The wake effect: As wind farms expand, some can ‘steal’ each others’ wind

Wind rights, as presently constructed, are more analogous to air rights than water rights. They convey the right to use a space versus resource.

Thanks for posting this. Water rights and who gets priority was the first thing that came to mind. The thought of “wind augmentation plans” is fun to think about.

From the article:

"you can't steal something that can't be owned - and nobody owns the wind"

How about hurricane-chasing drone ships full of turbines?

Kill two bird with one stone! Sap hurricane energy and turn it into renewable energy.

The amount we can extract is tiny compared to the volume of energy put into the air every day by the sun. At a certain scale it could definitely become an issue and change the local environment and reduce wind speeds, we have seen that with some of the biggest solar farms where the air temperature is changed and the shade increases vegetation and wildlife so presumably wind speed reductions will have some effect. But compared to the CO2e it saves from being emitted its absolutely worth it currently.

Yes kinda, although even very large wind farms are small compared to:

1) the total height of the atmosphere and

2) other natural obstructions like cliffs and hills

What happens in surface level winds (which is where windmills operate) are actually controlled by the upper level winds. Obstructing surface level winds has local effects (these are also called "terrain effects" since this is usually caused by geography).

Theoretically, if you were to cover the earth in windmills, this would have a serious effect on surface level winds, where they would generally be blocked by a nearby windmill. This would be especially noticeable at sea where you otherwise don't get terrain effects. The vast majority of the atmosphere (everything above a few hundred feet) would continue to be unaffected, though, and would continue to be driven by ground and sea surface temperatures and the Coriolis effect, mostly.

In terms of negative effects of wind farms on birds... reduced wind speed is truly the least of their concerns.

Wind farms do have meteorological impacts (e.g. onshore ones slightly dry the soil behind them). It is measurable but insignificant.

That's what I was wondering -- couldn't this have some long-term effects on the climate of the area? In its current form, there is probably very little impact. But I imagine as wind farms become more common and dot the country-side... what does this do?

[flagged]

That book title is not easily googleable!

Mine, by Kim Faulk, 2022 Synopsis: “ Family is everything... I always knew my father was a cold, heartless bastard.

But the moment he took Elle Castlemaine and her pathetic daughter into our home, barely a month after our mom died, he unleashed something savage inside me.”

I’m guessing it’s not that one!

We have been here before with the waterwheels that powered the mills at the start of the Industrial Revolution, allegedly.

Allegedly this was a problem in the Cotswolds, UK, when the woollen industry was where the big money was. I only know this from school history classes, not from Google, hence my use of the word 'allegedly'. Allegedly, mills placed upstream slowed the flow to existing mills downstream, leading to disputes.

In time, mills were built with big chimneys, meaning coal. But why would you go for expensive coal that had to be transported when you had 'free' power from the river? It has been hypothesised that drought may have played a part in this, not the over use of waterwheels.

Classical example is rivers crossing two countries, and the country upstream installing dams...

Most climate change advocates naively believe that because an energy resource in renewable it must be infinite too. Simple energy balance over a given area will show how much extraction of wind energy will reduce available energy downstream.

Moreover, the economics of offshore wind farms is often commingled with state enterprises and various subsidy schemes, which makes them uneconomical even in the best of times, so a 2% capacity reduction coupled with inevitable maintenance and repair costs escalations might make many wind farms uneconomical.

Onshore wind farms are much more economical but the best locations such as Texas, Oklahoma and New Mexico already have been developed.

I think that’s a glib dismissal without any analysis of the financials that motivate the investment being profitable in the first place.

I think the point is that with thin margins and capital costs, 1.6% (compounded over decades) could be a large chunk of your profit.

TFA discusses this:

> To justify their investment and make a profit, "it's very important for a developer to be able to project that the wind farm will produce a given amount of electricity for 25 or 30 years", the typical lifespan of a wind farm, he says. Even a relatively small, unexpected reduction in that energy output can upset this investment calculation and make the wind farm not financially viable, Finserås says.

This isn't a Best Buy. Offshore wind is very expensive compared to land-based wind and operators can struggle to turn a profit. 3.28% is indeed likely very significant.

I do not understand HN's pathological obsession with trying to "gotcha" news media titles for being "clickbait" especially given the "Software (version number)" posts and edgy titles to corporate and personal blogs that are everywhere here.

This has in the past been scientifically proposed as a legitimate way to cure the US of tornadoes while yielding significant energy in the process.

This sounds a lot like the plot of The Horde of Counterwind by Alain Damasio

A Valley Without Wind 2…

Some level at 100km OR 10% if very close, but not both at the same time.

Pretty much. For all the faults we can find with wind farms, they are still pretty dang useful.

The problems with wind farms seem trivial in comparison to the wave of fallout which disrupted agriculture all across Europe.

Wind has been common in the U.K. for decades, I remember driving past them as a kid in the 90s on holiday

It’s only recently that the right wing has become particularly against them

Here the victims of "wind theft" by wind farms are other wind farms. The point of this article is that by not accounting for the problem, the efficiency of wind power around the world may decrease and also discourage investors.

Also, isn't it really stupid to treat the wind the same way we do with rivers or with electrical current (which is actually flowing the opposite way to electrons, so not like the river/wind at all)?

E.g. country A is saying that country B is stealing their incoming (upstream) wind, but there's currently a zone of negative pressure (based on the mountains/shore/passing by cyclone/whatever) on the country A's territory which actually allows for the pressure gradient to form through both countries A and B - so there's more energy potential available to tap into on country A's territory?

Thinking of wind direction. I would imagine that wind farms in general are build in areas where there is tendency for prevalent winds. That is known to have certain direction and speed. As these are most sensible places for most production.

Areas with more changing wind patterns are likely less desirable.