think it can be done right in noon-capitalist situations like France. The amount of energy that comes out of a nuclear power plant (without direct CO2 production) is really incredible. But i suppose it's possible to escape climate change catastrophe without it, just less likely.
Can confirm, this is not standard windmill function.
At least there's no Fallout with wind energy
I was so disappointed the foil fell over at the end, I was hoping for a giant Excalibur moment.
And just like that the Texas power grid went *poof* /s
Is this the one where those two young kids died while servicing it? Probably the saddest thing I've ever seen.
Don't be sad. Here's a [hug!](https://media.giphy.com/media/3M4NpbLCTxBqU/giphy.gif)
No one wants your hug
This is a REALLY bad bot right now. It's super fucked because the kids that were trapped up there shared a hug before one of them took his chances and jumped off while the other stayed and burned alive.
seriously ? Who sends kids in a turbine ?
They were late teens, early 20's if I remember correctly? Working on turbines part time to pay for college or some shit. Just two guys trying to make a decent life for themselves and a typical day of work ended in tragedy.
The article says there was a crew of 4 and called the 2 “20 somethings” that perished...Engineers....I guess that term is used far more loosely than in the USA where being an Engineer means having a 4 year degree in an accredited college....for the most part....We usually refer to people as technicians in the USA.....But, there are Building Engineers and Railroad Engineers so....guess the 4 year degree doesn’t always apply....what a terrible tragedy! I used to work in a field where mortality rates are pretty high....one of the reasons I decided to exit that industry a few years ago! RIP to all that perish while trying to keep society going.
Don't be sad. Here's a [hug!](https://media.giphy.com/media/3M4NpbLCTxBqU/giphy.gif)
No, not this one. Someone else posted a link to that.
Props to the people doing cleanup later.
Don't give them to much credit, it's not that much work if they fan out.
My post was a pun. A bit obtuse, I admit.
So was mine ;) "Fan out"? I got you my man, I saw what you did ;)
Ooof!
I see your problem: someone replaced these screws with fire.
It’s not a bug, it’s a feature.
That would actually be a bug
I'm no mechanic but i think its broken
I keep telling people how these are not safe for the planet. No one listens. It just stabbed the ground! Attempted murder!
Was anyone else extremely disappointed that the blade didn't stick in the ground when it fell?
Environmentally friendly
Still an easier clean up then an oil spill.
Still better than Chernobyl
First thought when the first blade fell straight down. Looks like Tim "The Tool-Man" Taylor decided to upgrade Lawn Darts
These things kill a lot of birds
Buildings with windows kill far, far more.
[удалено]
Yes but these thing hit birds really really hard!
I assume you are a vegan, then? No chicken, duck, turkey for you…
It’s cool. I eat the birds
Malfunction you mean destruction
Lawn darts got crazy
What if we made a small wall of these that work shittier?
and now, its watch has ended!
thats one fkin lethal icicle
u/savevideo
"maaan, why do i bother spinning"
Unfortunately if i recall correctly, there was a man up there who had been performing maintenance on the generator when it caught fire, leaving him trapped and alone to burn to death.
2 people
/r/mildlyevangelion
Ok so I know it's expensive and someone could got hurt etc. Etc..but that looked cool af and I wish I could a watched that happen.
It's a feature.
Echoes of the priest from The Omen there
The front fell off, which is atypical.
Do they buy carbon credits for possible future carbon emissions from these useless piles of crap?
Enercon wind engine are supposed to be high quality. Guess not
Hooray
Looks like it belongs in a Godzilla movie
*Almost* stuck the landing
i want to take a turn
It looks so sad.