4 ms·
> I’m surprised the mitigation discussion didn’t include “more wind generation”. Especially at the coast This is just my conjecture, but I wouldn't be surprise
by danans 7y ago
> I’m surprised the mitigation discussion didn’t include “more wind generation”. Especially at the coast
This is just my conjecture, but I wouldn't be surprised if the very high cost of coastal land, and possible objection by nearby homeowners in CA is part of the reason for lack of wind power on the immediate coast.
If you go just a bit inland, however you'll find the massive new Turtle Island wind farm near the Sacramento River delta.
- Filligree 7y agoCoastal land, yes. It's usually unproblematic to build wind farms offshore, and they work even better there.
- ZeroGravitas 7y agoOffshore wind power started off in areas with shallow seas, it's only now getting around to floating wind that would suit California.
- dredmorbius 7y agoCalifornia will have plenty of shallow seas, by and by. Mostly in places like the Bay counties, Stockton and Sacramento.
- leggomylibro 7y agoHey, it's like this in Washington too! Not a windmill in sight near Seattle, but head East and you'll see them grouped along mountain ridges by the dozen. It does seem very windy out there compared to the coast, though. It's funny, people seem to dislike the windmills even as they house military firing ranges, hydroelectric dams, nuclear reactors, and similar on the same land. It's less funny that the government coerced people who were resistant to signing treaties or selling land to cede the Columbia River Valley for those things, but the wind turbines - those seem to really bother people. In fairness, they do sort of remind me of Simon Stålenhag's art[0]. It's a little bit eerie how they loom in the distance and light up in unison at night. [0]: http://conceptartworld.com/artists/simon-stalenhag/ http://conceptartworld.com/artists/simon-stalenhag/