Offshore Wind “Wake Effect”

From MasterResource

By Robert Bradley Jr.

The media bias in favor of industrial wind turbines is a sight to behold. Simple reporting of the facts, from costs to environmental tradeoffs, could inform the public and voters to quite possibly eliminate the government gravy train that disadvantages virtually all of us. That is, everyone except for wind developers and other constituencies of the Climate Industrial Complex.

It is uncommon to see a break in the narrative of “the energy transition.” This was recently done at E&E News’s Energywire, “‘Wake effect’ could drain 38% of offshore wind power, study says“. This piece by Heather Richards (May 5, 2024) is worth revisiting at length. Key quotations follow:

The findings from national lab and university researchers upend assumptions about how turbines interact with each other.

Wind turbines off the East Coast might significantly drain energy from each other, lowering the power output of an offshore farm by up to 38 percent, according to a new study that challenges early assumptions about the nascent industry’s electricity contribution.

The findings add to growing research about the “wake effect,” which is when offshore turbines in close proximity affect each other’s energy output.

Researchers from the University of Colorado and the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) found that entire wind farms can impede neighboring projects, decreasing the power production of adjacent farms by up to 15 percent under some conditions.

———————

In the research paper, “New offshore wind turbines can take away energy from existing ones,” Science Direct reports on the findings, with the authors offering apologetics (“We need a diverse mix of clean energy sources to meet the demand and decarbonize the grid”) and (“With better predictions of wind energy, we can achieve more reliance on renewable energy”). The article states:

In a new paper published March 14 in the journal Wind Energy Science, a team led by Dave Rosencrans, a doctoral student, and Julie K. Lundquist, a professor in the Department of Atmospheric and Ocean Sciences, estimate that offshore wind turbines in the Atlantic Ocean region, where the U.S. plans to build large wind farms, could take away wind from other turbines nearby, potentially reducing the farms’ power output by more than 30%.

Accounting for this so-called “wake effect,” the team estimated that the proposed wind farms could still supply approximately 60% of the electricity demand of the New England grid, which covers Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, and Vermont.

“The U.S. is planning to build thousands of offshore wind turbines, so we need to predict when those wakes will be expensive and when they have little effect,” said Lundquist, who is also a fellow at CU Boulder’s Renewable and Sustainable Energy Institute.

When wind passes through turbines, the ones at the front, or upstream, extract some energy from the wind. As a result, the wind slows down and becomes more turbulent behind the turbines. This means the turbines downstream get slower wind, sometimes resulting in lower power generation.

The wake effect is particularly prominent offshore, because there are no houses or trees that stir up the air, which helps dissipate the wakes, said Rosencrans, the paper’s first author.

Using computer simulations and observational data of the atmosphere, the team calculated that the wake effect reduces total power generation by 34% to 38% at a proposed wind farm off the East Coast. Most of the reduction comes from wakes formed between turbines within a single farm.

But under certain weather conditions, wakes could reach turbines as far as 55 kilometers downwind and affect other wind farms. For example, during hot summer days, the airflow over the cool sea surface tends to be relatively stable, causing wakes to persist for longer periods and propagate over longer distances.

There is another problem for offshore wind ….

“Unfortunately, summer is when there’s a lot of electrical demand,” Rosencrans said. “We showed that wakes are going to have a significant impact on power generation. But if we can predict their effects and anticipate when they are going to happen, then we can manage them on the electrical grid.”

Compared with energy sources derived from fossil fuels, wind and solar power tend to be variable, because the sun doesn’t always shine and the wind doesn’t always blow. This variability creates a challenge for grid operators, said Lundquist. The power grid is a complex system that requires a perfect balance of supply and demand in real-time. Any imbalances could lead to devastating blackouts, like what happened in Texas in 2021 when power outages killed nearly 250 people.

To better understand how the wind blows in the proposed wind farm area, Lundquist’s team visited islands off the New England coast and installed a host of instruments last December as part of the Department of Energy’s Wind Forecast Improvement Project 3. The project is a collaboration of researchers from CU Boulder, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute and several other national laboratories.

The instruments, including weather monitors and radar sensors, will collect data for the next year or more. Previously, offshore wind power prediction models usually relied on intermittent data from ships and satellite observations. The hope is that with continuous data directly from the ocean, scientists can improve prediction models and better integrate more offshore wind energy into the grid.

Or not. Wind is the perfect imperfect energy for the grid, and offshore wind more so.

4.8 28 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

91 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
John Hultquist
May 31, 2024 11:10 am

I wonder about the opening photo.
It appears to be an ocean facility, and quite large.
Is it a concocted digital image?
Land facilities near me are not aligned as these are.
Just wondering – because if it is not real, I suggest not using it.

Rud Istvan
Reply to  John Hultquist
May 31, 2024 11:23 am

It’s real. The photo comes from Vattenfall itself. It is Vattenfall’s Horns Rev wind farm off Denmark.

David Wojick
Reply to  Rud Istvan
May 31, 2024 11:42 am

Yes there are many such. There is a large scientific literature on offshore wake effects including environmental damage. The news here is that they are potentially much larger than usually assumed. This is why big turbines are a mile apart.

Reply to  David Wojick
May 31, 2024 1:45 pm

Some years ago we started to hear about those nuggets of minerals at the bottom of the sea in places- billions of them. Any talk about exploiting them resulted in gnashing of teeth by the enviros. Now it’s them wanting to industrialize the ocean to “save the planet”.

Bryan A
Reply to  Joseph Zorzin
May 31, 2024 2:48 pm

Kinda like the old George Carlin skit about how saving the environment the way enviro-mentals suggest is like
Fighting for Peace
or
F—ing for Virginity

Reply to  Bryan A
June 1, 2024 4:40 am

or putting an egg back together

Bryan A
Reply to  David Wojick
May 31, 2024 11:05 pm

So we know Wake Effect has a negative impact on wind generation…
Hopefully soon the world wakes up to the Woke Effects negative impact on society as a whole

David A
Reply to  David Wojick
June 1, 2024 2:05 am

So wind turbines slow down heat dissipation. A not insignifigant means of earth shedding heat is circulation and convection – conduction. Slow down that process and you have warming. Not much, but then again, neither do you have much warming from a bit more CO2, which is certainly better for bio life.

Reply to  David A
June 1, 2024 4:49 am

We have a CO2 drought, which causes much extinction of fauna and flora.
The Tropics used to be much larger, and the Sahara was entirely forested..

CO2 should be at least 1000 ppm (as proven in greenhouses) to increase flora and fauna, reduce arid areas and deserts, as proven by several hundred MILLION years of physical evidence

Net-zero is a suicide pact

Reply to  David Wojick
June 1, 2024 4:39 am

Not to eliminate the wake effect, but to somewhat reduce it.

The additional costs are more cabling and more travel distance for maintenance and part replacement.

More subsidies and hiding the numbers and telling lies become a high-level art in the woke double-speak world

oeman50
Reply to  David Wojick
June 1, 2024 7:20 am

Data from Great Briton with its multitude of offshore wind facilities around a relatively small island should give us insight into this phenomenon in the real world. One can at least postulate that this would affect the multiple wind farms that are planned on the east coast of the U.S.

Bryan A
Reply to  Rud Istvan
May 31, 2024 9:57 pm

Here it is in Google

http://www.google.com/maps/place/Horns+Rev+1+Offshore+Wind+Farm,+55%C2%B031%E2%80%B247%E2%80%B3N,+7%C2%B054%E2%80%B222%E2%80%B3E,+Horns+Rev,+East+North+Sea,+Denmark/@0,0,0a,13.1y/data=!4m6!3m5!1s0x464ac09953aa963f:0xa4b6fc86b2a2a375!8m2!3d55.5333333!4d7.9833333!16s%2Fg%2F1hb_g8d_2

The link didn’t link properly so you’ll need to copy paste all of it to see the photos from the beach…and they said those lone oil platforms were an eyesore.

Fran
Reply to  Rud Istvan
June 1, 2024 11:57 am

The photo is so dramatic that I assumed it was a photoshop job.

Reply to  John Hultquist
June 1, 2024 4:32 am

No it is not photoshopped

The wind system is in the shallow North Sea, humidity is high, 90% or more, because of frequent fogs.

The wind turbines take energy from the air, which cools it causing the water vapor to condense and become visible, the same way clouds are formed.

The next row of wind turbines takes even more energy from the air, etc.

The overall production of the wind system decreases up to 35%, so if the capacity factor normally is 0.40, it becomes 0.40 – 0.35 x 0.40 = 0.26, which is unprofitable

The Woke, Permanent, Ingrained, Bureaucracy has a “remedy” for that, by giving more subsidies “to make wind work”, which ends up screwing all ratepayers, lower their standard of living, make the U.K. less competitive in world markets, while illegal boat people from
all over, take the jobs from U.K. tax-paying workers.

The U.K. people is so screwed by its own leadership, who blame others, never themselves

Reply to  John Hultquist
June 1, 2024 5:25 am

It’s real. the windmill “hub” can pivot 360 degrees to be able to point directly into the wind. And if you have an array of windmills, there are 2 wind directions that will make each row or column of wind turbines align as in the photo. (i.e. if the array is rectangular, then the 2 wind directions are 90 degrees apart that align the rows of windmills to be perfectly inline) All other wind headings will offset from this alignment and not have as much wake issues with other turbines, but still has some.
(edit – there are 4 wind directions where a rectangular array of windmills will experience this alignment – if the array were oriented NS and EW, then wind from 0 and 180 degrees aligns, and wind from 90 and 270 degrees aligns)

Bil
Reply to  John Hultquist
June 1, 2024 9:21 am

Flew over it a couple of weeks ago and was surprised at the straightness of the lines

James Snook
May 31, 2024 11:22 am

Perhaps they will also get an insight into output degradation due to aging, which has been estimated to be a not insignificant 1.5% pa.but which is always ignored in the blind enthusiasm for increasing wind capacity.

James Snook
Reply to  James Snook
May 31, 2024 11:26 am

How silly of me, I misread the article and thought that they were going to instrument an actual wind farm but that would be far too instructive for academics to consider.

MarkW
Reply to  James Snook
May 31, 2024 2:26 pm

The article mentions them using both models and observations.

James Snook
Reply to  MarkW
June 1, 2024 4:11 am

“Using computer simulations and observational data of the atmosphere”.

Not observations of an actual wind farm, nor it seems is the planned research programme.
 

Reply to  James Snook
May 31, 2024 1:47 pm

I bet that 1.5% estimate doesn’t include an estimate of damage from storms- after all, severe, catastrophic, disastrous storms are supposed to greatly increase! 🙂

MarkW
Reply to  Joseph Zorzin
May 31, 2024 2:26 pm

I’m pretty sure the 1.5% is just normal wear and tear.

Iain Reid
Reply to  James Snook
May 31, 2024 11:33 pm

James,

Professor Gordon Hughes has done extensive studies in the economics of wind genertaion and he puts it as 3% and 4.5% for onshore and offshore respectively. I would expect that a new wind genertaor’s output deteriorates slowly at first and the output dimishes further the older the machine is, i.e. not linear but increasing with age as the blades’ profile wears due to erosion?
There are so many negatives to wind genertaion that I find it surprising there is such widespread use globally. Even the legislators must be waking up to their limitations, but there is no sign of this in the U.K..

Reply to  Iain Reid
June 1, 2024 4:52 am

The dead birds quickly become food for the remaining fishes

David Wojick
May 31, 2024 11:39 am

Wake effects can also be environmentally damaging including to whales. See my
https://www.cfact.org/2023/12/01/nas-study-raises-concern-over-offshore-wind-harming-endangered-whales/

The long distance energy loss reduces oxigenation of the water while the the near turbine turbulence creates a suspended sediment plume. Both are damaging. Both are ignored.

David Wojick
Reply to  David Wojick
May 31, 2024 1:03 pm

CFACT pointed to these adverse wake effects in comments to EPA re the air quality permit for the Dominion project.
See https://www.cfact.org/2024/03/04/cfact-says-offshore-wind-threatens-air-and-water-quality/

EPA ignored them. The Bidenistas can see no evil in offshore wind. Studious blindness.

Reply to  David Wojick
June 1, 2024 4:55 am

They are not blind and not stupid, but they are experts at lying, obfuscation and hiding the data, after decades of practice

don k
May 31, 2024 11:49 am

“The wake effect is particularly prominent offshore, because there are no houses or trees that stir up the air, which helps dissipate the wakes, said Rosencrans, the paper’s first author.”

Green solution — Not a problem. Just another minor speed-bump on the road to net zero. We’ll simply build a circle of housing around each turbine to stir up the air a bit. Will 10 story multifamily be sufficient or will we need something more ambitious?

David Wojick
Reply to  don k
May 31, 2024 1:04 pm

Floating houses to go with the coming wave of floating turbines.

Reply to  don k
May 31, 2024 1:49 pm

Good place for all those “migrants”. 🙂

Reply to  Joseph Zorzin
May 31, 2024 3:29 pm

“Newcomers”, please.

Reply to  Retired_Engineer_Jim
May 31, 2024 4:04 pm

Illegal aliens is the correct term.

jleefeldman
Reply to  don k
June 1, 2024 7:48 am

It will adversely impact communities of color therefore not an option.

Rud Istvan
May 31, 2024 12:00 pm

Years ago I redid EIA’s erroneous LCOE calculations comparing CCGT to onshore wind, using ERCOT actuals for grid standby and extra transmission. At that time ERCOT wind penetration was 10%. Result was CCGT about $58/MWh, onshore wind about $146—2.5x. Post is ‘True Cost of Wind’ over at Judith’s.

Even EIA says off shore wind is 3x on shore (probably a low ball, but let’s use it). Add in the 30% wake effect output reduction, and it is more than 4x. That makes off shore wind ~10 times more expensive than CCGT—$580/MWh LCOE. Insane.

Reply to  Rud Istvan
June 1, 2024 5:01 am

Don’t forget the cost of having that big federal and state bureaucracy of liars.
If that LCOE were added, wind and solar would sink like lead balloons

Randle Dewees
May 31, 2024 12:19 pm

The wake effect is particularly prominent offshore, because there are no houses or trees that stir up the air, which helps dissipate the wakes, said Rosencrans, the paper’s first author.

I would not want my home to be part of a wind farm system

Reply to  Randle Dewees
May 31, 2024 1:52 pm

I wonder about the sound of a large wind system. Just one will result in a wup, wup, wup sound, but how about thousands? What sort of “harmonies” or dissonance will that create? Is that considered at all at sea? Can that noise be detrimental to any wildlife? Can it be heard under water?

David Wojick
Reply to  Joseph Zorzin
May 31, 2024 4:44 pm

BidenNOAA claims operational noise is insignificant but Bob Stern calculates that a single turbine exceeds the marine mammals harassment threshold, which the hundred or more in a single facility will compound. Dominion’s just started Virginia facility is building 178 monsters.

Note that the huge 15 MW turbines now being installed off America have never been built before so there is no historic data. And in some places many facilities are in close proximity so a thousand compounding their noise is possible. This is why CFACT et al are suing for a cumulative impact assessment which the Bidenites refuse to do.

Reply to  David Wojick
June 1, 2024 5:03 am

The US east coast will become a fauna desert. No life food chain would be possible

I'm not a robot
Reply to  Randle Dewees
June 1, 2024 8:15 am

I believe wake effects are just as substantial for terrestrial wind turbines. If less than floaters; not much,

May 31, 2024 12:28 pm

This daming effect of a large wind farm also causes an end-run of wind around the flanks of, and over the farm diverting original pre-windfarm flow. The demand for airflow by a low pressure system in the lea of the farm won’t be denied. The deficit will simply be drawn from another direction.

This is in addition to a simple wake effect and would be of a similar magnitude. Another separate wake effect is the dehydration of the air in the wake, possibly creating a local drought over farmland further downwind.

The linear mind of most consensus researchers reflects a lack of awareness of the complexity of responses of the natural system to perturbation. This has been long recognized by thoughtful scientists as “unintended consequences” of an action and is the reason why geoengineering by the Clime Syndicate to solve a “linear imagined problem” is so strongly resisted by thoughtful scientists.

Reply to  Gary Pearse
May 31, 2024 1:54 pm

Just curious as I have no idea- but what causes the “dehydration of the air in the wake”?

Reply to  Joseph Zorzin
May 31, 2024 2:34 pm

The damming or drag effect causes some compression of high relative humidity air from the sea which results in premature raining or formation of dew formation drying the air.

Reply to  Gary Pearse
May 31, 2024 4:12 pm

And so we have the cause of “sea level rise”!
(“Attribution science” and all that.)

David A
Reply to  Gary Pearse
June 1, 2024 2:12 am

So wind turbines slow down heat dissipation. A not insignifigant means of earth shedding heat is circulation and convection – conduction. Slow down that process and you have warming, simply due to increasing the residence time of energy within the system.

Editor
May 31, 2024 12:44 pm

I consider the opening photo (taken in 2008!) the most important photo ever taken of wind turbines. While there are some nice simulations that show similar effects, seeing the 100% natural effects is priceless and helps confirm the simulations.

A paper about the site and photo is at https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/6/2/696

An article showing a simulation that suggests windbreaks may actually improve performance is at https://www.sciencenews.org/article/wind-farm-windbreak-turbine-speed-power-output

John Hultquist
Reply to  Ric Werme
May 31, 2024 1:49 pm

Thanks for the links. (and to the others up top)
I got DSL in the fall of 2008 and started reading at WUWT, CA, and a couple of others in September. I missed this photo if it appeared back then.

Reply to  Ric Werme
May 31, 2024 1:59 pm

In the 2nd link:

“windbreaks placed in front of each turbine can increase power output, new computer simulations suggest”

At what cost? Apparently, cost is irrelevant. How do you build a windbreak at sea? That’s the best the computer simulations can do- is suggest? Like, well, maybe, possibly? Medieval epicycles anyone?

Reply to  Ric Werme
May 31, 2024 3:10 pm

I’m surprised there is no mention in the first-linked paper of compression of the air as a factor in the humidity increase. The air mass entering the first row is decelerating as it progresses, compressing the slowed airmass down wind. You can see that the phenomenon reaches a uniform state virtually immediately from the front of the wind farm. There is no sign of a progression suggested by mixing mixing of layers. I accept that other factors are at work but a sudden compression would appear to be the primary cause.

strativarius
May 31, 2024 1:05 pm

The Wake Effect:

Mourning the loss….

Reply to  strativarius
May 31, 2024 1:34 pm

If only the woke would wake!

Bryan A
Reply to  Gunga Din
May 31, 2024 11:07 pm

The Woke Effect
Mourning the next generation

MiloCrabtree
Reply to  strativarius
May 31, 2024 1:43 pm

Well played!

Reply to  strativarius
May 31, 2024 2:00 pm

I’m mourning the loss of common sense here in Wokeachusetts, a deluded feminocracy.

Reply to  Joseph Zorzin
June 2, 2024 10:25 am

Womb people in charge?

lanceflake
May 31, 2024 1:33 pm

Understatement of the year:

wind and solar power tend to be variable

David Wojick
Reply to  lanceflake
May 31, 2024 4:48 pm

especially since both often do not exist.

Bryan A
Reply to  David Wojick
May 31, 2024 11:09 pm

…together…
The windless nights of summer

May 31, 2024 1:41 pm

“… the team estimated that the proposed wind farms could still supply approximately 60% of the electricity demand of the New England grid…”

oh, right- fur sure! As of now or as of net zero nirvana when everyone has an EV and heat pump, all remaining industries (not many) are “decarbonized”? When agriculture and forestry are decarbonized? When the airlines are decarbonized? When there are huge battery systems all over the region which need to be charged?

And if the entire region somehow became deSatanized— er, I mean, decarbonized- how much will that reduce the temperature of the planet? How many fewer hurricanes, tornadoes, forest fires, droughts and floods will there be? How much will it slow down the rise of the sea? And what will it cost? Easy to spit out that wind farms will supply 60% of the power needs of the region. Oh, but they have computer models!

Editor
Reply to  Joseph Zorzin
May 31, 2024 3:08 pm

As so many are discovering, a wind farms that supplies approximately 60% of the electricity demand is not much is use if 90% of the supply is when there is approximately no demand.

MarkW
May 31, 2024 2:24 pm

The bigger wind farms get, the less energy the “last” turbine installed will produce.
The reduction is 38% for current wind farms, however we will have to increase the size of these farms by a factor of at 30 to 50 times in order for wind to come close to providing enough power to power the current grid.

Between electrifying cars and all utilities will require the grid to at least double or triple in size.

Will there be any wind left by the time the last turbine is built?

jvcstone
Reply to  MarkW
May 31, 2024 3:37 pm

Making everyone eat a lot of beans daily should take care of that

Reply to  MarkW
May 31, 2024 3:43 pm

The more windmills are built and the flaws come to light, to keep them going, they’ll just need more of the hot air that got them built in the first place.

David A
Reply to  MarkW
June 1, 2024 2:16 am

So wind turbines slow down heat dissipation. A not insignifigant means of earth shedding heat is circulation and convection – conduction. Slow down that process and you have warming, simply due to increasing the residence time of energy within the system.

May 31, 2024 3:50 pm

Good thoughtful comments here.
I spent about 1/3 of my career in the development and testing of rotary-wing vehicles (helicopters and tilt-rotors). A wind turbine is a very large rotor designed to extract energy from the air and convert it to electrical energy. As a natural result of this, the air exiting the rotor disk contains less energy than the air entering the rotor disk. Therefore, the air passing through the wind farm has less and less energy. Duh!
Yes, there is the daming effect, and more energetic air is entrained into the flow through the wind farm, but the wind turbines operating downstream of other turbines will be operating in less energetic air. Consequently, the actual output of the wind farm will be significantly less than the theoretical maximum.
Physics is a bitch!
BTW, we have heard reports that the world is less windy then it has been. Could this be a result of the number of wind farms built to date?

Reply to  Retired_Engineer_Jim
May 31, 2024 4:02 pm

Yes, there is the daming effect …”

I think you meant “dampening”, but, yeah, “daming” works too! 😎

David A
Reply to  Retired_Engineer_Jim
June 1, 2024 2:17 am

Dont forget the warming effect. So wind turbines slow down heat dissipation. A not insignifigant means of earth shedding heat is circulation and convection – conduction. Slow down that process and you have warming, simply due to increasing the residence time of energy within the system.

Reply to  David A
June 2, 2024 10:33 am

Retained energy of the system, aka enthalpy, has been increasing since 1900, due to increased temperature of the atmosphere, which has many causes.

CO2 plays about a 0.6% RE role, WV at least 50 times greater, the rest is dry air warming up

Editor
Reply to  Retired_Engineer_Jim
June 1, 2024 8:33 pm

BTW, we have heard reports that the world is less windy then it has been. Could this be a result of the number of wind farms built to date?

I don’t believe so. While this may not apply to the whole world, the Blue Hill [Weather] Observatory south of Boston has documented a long term decline is wind there. I’m not fond of any of the suggestions why.

More recently, I’ve heard of long term changes in wind direction over Massachusetts Bay through my marine biologist sister.

The decline started in the late 1970s with the ending of the last cooling period and the crazy storminess then.

I mention a bit more about it at https://wermenh.com/wind/ .

Editor
Reply to  Ric Werme
June 1, 2024 8:36 pm

The latest Blue Hill graph is atcomment image

Note that each data point in their graphs of 10 and 30 year means are backed by 10 and 30 years of data.

Note also that the kinetic energy in the wind varies with the square of the speed, and note also that the energy that can be extracted varies with the cube because the volume of air intercepted per unit time is proportional to speed.

The wind speed now is only about 75% of what it was, so the wind energy is only 58% of what it was and 45% available to wind turbines! This assume all speeds have dropped to 75%, probably not a safe assumption, the cube law means that occasional high winds brings a lot of energy.

Reply to  Ric Werme
June 2, 2024 10:35 am

We need more graphs like this to shut up the wind folks.

If wind speed doubles, power is up 8 times, and if wind speed is half, power is 1/8 times. That is how the cube law works.

During gusty weather, as off the coat of New England, output, MW can go from say 1600 MW to 100 MW in just a few minutes.

The other generators have to work like hell to reduce and increase their outputs to maintain balance on the grid.

That is very inefficient, similar as with a car accelerating and slowing down, 24/7/365

antigtiff
May 31, 2024 4:01 pm

Don Quixote should dismount his horse and board a ship to get these windmills.

hiskorr
May 31, 2024 7:57 pm

The photo showing the visible “wake effect” is quite striking. Let me suggest something worth pondering: The air at ocean surface level, especially on summer days, is quite near WV saturation level The front rank of windmills extracts energy from the air, reducing both temperature and pressure (velocity). As the photo clearly shows, the air immediately behind the mill is above WV saturation level, causing condensation. Thus the air loses not only wind velocity energy, but also the considerable condensation energy before it reaches the next ranks of windmills. To make matters worse, this condensation energy is dumped out near sea level instead of following its normal pattern of rising to cloud level to produce the usual cloud effect of reflecting and radiating energy to space.

David A
Reply to  hiskorr
June 1, 2024 2:19 am

Bingo, as stated… “So wind turbines slow down heat dissipation. A not insignifigant means of earth shedding heat is circulation and convection – conduction. Slow down that process and you have warming, simply due to increasing the residence time of energy within the system.

Reply to  hiskorr
June 2, 2024 10:49 am

Condensing releases energy, but that is very little compared to what was extracted by the wind turbine, but it has a very large visible effect, like the contrails of a high up plane

Bob
May 31, 2024 8:40 pm

Wind and solar are not a substitute for fossil fuel and nuclear. Stop wasting our time money and resources. Build new fossil fuel and nuclear generators and remove all wind and solar from the grid.

Bryan A
Reply to  Bob
May 31, 2024 11:14 pm

Wind and Solar (+Battery … they won’t work well without battery) are excellent forms of generation IF (and only if) there’s no grid to connect to and Diesel must be imported
AND you aren’t in severe weather zones…
No Hail
No Tornados
No Hurricanes
No Wind storms

Iain Reid
Reply to  Bryan A
May 31, 2024 11:39 pm

Bryan,

only if you have an intermittent use for the electrcity. E.g., keeping the battery of a stand by generator charged.

Bryan A
Reply to  Iain Reid
June 1, 2024 9:35 am

Most Off the Grid users tend to be minimalistic and burn one lamp at a time … perhaps recharge a cell phone or two. Likely listens to radio but not TV…Runs a fan but not AC…Has a wood stove for heat and cooking and perhaps a wood fired outdoor oven…And lives in a house of less than 750 sq ft (25’X30′ or so).
They would likely, they if they owned one, recharge an EV from a station tied to the grid

June 1, 2024 2:28 am

The Three Laws of Thermodynamics

You can’t “win”; that is, getting more out than you put in is a physical impossibility.
You can’t break even; that is, no matter what you do you will will always have loss in your endeavors.
You can’t avoid playing the game; that is, refusing to participate simple means everything rots around you!

June 1, 2024 5:20 am

Duh, this points to how utterly ridiculous, insane and incompetent are the people actually producing and installing wind farms. Before one even contemplates the builds, one should have done some reality checks with a view to the bigger picture. I am not just talking about how wind turbines affect other downstream turbines, but rather the more important factor of how extracting energy from the wind will seriously affect weather, by messing with the transport of heat, water etc around the globe! (assuming you erect enough of them to replace hydrocarbon fueled energy generation)

Installing huge numbers of wind turbines can and will have disastrous consequences to rainfall and cause major shifts in storm patterns. The fact the negative consequences which should have been apparent to even half brained engineers is only coming about after so many have been erected, is testament to how utterly stupid mankind has become.

hiskorr
Reply to  D Boss
June 1, 2024 5:49 am

How right you are! In particular, if you induce sea-level condensation, then the condensation, itself, reduces local temperature and pressure which produces more condensation and more local turbulence, as we see in the photo. The effect is the same as we see in “vapor trails” as aircraft wings (like turbine blades) extract enough energy (lift) from the air to cause condensation which then perpetuates. It’s why the “vapor trails” last so long.

rbcherba
June 1, 2024 7:54 am

Wind turbines remove energy from the atmosphere and the climate activists want to install many thousands more. Being an old engineer, I wonder about the unintended consequences on the atmosphere and the climate. I’ve never seen an article on how much energy we’re removing or how this influences weather and climate in the vicinity of wind farms and possibly worldwide atmospheric energy — and I’m not smart enough to make the calculation myself. I just remember something about every action having a reaction and that you can never do just one thing.

June 1, 2024 8:10 am

It’s interesting how it was the “power outage” that killed 250 people in Texas in 2021, not the cold. If the grid had underproduced in the summer, no doubt it would have been the “heat and climate” that killed them, not the power production apparatus.

ferdberple
June 1, 2024 10:27 am

By removing energy from the wind, turbines will change the long term climate. Windy areas will no longer be windy.

Ultimately, eliminating the cooling breeze in summer will drive temperatures hotter. Eventually we will burn natural gas for power to allow us to take down the turbines and restore the climate.

ferdberple
June 1, 2024 10:29 am

Racing sailboats, if you end up downwind of the fleet your chances of winning drop to zero.

Reply to  ferdberple
June 2, 2024 10:53 am

Unless you tack away into a better wind.
The good guys know how to read the wind
Do that a few times and at least 90% of the fleet will be behind you.
I raced sailboats for more than 30 years on Long Island Sound, known for its shifty winds

ferdberple
June 1, 2024 10:36 am

If wind energy was practical it would be in widespread use by ships.

Small craft use sails because they cannot carry enough fuel to reach their destination. For large ships this is not an issue because volume goes up as the cube of the length.

June 3, 2024 4:45 am

Hm…the “wake effect” of these turbines is significant enough to impact the power generation of the entire wind farm and perhaps even reduce the power output of other nearby wind farms…but it doesn’t seem to occur to them to wonder what types of effects this “wake effect” may be having on local weather patterns and how those effects may impact the larger area climate?

Verified by MonsterInsights