Wind Power

Once while driving to San Francisco from the Yosemite area, my wife Donna and I drove through rolling hills covered with wind turbines as far as the eye could see. The turbines were of various designs, but all were modern and sterile-looking.

But why not build wind turbines that are aesthetically beautiful?

Many people say they would be disturbed by the sight of endless rows of power-generating wind turbines in open areas near their homes. But wind can provide free (or nearly-free) electrical power, without causing any pollution (aside from that caused by the manufacturing of the wind turbines themselves).

So think about the old windmills for which the Netherlands are famous. Do you think of them as ugly? If not, then why can’t modern “windmills” be made more attractive than they often are? Maybe if the organic design principles of the architect Antoni Gaudí, or even of H.R. Giger (of “Alien” fame) were incorporated into the design of power-producing windmills, they could then better blend with their natural surroundings.

Gaudí, for example, is famous for cathedrals and apartment buildings that look more a part of the Earth than most other structures. So why couldn’t such principles be applied to wind-dynamos? And even utilitarian windmills such as those produced in the U.S. since 1888 by Aermotor Windmill, and which are used only to pump water, are beautiful in their own way, yet extremely efficient. (Valves in the Aermotor pump, which is itself located underground within a well, ingeniously prevent water from flowing back into the ground if the wind stops blowing.)

Of course, there are other potential problems with wind turbines. Fast-moving, sharp blades could possibly wreak havoc on an area’s bird population. It seems that larger, more slow-moving blades could be more easily spotted and avoided by birds, who already have enough problems flying into window glass wherever humans live or work. And newer designs do allow blades to move more slowly while still producing as much electricity, while smooth support shafts no longer create roosting areas for birds as the old lattice-style frameworks previously did. (But studies have indicated that wind turbines kill far fewer birds than do collisions with buildings and windows, which have been found responsible for 5500 per 10,000 human-caused bird fatalities, as opposed to less than one per 10,000 for wind turbines).

However, wind turbine-caused fatalities for bats may be much higher than those for birds, with the Bats and Wind Energy Cooperative estimating that 1,700-2,900 bats were killed at two wind farms in 2004. And as we all know, bats are highly beneficial in controlling insects, including mosquitoes. Perhaps grids, similar to those used on house fans, or matrices of plastic monofilament or something else that would be visible to the vision of birds and the echo-location of bats, can be installed over the turbines.

And, current wind turbines are only really effective in areas that consistently receive high winds. But, what if on top of every skyscraper of the future, there were a wind turbine or series of wind turbines providing at least some of the power for that very building? Would a city’s skyline really be damaged by the presence of these “windmills”? And why not add some solar panels as well? Then, how long would it be before most city residents became accustomed to the sight of such devices on rooftops? Not long, I think.

(CONTINUE READING)