Comments on: Japan To Build World’s Largest Offshore Wind Farm Near Fukushima

By: rodri Marceli

rodri Marceli — Mon, 28 Jan 2013 09:01:09 +0000

Very stranger project … Specialist on TVprogrammer discussion:- We don`t have BREEZE for power to move turbines … Hmmmm … And , only two locals have windstorm over 40km/h …

By: DKKEwil

DKKEwil — Sun, 20 Jan 2013 17:45:24 +0000

@rnbram: Do you live in denial or something?
What happens when a reactor overheats, well Chernobyls a bit of an problematic area, i’d say. And what about the nuclear waste, yes dig it down for centuries and years to come.. such a smart thing to do yes. Not that i’m a hippie or anything, but windmills will never get anyone killed when they’re faulty, nor will solar panels.

By: Minwoo Kim

Minwoo Kim — Fri, 18 Jan 2013 03:10:24 +0000

Obama’s energy policy is right. Japan’s FiT in July is among the highest in the world. Japan’s FiT is shaking the renewable energy market. New solutions will be showed in Japan. This is it! Floating wind turbine is one of the best solutions for USA and UK. U.K has more install places around its shores than any other in the world. USA has Atlantic Coast. As you know, Every year Some typhoons arrive Japan. The typhoon has strong wind. Floating wind turbines must have constructed to resist typhoons. So they have to reduce vibration to install floating wind turbines on the sea. Because, it makes many kinds of problems! It’s increasing the durability problem of floating wind turbine. Vibration’s caused by wind, waves and external forces. New Floating Body Stabilizer for floating wind turbines has been created in South Korea. The Floating Body Stabilizers generate drag force immediately when floating wind turbines are being rolled, pitched and yawed on the water. Recently, this Floating Body Stabilizers have been used to reduce vibration of floating solar panels in South Korea. You can see New Floating Body Stabilizer videos in YouTube. http://youtu.be/O2oys_YHhCc, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nA_xFp5ktbU&feature=youtu.be.

By: rnbram

rnbram — Fri, 18 Jan 2013 02:13:06 +0000

@xsimpletunx good point, though it’s a detail.

By: xsimpletunx

xsimpletunx — Thu, 17 Jan 2013 22:01:36 +0000

If the wind farm has the capacity of 1 GW, that is not enough to even replace 1 nuclear reactor. Even if they built one of these giant wind farms a year, they wouldn’t accomplish the stated goal by 2040. Or are the numbers stated in your article incorrect?

By: rnbram

rnbram — Thu, 17 Jan 2013 19:50:23 +0000

What will happen to the turbine structures if a tsunami came through. Nothing? I wonder if the cost of ensuring that level of safety for the wind turbines would be all that different from improving tsunami & earthquake protection for nuclear plants.

Keep in mind that the Fukushima nuclear _disaster_ caused no deaths, no noticeable radiation damage to any individuals, and radiation that entered the ocean (already radioactive) and atmosphere quickly dissipates. To get an idea of natural radioactive levels see http://www.physics.isu.edu/radinf/natural.htm
Then appreciate how enormous the ocean is, as a diluting factor.

Some are making news by reporting the increase in radiation as it spreads across the ocean… but they do not put it in the perspective of existing radiation. The idea that Fukushima radiation in the ocean is some sort of catastrophe is hyperbolic scaremongering for political purposes, not reason.