wind vs tidal11 Feb 2022 11:27
Since my fatal error yesterday, I did some (basic) research to educate myself.
It came to comparing wind and tidal energy, for I wanted to know and judge how much 2.0 MW are.
So a common, nowadays whirligig (googled that) averaged delivers 3.0 MW. Better ones up to 5 and beyond.
So 2.0 MW felt greater in my "ignorant mind" than my enlighted.
Interessting how much per watt SAE has to pay. Tidal is more expensive due to several facts (ofshoreness/ water, no mass production, pioneer role/ paying dearly, more / different materials / mass aso.)
Together with geo-, political, nature issues, these are the cons.
On the pro side would be the huge potential, optics / invisibility, still headroom for optimization/ tech not grown up, massive ressources available and unexploited, and last but not least predictibility / reliableness.
Personally I wonder if water doesn´t have the strengh and far more strengh (thats what I think) to push and sofor generate more energy than these 2.0 MW. Yes it´s "only" an average value but...
I mean these poor windmills get 5.0 MW out of a slight breeze.
So why was the conclusion a design like this (which I think is well designed and top notch, cutting edge tech). Why is this particular AR2000 (p.e.) the sweetspot of all their thoughts, planings and math?
Why not 50cm more winglenght for 3.0 MW. I´d be interessted in their thoughs dusted in their bin.