OK if you look for a portable or temporary off grid solution, but production and maintenance over (short) lifetime might cost much more energy than it generates, so it doesnt make sense except for this special mentioned usecase. You def. will not save the world with these unefficient devices. And I doubt that it's physically possble to make them more durable and efficient in the near future.
Same to portable solar panels.
Though the whole graphene research sounds promising.
I don't see why they can't be mass produced more cheaply with all the money that's been invested into developing production
More energy cheaply, I mean
More energy efficient production & maintenance
On raw material there is a limit to cap down the price. only the production, logistics, retail, margin, sales can be cheaper.
But what if the raw material production consumes more energy than the product generates in its lifetime? Like solar panel silicon wafers?
If using metal costs more than the lifetime output of the turbines, then just use stone
This really doesn't seem so hard
nostr:npub162zpxufpw8pnuytaf0gfxzkqtvk9rvcwkvppa7x57y3n7qkfpg4shatdhy why are you pretending this shit makes sense?
You really think the cheapest possible dynamo, fan blades, and pole cost more energy to make than they can output in their lifetimes?
This reminds me of the other day when you said "fair" to someone accusing me of "creating revenge porn"
Yeah, I assumed he had his facts straight. I've heard similar said about most alt energy so assumed it held.
As for the "fair" thing, details unimportant, I know the type of thing he was likely put off by and think it's fair to decide one wants none of that in their feed.
Oh and your reply was to use stone? Stone fans? lol
I don't believe metal is actually too expensive but if you believe it is then what would you suggest to save cost?
Why would you laugh at me for suggesting the logical response to the ridiculous suggestion that we need to use the cheapest possible material, but not laugh at the ridiculous suggestion itself?
You seem to be straight up joining in with my gangstalkers now
Stone wouldn't work, even I know that. So it's a joke. Kinda funny, but not a helpful reply to further conversation, as far as I could tell.
Stone would work, I don't understand what is making you keep ignoring logic
Oh? You trunk building fan parts out of stone is cheaper and as effective? I just can't imagine that. Feel free to elaborate
Probably not as effective since it would miss lower wind speeds
It might resist vibration as an upside but that upside should be cancelled out by its fragility and the extra load it inherently puts on its bearings
But cheaper than metal refinery? Yes
You focusing on the blades? Original post just covered overall materials, hence I imagined a fan entirely of stone as your reply to be a joke.
Stone blades? Maybe, but probably not. Can't think of any easy way to shape stone into uniform blades, let alone ones that have all the helpful properties (flex, etc) needed.
Ah, thanks for clarifying. All stone would indeed be a joke. I had been arguing with the guy about fan blades for a while, starting with him saying all wind turbines must have blades made of fiberglass or they won't work. I said the fanblades should be made of metal on small ones.
I figured there's no way he's saying a dynamo costs more energy to produce than it can ever generate, and there's no way he's saying adding a mount makes it cost more to produce than it can ever generate, so he must be saying metal fanblades have the same cost-to-produce issue as fiberglass.
Stone isn't that hard to shape uniformly, but it won't have all the helpful properties you want, and it will probably need the fan assembly/bearings replaced more often, but if metal fanblades are really too expensive to produce then it still would solve that problem which is just an extreme example to prove bare material cost can't be the problem
Yeah, hard to imagine a cheap little windmill with metal blades (like I'm sure I've seen) costs more than its lifetime energy output would cost. Guessing more to do with the large ones, wasn't sure on that. He did seem to think it applied to even the small battery charging one you mentioned... no idea. In that scenario it's not about cost anyway, or if it is, the right cost to compare to is building power lines to the remote location (you can't say it's the same fixed cost as in a modern home when there's no availability at all)
Are you imagining the stone just spins up too fast and shatters? Or the wind can't move it at all? I don't get it dude
It's fair to decide one wants none of what in their feed? My posts?
And how the fuck does it sound to you like the "fact" is "straight" that a dynamo+fanblades+mount cost more energy to produce than they can generate in their lifetimes? Do you see some insanely huge energy requirement I'm missing in the production of fanblades and mounts or do you think dynamos just inherently cost more energy to produce than they can generate? What the absolute fuck?
Yes, your mean posts are too much for some. Not that complicated.
As for topic at hand, I honestly don't know. Again it's consistent with theme I always hear so assumed true. Why don't we wait for a reply from him? I'm just learning this stuff first time
If my mean posts were too much for anyone, then the people who are crueler than me and have more followers than me and constantly have their posts booster would also be too much for those people, but absolutely fucking no one has all my gangstalkers muted in addition to muting me, so that's clearly not the case.
*boosted
Are you saying a dynamo inherently costs more energy to make than it can produce in its lifetime? Because that sounds retarded
What are dynamos usually attached to that costs so much less energy to make than a pole and a fan blade?
