As of late one of the most noteworthy opponents found within the US that has spoken against some wind farm developments has been the Pentagon, citing that some large-scale wind farms such as the nation’s largest planned wind farm in Oregon as posing a potential risk to aircraft flying into and out of military installations in the area. This sentiment has been supported by the Federal Aviation Association (FAA), with warnings being issued to even private residential developers of wind turbines due to the potential collision hazard they pose to low-flying aircraft in addition to the potential electro-magnetic interference the turbines may create during periods of normal use that could interfere with some aircraft instruments.

This opposition has effectively stymied developments of wind energy ranging from the Pacific Northwest as far south as Texas, at least temporarily stopping a number of large wind energy develops that together would produce constant renewable energy in the range of gigawatts of power – enough to provide clean energy to thousands of homes in surrounding areas. Many of these developers are feeling particularly challenged by these delays due to the fact that if they do not complete development of the wind farms by 2012 they will lose eligibility for many of the government incentives that are currently available that would allow them to justify the developments to investors and ensure the energy is truly an affordable alternative to conventional energy.

Nevertheless the concerns being voiced by the government agencies, despite their negative public impact upon many developments, are valid concerns for public safety. Should the wind farms actually generate significant levels of electro-magnetic interference, for instance, this could effectively eliminate many air travel routes from being accessible to both public and private aircraft and cause both large-scale delays and cost increases in many travel plans in addition to direct safety hazards to stray aircraft entering danger zones. This has been a major concern in many areas and has been a long-term concern working against many developments worldwide, providing a heavily weighted negative side to the many positive benefits most people see from alternative energy development plans.

Pros

Minimal Pollution – Once the construct has been made (commonly with readily available materials unlike heavily-processed pure silicon needed for solar cells) the environmental impact of a standing wind turbine is minimal and can maintain steady operations for decades.

Source of Income – Incomes established in areas of relatively regular wind flows can generate energy year round and provide both reduced power consumption locally as well as a potential source of income should power be sold back to into the grid.

Reduced Energy Loss – Local power production reduces the amount of energy lost via transfer through energy lines (up to 50% of all total energy) and improve overall energy efficiency

Cons

Potentially Loud – Large-scale wind turbines can become quite noisy during some periods, generating noise volumes beyond 50 decibels (what can be considered most general conversation)

Variable – Due to the fact that wind currents never maintain 100% steady flows throughout the year the actual power generated from a wind turbine can fluctuate greatly and suffer from sudden changes in air flow (such as if gusts are common during storm seasons)

Potential Safety Hazard – Should an area frequently have aircraft in the vicinity many large turbines could potentially pose risks, particularly in rural areas where small personal aircraft used for farming purposes may be prevalent.

Myths

Wind Turbines Lower Property Value – In all actuality studies have indicated that home proximity to wind farms do not decrease a home’s actual property value, and homes with their own wind turbine for power production have actually been known to increase in value substantially in some areas.

They Pose a Risk to Birds – Studies have shown that a wind turbine, on average, may kill between 1.5 to 2 birds per year in most areas. Cats, on the other hand, are generally responsible for an average of 8-10, making one cat equal to 5-7 wind turbines in terms of danger to the avian population.

They Post a Danger in Stormy Conditions – While it’s true that adverse weather conditions can greatly affect a wind turbine’s functionality the design of modern-day wind turbines prevents them from being active and therefore a threat in severe weather, thus posing little to no risk to surrounding residents at such times.

The system will work by utilizing massive offshore wind turbines over 230 meters (roughly 750 feet) in diameter to pump pressurized air into underwater Energy Bags (or into geological formations if deep water is not readily available) where the compressed air is stored and then fed into energy generators to provide power as necessary. Being located deep under water the additional oceanic pressures can help add force to the compressed air and use a combination of both the natural wind currents as well as the ocean’s depths to both store and utilize energy to a degree previously considered unobtainable.

Professor Garvey’s drive to engineer and implement systems such as this has been based on the fact that the UK is currently in dire need of some sort of “energy revolution” to help provide power to the population in the near future. He speculates that with a full development using the ICARES method offshore wind turbines could easily produce roughly 25% of all alternative energy used by the country within the next 15 years, and already government plans in support of the project have been made for the first construction of one of the massive turbines needed to power the system to begin as early as May 2011. Should this prove effective in the UK it could also lead to NIMROD’s eventual expansion into foreign markets as well, potentially bringing wind energy to a sustainable and much needed new height in as little as a few short decades.

Traditionally VAWTs, despite their versatility in lower wind conditions, have been of less focus for wind farm developers than HAWTs due to the fact that VAWTs typically have a much lower energy output than the vertical variants. This has led many VAWTs from being excluded from many developments in favor of the more energy-efficient HAWTs, though as Wind Harvest has demonstrated recent studies and applications combining both have proven highly effective at increasing all-around power.

Wind Harvest is reportedly looking at Europe for their future wind farm developments implementing this new structure with both the UK and Italy in particular primary targets due to the favorable government incentives offered there for wind energy production. While developments in the United States will also likely be done in the future this is more of a long-term goal and is dependent upon both the success of the wind farms developed in Europe as well as any future incentives that can be offered in the US should any additional government support be offered in various areas.

The primary military concern about wind farm development stems from the fact that in order to maintain adequate efficiency wind farms must operate at least 80 to 100 feed in the air, with the higher the placement the more efficient the turbines can operate due to the “cleaner” wind streams. RADAR detection, however, generally begins at roughly 50 feet, thus any wind turbines present would potentially block any RADAR signals by bouncing back signal waves with their blades and create an effective “dead zone” on the opposite side of the turbine from the RADAR emitter.

This latest concern is currently being taken into consideration and further discussion must be made on a number of different proposed wind farm development sites around the US before any final decision can be done. At the very least this is likely to postpone or cancel entirely a number of major wind developments planned for both on- and off-shore establishment, though at worst it could also bring about new regulations that could even limit personal wind turbine usage and severely limit the overall capabilities of individuals to produce supplemental power of their own at home on their own properties.

One such case is San Bernardino County in California, where legislators recently passed a bill that limits the establishments of wind turbines on properties ranging from 2.5 to 5 acres to 80 feet, while properties with an area of over 5 acres can install a 100 foot tower. While this difference may seem small to many people the fact is that even this 20 foot difference can mean a substantial limitation in energy production capabilities for home consumers. An 80 foot tower, for instance, can generally produce up to 36% more energy on a regular basis than a 60 foot tower, while a 100 foot tower may be able to average out 17% more energy than an 80 foot one.

This difference in energy production is due to the fact that higher towers are able to better utilize “cleaner” air streams, catching wind flows that offer less turbulence and uneven patters. In wind turbine terms this means a more constant, steady turn of the rotors that equates to a much more efficient energy production cycle.

When asked by reporters as to why the county board decided to impose these regulations no comment was offered, however it is being seen by many as a push backwards rather than forwards in support of green energy production. As of last year wind turbine energy produced roughly 1.5% of California’s total energy usage, while if full support is offered many people believe that this number can grow to as much as 20% by 2020. With ongoing restrictions being made to limit these developments, however, this could potentially quickly become an “ideal scenario” rather than a likely outcome a decade from now unless some sort of change is made.

In the meantime a number of government grants for wind turbine development are still being offered both federally and locally by many state and city governments to help offset the costs of developing wind energy production, therefore all is not completely lost in the wind energy sector. Nevertheless these recent restrictions are a step back in terms of power production and, unless the issue can be addressed, may simply serve to help limit our conversion from petroleum fuel dependence even further until all reserves are depleted entirely. While it is true that this is unlikely to happen for another decade or two according to a number of different scientific reports any delay now only serves to worsen the situation consumers will face when that time arrives.

In terms of why more offshore developments have not been seen to date the primary limiting factor involved is time and resources. With most alternative energy developers highly concerned about the state of the global environment developing a number of offshore production facilities becomes a minor goal as it is much quicker, cheaper and overall less material intensive to develop land-based stations. Although it’s true that this does limit the overall availability of viable development locations at the same time it allows for developers to expand much more quickly than they would see otherwise should they rely entirely upon offshore spots.

Another major limiting factor is the limited number of locations available to some countries for efficient offshore development. Many locations along the European coastline, for instance, have a relative high sea bed that can be used for turbine construction. In the US, however, the most viable development location is Cape Cod, while the majority of other coastal areas have a sharp drop-off in sea depth that would incur heavy costs to any company seeking to build up a offshore farm in those locations.

A final major limiting factor behind offshore wind farm development is the fact that a large number of environmental protection groups are against this as they feel it would pose a major detrimental impact upon the natural ecology of the ocean. This is particularly an issue today as many ocean “dead zones” with depleting oxygen levels are spreading rapidly, with one major location in particular being found off the cost of the United States’ Pacific Northwest. Although offshore wind turbine developments have not had any observed negative impact upon oceanic ecology due to the lack of long-term studies available this is seen by many as not a viable argument and therefore development has come about slowly in some areas.

Overall, though, offshore wind farms are still in the process of being sources and developed around the world, and due to their efficiency and potential to offset substantial energy costs they are receiving more and more funding each year by governments looking to establish a stronger “green” energy plan for their local residents. While it’s true that Europe is currently the leader in most solar and wind power development other countries such as China and the US are looking to make strong progress in the coming years following the wake of the economic recession and further offshore development in a number of different locations should be anticipated in the coming months and years and may, potentially, provide solely for all of the energy needs in some areas.

Pros

• VAWT construction allows for the wind turbine to draw upon lower wind speeds, enabling energy conversion in areas with less-than-desirable constant wind conditions
• Vertical axis kits are easy to purchase, ship and assemble on-site and can easily be installed even relatively close to the ground if no suitable high ground is available
• For those interested in creating their own home wind turbine from scratch many VAWT designs can be assembled easier than horizontal designs as they do not need to have a central pivot point to rotate into the wind
• Due to potentially smaller overall sizes VAWT structures can easily be installed and used in many residential areas where other forms of alternative energy generation other than strictly solar power may not be allowed.
• The vertical design and balancing of a VAWT means that noise is constantly kept at a minimum, generally between 2 to 3 decibels, making it a quiet energy conversion system that can be used year round with little disturbance.

Cons

• VAWT construction can not generate as much power in any given wind situation compared to conventional horizontal designs (typically only converting approximately 30% of the wind’s energy into usable power).
• Limitations on power production make VAWT units undesirable for many people as they cannot generally produce enough power for conventional home use unless a larger unit is used.
• Because of the additional materials needed in blade and structural support many VAWT packages offered commercially may cost the same or more than conventional horizontal packages, meaning overall consumers will be getting less for their money in terms of power conversion.
• In a commercial sense most VAWT designs offer too little benefit verses development costs, therefore even though they can operate at lower wind speeds the overall benefit gained is marginal and therefore they do not pose a viable solution to many developer needs for wind farms.
• Because of the vertical design the turbine cannot rotate out of dangerous wind conditions, meaning that should an area with a VAWT be prone to sudden wind gusts it may actually pose a safety hazard.

Overall vertical axis wind turbines are a good solution for many home owners looking at implementing some sort of alternative power generation device on their property but feel that their location is not suitable for expensive solar panels or does not have a constant enough wind speed to sustain a horizontal wind turbine design. In a commercial sense, however, other conventional designs are better suited for mass power production and will offer a better overall benefit to consumers as they will be able to convert more energy for use – particularly in offshore platforms where strong wind speeds are fairly constant year round.

This gathering is a major event in the wind industry sector as it helps both initiate and promote a number of positive changes in the wind industry sector and is responsible for helping the development of wind power operations, both land-based and off-shore. This has become an area of focus in particular for many budding wind energy companies as the decisions whether or not to fund new and ongoing projects alike can mean the difference between sustainable wind power, particularly in the currently struggling economy where wind power developers are struggling to establish themselves in the fluctuating market for alternative energy sources.

Of particular note at this year’s meeting is the session to be held in the afternoon on the 10th when attendees will be welcomed to personally speak with Members of Congress from 1:00pm to 5:30pm. While this may not seem like a major opportunity to many outside viewers this is in fact the key opportunity many members of the wind industry need to help establish their views and, with luck, begin the process of change that could help transform the wind industry sector in the US both in the near and far future.

Other key notes from the conference include speakers from major alternative energy groups such as Denise Bode, the CEO of the American Wind Energy Association (AWEC) as well as experienced lobbyists such as Steve Elmendorf, the President of Elmendorf Strategies, in order to assist developers in continuing their struggle for funding and support throughout the year. Although registration is currently closed for this event the results of the gathering should be made public later in the week and may help shed some light on where the wind industry sector is heading in 2010.

New research for Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory indicates, however, that such fears are ungrounded. The Laboratory found in the course of its research into the issue that “there was no appreciable impact on the values of around 7,500 properties that stand in close proximity to wind turbines.” One of the staff scientists and co-author of the research at Lawrence Berkely, Ryan Wiser, stated that the group “simply found no evidence that such homes were negatively impacted by the presence of wind farms and turbines.” Mr Wiser also commented on past studies into the impact of wind turbines of house values and the fact that previous studies had reached differing conclusions. He stated that many such past studies were conducted using unreliable methods, such as sample sizes that were far too small to form a reasoned and balanced conclusion, further stating that despite the fact that many previous studies had led to a considerable amount of literature on the issue the conclusions reached were, in most instances, “deeply flawed.”

Those that have long championed the use and advancement of wind power have welcomed the new study and have described it as reassuring for those communities that will play host to wind turbines and farms in the future. It may also spark more positive action from governments that have previously been rather tardy to act.

Despite the good news that wind turbines and farms do not impact on house values the authors of the study also stated that ,while there was no statistically significant adverse impact on house values from wind turbines, there might still be an effect upon individual houses. Mr. Wiser went on to state that “individual homes may possibly have been affected, as any human development has an impact on prices, and to suggest otherwise is a little silly.” Having said this, however, the Laboratory’s study was extremely wide-ranging and looked into homes utilizing many different pricing models and also took into account such factors as the recent market tribulations. The result was that it discovered no evidence at all to uphold the view that house values were sensitive to the nearness of wind power facilities.

In a final statement Mr Wiser said that, if there were homes whose values were affected, they are few and far between and the research team was unable to find any widespread impact. The price of properties is not, however, the sole concern of those that live in close proximity to wind power facilities, with many claiming that turbines spoil their views and are too noisy as well.