The government already owns the land, and could give the right to install wind farms to companies for free (much like they did when building transcontinental railroads).
Why not just put up wind turbines in the medians of interstate highways? The land is already environmentally damaged from road construction, anyway. If we just put up one wind turbine every 264 feet (twenty per mile), there wouldn%26#039;t there be plenty of companies just lining up take advantage of this?
The environmental casualties of windfarms would be almost meaningless here: they can pollute a bit (just like the cars driving by them), they make noise (just like cars), they screw up the environment for birds (think of all the chemicals we%26#039;ll save from not having to clean so much bird poo off your windshield!), etc., etc., etc.
What would be the argument against this, and why aren%26#039;t we doing this already?
This would pose a serious threat to nearby motorists. I would guess this is why it is impractical for most freeway areas.
* You must be logged into Answers to add comments. Sign in or Register.
Other Answers (6)
-
1. Wind farms must be located in places that consistently experience sufficient wind to keep the mill blades turning. If not, the mill isn%26#039;t cost-effective.
2. The mills require height clearance that may or may not be available in an interstate median.
3. The mills can sometimes fail, exposing drivers to the hazard of flying debris and exposing the mill owner to serious liability expense.
4. The mills themselves would be exposed to damage or destruction in accidents.
5. The infrastructure necessary to direct electricity produced by the mills to the grid could require costly modifications to the interstate infrastructure. -
- Most places don%26#039;t have enough wind to even turn the windmills.
- A lot of the turbines are big enough that such a small space would cause them to hit eachother.
- Interstates in the cities don%26#039;t always have a median just a wall. -
I%26#039;m sure a cost benefit analysis would show this working, but taking 25 years to turn a profit. There also are a few wind %26quot;hot spots%26quot; in the country that come close to even giving consistent winds to give consistent power. But you posing this question makes you probably agree that every little bit helps.
I do like your theory of, we%26#039;ve already F%26#039;ed up that corridor, why not keep going on that theme. At the same time, we%26#039;d have to regulate how close we can build these things near populated areas. On I-95 in my area, we%26#039;d be placing those massive turbines a few hundred yards from homes. But I will give you massive amounts of miles on I-80 and good 10 miles stretches of I-95.
Might be a bit unnerving to be cruising along at 75 mph, watching them spin...
Try PBS%26#039;s or Nat. Geo.%26#039;s websites and see what the latest wind power documentary says. -
My husband works on the commerical wind turbines. I would live near a wind farm in a heartbeat. I would NOT however want to see wind turbines along our public highways.
Wind turbine blades do fail from time to time....fact of life. When those blades fail it is like the wreck of a small airplane. There is that much debri and it is spread out over a very large area. The cranes used to erect wind turbines and put the blades on are HUGE! How huge? So huge the cranes arrive with their own smaller crane, which must be put together, in order to put together the huge crane!
Highway systems would have to be shut down, in oder for some maintenance to be done on turbines. The lives of the men who work on the turbines would be forever in danger from drunk drivers.
Wind turbines only make economical sense to erect where there is enough wind.
It is better for the medians on interstate highways to be planted with trees and bushes native to that area, to help absorb some of the pollution that vehicles spew out.
~Garnet
Permaculture homesteading/farming over 20 years
Hubby works on the commercial wind turbines