What is the Navy protesting for??
A few hundred floating wind mills would give them something to avoid hitting.
That should be good training ground for young officers.
Don’t know really why they are protesting other then they use those waters for training and simulations…as you can see, there is wide spread, bipartisan support for this in this country (and for the San Fran Chronical - the news paper to an area that is MILITANTLY anti-Trump and basically wants to secede while he is in office - to say anything even remotely neutral, much less positive, about the Trump admin -ie they actually wrote that this project has the support of the Trump administration - is kind of mind blowing so I’ll take their word for it) - but there are still a lot of obstacles to do this in the US, ESPECIALLY on the West Coast, that has some rather extreme depth changes, weather, and seas. I’ve just recently sent a resume off to yet another offshore wind co - so I’m watching closely but have very little expectation that these offshore wind farms will take off here in the US. Love to break in to this but it probably won’t happen in my lifetime.
Not having lived in a California for quite some time, I could see the Navy’s desire to minimize permanent structures in the area.
Does it mean it’s bad or good, but I can see that point of view for a Navy objection for training with live ordnance.
I still don’t know why people want to put these things offshore of California in the first place. East of the coastal range are huge wind farms. North of Mill Valley is surprisingly unpopulated and remote - hard to get to (but ridiculously beautiful) so I don’t see that taking off there, especially since the waters are particularly rough in that part of the state. But that state is nothing if not willing to try stuff for the sake of trying stuff.
The reason is the stronger and steadier wind offshore. (which has been mentioned MANY times here)
Another reason is that larger windmills can be constructed for the offshore wind farm, thus reducing the cost per kWh.
The third reason is that there are fewer problems with obtaining “acreage” and few people to complain (NIMBY) when you get over the horizon.
It is coming, so better be prepared to take advantage of the many possibilities that open up in the Offshore Wind Farm business.
Those are European reasons. That don’t apply in California. Never the less, I am watching and hoping.
It would be much easier to locate the windmills just across the border in Mexican waters, then run a cable to San Diego. Mexico does not tolerate NIMBYs and a little money can cure a lot of problems in Mexico.
Norway aim to be world leader in floating wind farm technology:
Could this be bigger than offshore oil & gas technology in the future??
The first such wind farm, Statoil’s Hywind off Scotland has proven more efficient than expected and far more so than bottom supported wind mills offshore Europe:
It is still more expensive to develop floating wind farms, but with the higher efficiency it may prove more profitable over time.
Also, daytime winds at sea are generally stronger than night, while the opposite is generally true for land turbines. This is one of the fundamental weaknesses of onshore wind power, although it does somewhat complement solar power because of this fact.
The Swedes beat Norway to build the first offshore wind farm that do not require subsidies.
It will be built off The Netherlands by Swedish Vattenfalll:
Aker Solutions is jumping on the band wagon towards develop floating wind mills: