Wind Energy Is One of the Cheapest, and It's Getting Cheaper

Re:Wind Energy Is One of the Cheapest, and It's Getting Cheaper by menacingly on Monday September 04, 2017 @04:59PM (#15170832)

Looks like some far more competent folks have pretty thoroughly looked into it. I'll sleep better knowing I'm not the wind's sole protector

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Wind Energy Is One of the Cheapest, and It's Getting Cheaper by nkurz on Tuesday September 05, 2017 @02:56PM (#15178102)

I know it's bad form to just offer an unexplained video link, but your phrase "the wind's sole protector" reminded me of this delightfully understated French commercial that illustrates why the wind has so few people looking out for it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2mTLO2F_ERY

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Wind Energy Is One of the Cheapest, and It's Getting Cheaper by beobab on Tuesday September 05, 2017 @05:41AM (#15173702)

Although that would be a cool job description.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Wind Energy Is One of the Cheapest, and It's Getting Cheaper by madcaptenor on Tuesday September 05, 2017 @11:44AM (#15176319)

I'd really hope wind has a bus factor of more than one though.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Wind Energy Is One of the Cheapest, and It's Getting Cheaper by wojt_eu on Tuesday September 05, 2017 @10:20AM (#15175432)

If we increase our energy consumption 100-fold this estimation of net loss in wind would approach 1% which sounds bad. I guess we might need wind protector after all.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Wind Energy Is One of the Cheapest, and It's Getting Cheaper by namarie on Tuesday September 05, 2017 @12:19PM (#15176634)

That's a pretty big "if".

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Wind Energy Is One of the Cheapest, and It's Getting Cheaper by CuriousSkeptic on Tuesday September 05, 2017 @05:18PM (#15179204)

Is it? Given current energy consumption growth it's just 100-150 years away

Edit: From covering the entire surface of the earth, which is the bigger if. (Should have read the context)

[ Parent | on HN ]