Jet Stream Kites Could Power New York City 263
Damien1972 writes to tell us that researchers from the Carnegie Institution and California State University claim that a fleet of kites could harvest enough energy to run New York and other major cities, especially if they are affected by polar jet streams. "Using 28 years of data from the National Center for Environmental Prediction and the Department of Energy, Ken Caldeira of the Carnegie Institution's Department of Global Ecology and Cristina Archer of California State University, Chico compiled the first global survey of wind energy available at high altitudes in the atmosphere. They found that the regions best suited for harvesting this energy align with population centers in the eastern U.S. and East Asia, although they note that 'fluctuating wind strength still presents a challenge for exploiting this energy source on a large scale.'"
All together now ... (Score:5, Interesting)
With 2K for turbines and wires,
we can build a generating flyer.
With a line to the ground,
it's a turbine in flight!
With a bolt holding tight
to the string of the kite!
Let's go fly a kite
Up to the highest height
Let's go fly a kite
And send it soaring
Up through the atmosphere
Up where the air is clear
Oh, let's go fly a kite!
Hrmm... (Score:3, Interesting)
Got me thinkin'.
I suppose the "fluctuating flow" problem could be circumvented by using helium bags to get the kites aloft initially, combined with a spooled tether.
When the jet-stream is coming close, the bags are filled and the kite spooled to the proper altitude. Once the jet-stream is sufficient to keep the kite aloft, the bags are deflated and stowed. When the jet-stream is predicted to be moving out of the area, the bags are re-inflated until there is no more reason to keep it aloft, at which time it spooled back in.
Environmental issues? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Major side benefit (Score:5, Interesting)
Greens don't want us to find innovative new sources of energy to continue our lifestyle, they want to make energy scarce so as to reshape our society along lines THEY find more pleasing.
It's important to be aware the puritans are NOT green, although they have managed to hijack the green movement for the past couple of decades. The only thing that has kept them going is the impracticality of most genuine green tech. They are under siege within the movement now, and over the course of the next couple of decades will become a footnote to history, precisely because most people are in favour of sustainable solutions to the power generation problem and are, of course, not puritans.
They are not puritans for a very simple reason: puritanism is not sustainable. The only way the puritans can impose themselves on the world is if no green technology actually works. Unfortunately everything from solar to wind is coming along nicely, and even nuclear and clean coal are talked about seriously.
So don't make the mistake of confusing the puritans with the greens. The puritans are on the way out. The greens are finally coming back from the debacle of the early '70's, when formerly scientific organizations like Greenpeace became marketing shills for the puritans.
Re:Major side benefit (Score:2, Interesting)
Wind turbines, besides Sen. Kennedy not wanting to see em off HIS beachfront, are noisy, ugly and kill birds. Oh no, wind isn't green enough.
Could they be made to target the pidgeons that litter city centers of europe? Seriously, Wind turbines have flaws, but I haven't heard the bird excuse before. I live in Denmark where we get like 25% of our power from wind turbines, and both the visibility and noise are common issues with the placement of new turbines, but sea turbines shouldn't have those issues if placed properly. I guess we don't have as many problems with birdstrikes as the US, or the problem has been overstated there?