Thank You, unidentified avatar, for your great contribution to airborne wind energy. 
Why does any comment in this conversation keep getting repurposed to "Slow Chat III? And why is there no personal accountability for the virtual avatar creature behind all this arbitrary confusion?
The reason we constantly deal with âthe bird questionâ is the average windidiot out there has nothing to say about wind energy except the one thing they can understand: birds could be hit. Thats it! They donât know of anything else they could possibly discuss about wind turbines. This especially includes politicians! What are they going to talk about, what voltage the turbines operate at? What airfoils they are using and why? Their method of overspeed protection? Power purchase agreements? They are like children, and can only discuss concepts mentally available to children, so, itâs all about birds!
This is great for wannabe AWE efforts sometimes - kind of depends⊠Could help them temporarily by getting access to whatever ânew test siteâ they may dream of using, under the idea that higher flight will be above where birds fly, unless someone objects, and if only they could plod through the endless paperwork demanded by the same ignorant and tyrannical authorities who mandate low carbon energy solutions in the first place
OK guys, I just got another article from MSN, announcing a supposed discovery of a natural hydrogen deposit under Lorraine, France, stating its value at a âstaggeringâ $92 Trillion.
France Uncovers the Worldâs Largest Hydrogen Deposit, Worth a Staggering $92 Trillion
First let me say, again, weâre back to simple math, and as Iâve always warned, hydrogen is an abysmally inefficient means of energy storage. The supposed âgeniusesâ of the world have only now started to realize this, so their latest hydrogen-hype-fest is all about natural hydrogen deposits, which they say, if found, would be a - wait for it - âa game-changerâ.
Now as Iâve also pointed out, any article that uses that term âgame-changerâ for new energy ideas is most likely an outright lie.
The term âgame-changingâ is found just six (6) words into the article: " France has just made a game-changing discovery in the quest for clean energy . Beneath the soil of Folschviller , in the Moselle region, scientists have uncovered a staggering 46 million tons of natural hydrogen âa hidden treasure with the potential to revolutionize the energy transition."
This article states that this deposit below France amounts to around half of the current world annual production of hydrogen (almost all from natural methane gas, a byproduct of oil drilling). Since the world hydrogen annual production is worth about $160-170 billion, they have overstated the supposed value of this supposed underground deposit by 1000 times. Thatâs all, just a thousand times.
Nothing to see here folks, keep moving - itâs now a completely acceptable for a magazine to lie by exaggerating something by 1000 times - because, well, with the planet at stake, some lying may be necessary, even if it serves only to steer people in a wrong direction that will do no good no matter what. Itâs all part of the current mental derangement.
This alleged deposit was said to have been found by accident - the driller were searching for natural gas (methane).
Now me? Iâve always thought, from day one of the current hype-fest over underground hydrogen, that if it existed, weâd already know about it from oil, gas, and water drilling. And now, now that this hydrogen-hype-fest has hit the press, SUDDENLY an attempt to find natural gas finds millions of tons of underground naturally occurring hydrogen.
Yeah, sure. for a century of drilling for oil, gas, and water, there was never such a discovery, until just when a natural hydrogen hype-fest hits the internet, suddenly, someone just happens to accidentally find such a deposit. Which would be gone quickly, if it even existed, if used even for mundane industrial uses, let alone to replace other hydrocarbon fuels.
And it might be worth $80 billion at todayâs prices, NOT $92 trillion!
Personally, I doubt that such a large deposit of natural hydrogen even exists, just because this âstoryâ has all the typical earmarks of one more âgreenâ lie, and I do not believe there is a future for naturally-found hydrogen to ever find a significant place in our civilization, any more than I believe energy storage using concrete blocks lifted by winches will ever find a significant place in our power grids. Sounds like just more total B.S. to me. one more symptom of the derangement, just as âred spotsâ are a symptom of chicken-pox. OK enough for now - all is clear - you can go back to sleep!
Anyway, i only bring this up since weâre in a subject here that has, so far, turned out to be almost 100% BS, so we need to recognize BS when we see it, so we don;t fall for it!
Doug this topic has nothing to do with Airborne Wind Energy as far as I can see
Sure everyone gets it
Donât believe the hype. (I think Americans say âDrink the cool aidâ?)
Do the maths. (Yes thereâs an âsâ)
Hi Roddy:
Well, to start with, over here anyway, there is no âsâ in âmathâ, and thereâs also no âstâ in âwhileâ, and âKool-Aidâ is spelled with a âKâ. Also, we have no âCrickeyâ except by a few imported Brits.
And the nonexistent industry of mining supposed naturally-occurring deposits of hydrogen dovetails exactly with the nonexistent âindustryâ of AWE. Rather than ever actually being adopted, AWE has been relegated to the all-talk format, by a few remaining stragglers, still chatting about their idle dreams and ill-considered speculations, on the internet, often espousing silly ideas like towing ships around with kites, using underwater propellers to drive generators to electrolyze water, to produce hydrogen as an energy storage medium.
Itâs all fantasy chit-chat by know-nothings who canât even comprehend the abysmal performance of hydrogen as a medium of energy storage in the first place, as even a starting point for their ill-considered, off-target thoughts.
After decades of a promised âhydrogen economyâ by people who couldnât be bothered to even apply a moment of junior-high-school-level math, this latest mini-hype-fest over supposed natural hydrogen deposits is just a desperate rescue attempt at keeping the now-disproven hydrogen âstoryâ alive in any way.
Since AWE was supposed to be âa game-changerâ, this topic forms a good place of comparison, just so that we can each make sure we arenât merely the next animal thinking weâll be the first lucky one to successfully negotiate the solid-appearing surface of the La Brea Tar Pits!
Hi Guys! Hereâs todayâs bit of deranged, utter nonsense:
Ocean Depths Hold the Key to Energy Storage | Watch
I just started watching this latest bit of naive insanity from âscientistsâ in Germany and MIT: Concrete spheres with 10-foot-thick walls to hold a vacuum(?), placed almost a half-mile underwater, for energy storage.
Seawater is first pumped out of the spheres, leaving a vacuum inside(?) then allowed to flow back into the spheres through a turbine, which drives a generatorâŠ
Nevermind the obscene amount of greenhouse-gas-generating concrete required - âscientistsâ have finally realized that the only way wind and solar can make much of a difference is to first uncreate their just-created energy, then re-create it again for later use, after the sun has set and the wind has ceased blowing. That should logically result in electricity at 3x the original cost.
So the plot thickens. But it gets worse: At time = 1:20, they admit it would not be profitable without âsubsidiesâ, indicating it is a loser from the start. At time = 1:35, it claims âthe design capacity of such a sphere would be 20 MegaWattsâ. But they fail to specify for how long? 5 minutes? â20 MegaWattsâ is a measure of power, and power is âenergy per unit timeâ, NOT energy per se. Youâd need to know the time duration to calculate actual energy stored. So they donât even understand the basic units of energy vs power.
At time = 2:00, they claim there are sufficient âsitesâ, worldwide, to produce 800 TeraWatts âper hourâ, but again, they canât speak on the topic, because again, they don;t even understand the units of their supposed statistics. To say âWatts per hourâ carries no meaning in the context they are using it.
âWattsâ is already a unit of energy per unit time. What they perhaps might intend to say is TeraWatt-hours, which is Watts MULTIPLIED BY hours, NOT Watts DIVIDED BY hours⊠(Can you say "idiots, idiots, idiots?)
Yet they elaborate, saying âthis is more than Germany consumes in a yearââŠ
WHAT does Germany consume in a year? 600 TeraWatts per hour??? Again, the very units themselves donât even make any sense!!!
Who would believe this utter drivel? Thereâs not even anything TO believe, because the statements themselves are nonsensical! The âjournalistsâ are as ignorant as always, not even having any idea what they are even talking about! Well, politicians are pretty dumb when it comes to technical stuff, right? And they control funding, soâŠ
At time = 3:00, âThe Dutch came up withâ their own version, magically WITHOUT needing any concrete storage tanks. They propose to fill a 20-million-liter tank, below the seabed, with âpressurized waterâ - do they mean âcompressedâ water? What are they even talking about??? I think they mean that seawater at ambient pressure for that depth would be pumped OUT of the underground tank, to a "bladder, above it, which would then be allowed to flow back in through a turbine, connected to a generator, you knowâŠ
Once again, the âcapacityâ of the reservoir is quoted at â10 MegaWattsâ - but for how long? One minute? "MegaWatts is just a POWER capacity, NOT an ENERGY capacity. They of course leave out the time, which would be required to ascertain the ENERGY capacity.
Oh yeah, and the âestimated service lifeâ is about 20 years - funny how every proposed technology always has an estimated service life of 20 years, isnât lt?
And they never explain WHY they even NEED âa bladderâ, since the water would be at ambient pressure for its depth anyway. So the plastic âbladderâ is going to last 20 years?
And speaking of âbladdersâ, what happened to the very similar idea of using âbladdersâ to store CO2 at ambient atmospheric pressure in an âenergy domeâ, to be used as a compressed storage medium, then returned to the âdomeâ for storage after use? What happened to THAT âGame-changerâ ? Hmmm, havenât heard much about THAT âbreakthroughâ lately, now have you? Why not? I mean, did you ever take it seriously? As I recall, you did. So where is this âgeniusâ idea today? One more tombstone in the graveyard of idiotic, nonworkable pseudo-ideas?
Anyway, at time = 4:00, the video continues its outright lying. to promise the first commercial use of the Dutch underwater tank/bladder idea âwill be built in 2025â Hey wait, itâs already 2025? My, my, how time flies! So where is the working system? Hmmm, more lying huh? Could that be possible???
Speaking of underwater bladders and airbags for energy storage, at about time = 4:40, weâre introduced to âHydrostoreâ from Canada - using underwater airbags in Lake Ontario - my old sailing and canoeing venue - to store compressed air, to be run thru turbines later, to extract whatever energy is left, after the hot compressed air gives up much, if not most, of its energy, to heating the ambient water. Hmmm⊠another great idea!
Around time = 5:00, they SHOW one of the bags - maybe 12 feet in diameter. They go on to explain that the âpowerâ of the installation "is only 660 kiloWatt-hours - but kWh is a unit of ENERGY, NOT POWER. Once again, they donât even understand the basic units of the subject they purport to report on! Looking at that 12-foot diameter airbag, Iâd hazard to guess the real power is 660 Watts - period, and it might last for 5 minutes or so. More likely 30 seconds.
They go on to nonsensically declare that "within an hour, Toronto Hydro can provide energy to up to 25% of the city;s population - um did they mean Hydrostore, or Toronto Hydro, which provides conventional hydroelectric power to both Canada AND to the U.S.? âWithin an hourâ? Within an hour from what???
So they have an energy storage system that big, and weâve never heard of it before? Once again, I think they are just simply LYING. Meanwhile they are still flashing that figure of â660 kWâ on the screen - enough to power maybe 330 homes⊠And for what duration, a few seconds?
At time = 6:40, they conclude: "The most important conclusion we want to make in this video is that there are solutions. (But they havenât shown any real solutions!) Then they meander away, to divert our attention to the oft-debunked âGravity Batteriesâ using stacked concrete blocks and cranes - of course! Why stop the nonsense at inadvisable air bladders and water bags? Letâs generate more CO2 for concrete production, for a provably unworkable stacking crane system with limited output!
OK so I have to say, this all reminds me of AWE, where after 15 years of endless hype and story-telling, thereâs still nothing in regular operation. And we can rely on Pierre to point out that âSkysails generated over 100 kW!â Hi Pierre!
Now letâs see, when was that supposed milestone achieved - ten (10) years ago? And nothing since? Sounds like more of the same to me!
Anyway, just relaying on todayâs clean and green energy ânewsâ, for your dining and dancing pleasure!
I call BS on this @dougselsam
Thereâs loads of continuing progress in AWES
Do you follow any of the Airborne Wind Europe crew on LinkedIn âŠ
Thatâs where they social media - Not here on a forum where theyâre going to get harangued
Sure the progress (Especially mine on Kite Turbines) is slower than any of us would ideally like
But itâs HARD WORK
Yeah, sure Roddy.
Iâm pretty sure if, after 15 years of exaggerated hype, anyone was powering even one single home with AWE, weâd have heard all about it!
Todayâs entry: this article covers a couple of ânewâ âurbanâ wind energy solutions, citing the Netherlands as the source for such incredible âadvancementsââŠ
Silent Residential Wind Turbine Challenges Solar Panels in Global Renewable Energy Market
90% of average, everyday people reading it will believe every word, whereas, of course, âreal wind peopleâ will, as usual, immediately scoff at the âbeen-there, done thatâ ridiculousness of it all.
Basically, such promotions amount to deception, or at best, a source of humor, but the real joke is on the buyer, who will never see any benefit, and instead be left wondering how to dispose of their worthless piece of junk.
Bill Gates is backing off (downsizing)
his support of âBreakthrough Energyâ (Ventures?)
Bill Gates Gives Up on Saving the Planet: A Turning Point for Environmentalism
It seems that perhaps he is reducing his consumption of that particular flavor of Kool-Aid.
Wait - here he is hanging out with me and my girlfriend:
Do you think the shredded turbine was advertised at âtyphoon-proofâ? How about âable to keep producing full power in 162 mph windsâ?
Donât I remember Roddy living there, or am I misremembering?
He probably knows right where this is.
Well, a very large dinosaur footprint in clay has resurfaced after a hundred million years or so - Geez to think the clay was that stable!
Amazing.
Anyway, this area was once part of North America - and hey, the latest I heard is we might take it back! Just kidding. But you never know. Theyâd probably rename the Atlantic Ocean first, as American Ocean. But actually they donât have to - itâs already named after Atlantis, which is the old-school name for America.
Anyway, this news story makes me wonder if these dinosaurs ever tried Airborne Wind Energy. Did any dinosaurs ever use tools? Make tools? Do you think AWE will leave any direct evidence of itself, that will be readable in a hundred million years? Will there be anyone around to find it? Well, again, we never knowâŠ
Birds are said to be the closest descendants of dinosaurs.
And also:
And be careful with the topic itself: it risks flying to other regions.
Good point Pierre:
I think Joe Faust, famous hang-gliding promoter, probably would have said hang gliding âis reallyâ AWE, and I can say, once youâve hang-glided, you realize birds act just like hang gliders, and are even soaring in thermals quite a bit of the time. (Copy-cats) They had it easy - even a low-energy reptile could fly, since the atmosphere was twice as thick. Now itâs all subducted - buried underground, but weâre slowly pumping it back up! Bringing a nearly dead planet back to life!
What seems amazing to me is the lack of application of high-school-level math to so many of these âpress-release breakthroughsâ.
A couple of examples, gravity storage, and compressed-air vehicles, are covered in the following article:
âIt makes no senseâ: DTU professor questions gravity batteries | IngeniĂžren
Energy storage using concrete blocks, sandbags, etc. (solids) lifted then lowered by electric winches installed at structures or subterranean holes, having a certain height.
Remembering how the AWE wannabe community placed so much emphasis on âpress-releasesâ and âarticlesâ, compare these publications regarding AWE to similar ones regarding gravity energy storage and compressed-air vehicles.
In either case, it seems the problem is not applying simple math to discern viability. One might notice, we seldom see any articles promoting compressed-air vehicles these days - what happened? What changed? Someone did the math?
Lifting concrete blocks to store energy? Is that high-school-level math too hard for todayâs professional engineers and investors?
While pumped hydro makes sense, that is because there is a huge weight in all that water, using a pre-existing height difference inherent in the landscape.
With compressed-air cars, the range is extremely limited, and the efficiency is low. We donât see any compressed-air cars on the road after all that hype of perhaps a decade ago, now do we?
Whatever you want to call the lack of logic being applied to gravity energy storage, or maybe even kite-reeling(?), which also has not found any use thusfar, it would seem to be some form of outright mental derangement, not typical of either engineers or investors.
There must be some extreme psychological pressure to coax both engineers and investors to abandon or ignore their main traditional tool: math. I will leave it to the reader to determine what the source of such derangement might be.
Amazing to watch the newbies âdiscoverâ the basic forces in wind energy systems.
Real rotors of that size have been photographically-documented to bury their (real, high-performance) blades into plywood roofing materials.
Wheee! 3-D printing!
Check out the stock performance of market-leader 3-D systems:
3D Systems Corporation (DDD) Stock Price, News, Quote & History - Yahoo Finance
You can see:
Today the stock is worth just $2.07/share
Meanwhile, over the last 12 months, the company has lost $1.97/share
(negative annual income, about equal to the share price)
Click on the 5-year chart to see that, had you invested at the peak of ~$48/share in 2021, youâd have lost 96% of your money by now.
So much for fads. Not that thereâs nothing to 3-D printing, but the hype was way ahead of the actual, near-term promise. This company, that had acquired other â3-D printingâ companies, is well set to go bankrupt, at this rate.
For anyone naive enough to believe any of this incessant nonsense, here are two more âalternativeâ wind energy concepts, courtesy of MSN. I can see how the electrostatic one might generate âinterestâ (just maybe not so much actual electricity), but itâs hard to believe the spectre of grown men, seemingly in all seriousness, fooling around with the oscillating fiberglass polesâŠ
Revolutionary Innovation Challenging The Future Of Wind Energy | Watch
If youâve ever had some favorable coverage of your supposed wind energy âRevolutionary Innovationâ, realize the sad state of others who enjoy similar attention.
As I realized early-on, either you have an economical, reliable energy solution⊠or you donât! Or⊠maybe⊠just maybe⊠you have the essence of one, but youâre just ânot quite there yetâ.
Then again, thereâs always that La Brea Tar Pits analogyâŠ