I’ve said it before: One of the best ways to get Green – is to make Green$. Here’s another example.

Nordic Windpower is excited to launch its global business in North America, the highest-growth area for new wind turbine installations, and in California, a leader in renewable energy,” said Mr. Steve Taber, CEO of Nordic Windpower.”

“The cost economy realized in the manufacture, transport and installation of a lighter, simpler turbine is passed on to customers in the low purchase price. Nordic’s turbines have operated with unmatched reliability over a decade, even in the harsh conditions in Sweden.”

The manufacturing plant location is now being decided, with multiple states seeking to attract the business for economic and leadership reasons.

Nordic is successful in Scandanavia and Europe – and is out to grow worldwide. Their business model includes building factories where they wish to sell.

OK by me.



  1. moss says:

    I realize the Post is about economics and progress. The arguments about 2 vs. 3 blades should be part of the discussion when it comes to siting – especially whole windfields.

    Following the link to the article – then to Nordic’s site – their solution to the argument of more stability via rotor design (3-blade) is their hydraulic yaw system (for 2-blades).

    I’ll bet what will end up being the equation decider, then, will be how much of a factor is the local Audubon Society in your state! Generally, 2-bladed rotors are set up to turn faster than 3-bladed rotors. So, the latter are preferred in flyways.

  2. James Hill says:

    NIMBY.

  3. Angel H. Wong says:

    #2

    You couldn’t said it better 🙂

  4. Jägermeister says:

    #2, #3

    There’s plenty of places were wind power could be put without bothering too many people… 😉

  5. moss says:

    Actually, as prices continue to move down – as part of a mixed package of solar/wind power – I want to put one in my backyard. Not 1 MW; but, the one I’m looking at is rated at 1.8 KW.

    Triple blades, swept path of 12′ diameter. My cost installed ~$8500.

  6. RBG says:

    I have this image of the rare Ivory-billed Woodpecker flying into the blades. Somebody stop me.

    RBG

  7. #4 You underestimate the lunacy of true eco-nuts…

    Example from my “backyard”, Long Island NY: Project have been proposed to build a farm of these way out in the ocean. Perfect wind conditions, empty location (area not even of interest to the fisherman). Well, eco-nuts killed it. Two “major” complains: “will kill birds”; “will spoil the pristine view”. They won heavily! Same two arguments can be imposed anywhere… (It is empty desert? No, it is pristine view).

  8. moss says:

    Do us all a favor, #7, don’t include your selfish, middle class neighbors into eco-nuts just because they whine about “pristine views”. These hypocrites wouldn’t know pesticides from prawns. They just used the right buzzwords to allow politicians a copout from thought or conscience.

    It just fits your own prejudice.

    Happens lots of places. James has it right – though he might not wish to admit it: NIMBY. It’s usually a middle-class disease. They can afford it. They think.

  9. grog says:

    NIMBY

    there are so many ways in which we could be working to rid ourselves from the hard-core pollution of coal and from being entangled in strife-torn oil-producing geopolitical regions

    so why don’t we? because no one is willing to sacrifice anything

    such is the doom of america — yaaaay!

  10. Todd Anderson, III says:

    Dear NIMBY folks,

    I have to factor in acid rain from the coal-fired plant upriver when fertilizing my lawn and adjusting my pool chemistry.

    So do you.

    With coal-fired power-plants, it IS in your backyard whether or not you believe me.

    So maybe give something less polluting a try?

    WtWTTCH?

    Todd

  11. Mister Mustard says:

    >>It’s usually a middle-class disease.

    You mean like Walter Cronkite and the rest of the spoiled brats on Martha’s Vineyard, or Ted Kennedy would actually have to LOOK at the ghastly windmills?

    Knock off the anti-bourgeois nonsense.

  12. KVolk says:

    I would rather see alternatives that would give eveyone their own independant power supply. Get away from the big central supplier of energy.

  13. hhopper says:

    I would love to have a wind generator. However, I live in a deed restricted neighborhood. No way in hell!

  14. Rob says:

    #13, actually, in Hell, wind power is quite common,and there are windmills everywhere (all that heat makes for a lot of air movement). Trouble is, all new-comers to Hell appear in the form of birds. Only after surviving a whole day in the middle of a raging windmill farm do you get upgraded to full-fledged Tortured Soul status.

  15. joshua says:

    This bird bullshit is just that. It’s just not happening. Yes, birds have been killed, but not in the kinds of numbers that some enviromentalists claim. It’s just like any area of improvement in our enviroment, the small froup that goes beyond the fringe keep knocking it, until nothing gets done.
    There is a fringe element of the enviromental movement that will not be happy until we all are walking and carrying our goods with us on our backs. They are committed to basically stopping all technical advancement and to go retro. No cars, electricity, nothing.

    The bad thing is, a lot of groveling politico’s fall for there BS thinking they can win votes and be popular. Instead they are just the tools to stop progress(more so than usual).

    I have hiked all over the Highlands, where windfarms are in place, and they actually add to the spectacular scenery. And the locals, who usually supported the farms say they don’t cause any of the problems the NIMBY’S claimed. Scotland is on course to have 30% wind power by 2014……thats pretty good.

  16. bobbo says:

    15—I was on the borderline of commenting. Tough public policy is making the compromise between two competing interests. I’m sure there are some places where birds get killed ((while back one of about 50 Condors in the world got killed, in another place a rare Hawk got killed)) and other places where they don’t. Where they do kill birds, seems to me the issue is how much are the birds worth compared to the energy we need.

    I thought there were “vertical blade designs” that eliminated bird kill? If not, why not stop fighting and design such a thing?

    Anyhoo, it is suspect to frame a policy based on the opposition is wrong or has no position. Again, you were on the borderline until you posted “I have hiked all over the Highlands, where windfarms are in place, and they actually add to the spectacular scenery.” Yawp—just like smokestacks do in my area. Things of beauty like that excellent tire dump down the road, so many shades of gray with the sunlight refracting off the metal shards.

  17. hhopper says:

    Many birds get killed flying into windows. I’ve seen lots of dead birds near a microwave dish that broadcasts from a TV studio to the transmitter. I guess if they fly in line with the beam, they get cooked. My point is, this is not a reason not to have wind generators.

  18. b says:

    17—You make my point. If you don’t admit that killing birds is a reason not to have generators/transmitters then you are not “actually engaged” in the debate. If this is semantics and you meant “on balance the few number of bird kills is worth it” then we can talk.

    I suppose killing pigeons in New York is not a problem, and I even would accept a position of Killing all the California Condors if “on balance” it was worth it ((majority vote?, special interest legislation??))

    If Global Warming, lack of crop genetic variability, nuclear exchange, escaped virus does not get us===I see no way that most vertebrate species other than man,rats and other garbage breeders, and pets will exist outside of zoos. I guess it will only add to that spectacular view.

  19. Angel H. Wong says:

    Maybe if you tell the half drunken housewives that the wind turbines have a French design they might be into it.

  20. cheapdaddy says:

    Look, the early windmills designs allowed birds to built nests atop them. Fledglings taking their first flights ran into the spinning blades. Newer designs discourage nesting and spin slower. Even the Sierra Club has worked to dispel the false stories that opponents of projects like Cape Wind on Cape Cod continue to spread.

    These windmills, which are as visible as a radio tower at a distance, are spaced hundreds of feet apart and can be avoided by migrating birds. (They’re apparently smarter than most politicians.) These same politicians also oppose LNG tanks, power lines and cell and wifi towers. Any guess what their opinion of ethanol refineries, storage and distribution facilities will be?

  21. Nth of the 49th says:

    #5 Moss

    $8500, no shit, that’s very affordable. Hmmm I got a lot a room out back, got any more info?


0

Bad Behavior has blocked 6873 access attempts in the last 7 days.