Should coal stay?

Cedar Point would be perfect for some windmills since one of the biggest problems with them is that they're loud and people think they're an eyesore. Since Cedar Point already have lots of tall loud things nobody would mind any windmills at all. I doubt they'd be entirely off the grid, but they could definitely save some money.

If they were to invest enough money, CP could certainly come up with enough kilowatts to power the park. The problem with utilizing wind power , though, is that wind is an intermittent energy source. Even on Lake Erie, there are times when the wind simply dies (or even falls below the threshold to turn turbines). In that event, no wind, no power.

The way to get around this issue is by building surplus power generation -- that is to say, when the wind is blowing to generate 100% + x of the power necessary to run the park. The x, the extra energy, has to be stored somehow. It also has to be accessible virtually instantaneously in case the wind dies. The problem is that energy storage systems are expensive and/or inefficient. You're talking batteries -- a whole lot of batteries, or capacitors (also very expensive), or alternate storage systems like compressed air or pumped water.

This is the major holdup, globally speaking, for going above 10 - 20% wind power generation. Below that range, power peaks and drops can be accommodated by the grid. Above it, and it becomes much more difficult without other technological innovations and huge investment.

But theoretically speaking, it could be done.

(Not an engineer. I just stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night . . .)

As stupid as it sounds (to me anyway) a big part of the reason wind power hasn't taken off in the Lake Erie region is because of concern over birds flying into the blades. It seems to be the benefits would outweigh the harm of some careless birds flying into things, considering birds die from flying into things all the time (especially at CP) but what do I know?

Enjoying the discussion!

On the topic of braking, what do you think about the idea of having a series braking system - like one person suggested the Prius has? Have the first segment of the run be the electromagnetic portion. It will be designed to brake the train fully, but, if it fails, the next braking segment will be the traditional friction type. It will always be set on each braking event. Unfortunately, this will require a longer braking run or, if not extended, higher braking forces. What do you think Rideman?

On wind, I think it is an intriguing idea. On of the reasons I enjoy visiting the Point is the nice lake breezes. Where would you put the windmill(s)? Perhaps along the causeway leading to the Point?

Chris, I've thought of the answer to that one. Simply set aside a little more land for migratory corridors and nesting habitat for bird species so that the gain in population outweighs the loss from "bird meets blade".

Personally, I think windmills are a beautiful and stirring sight. Just to see rows of those two hundred foot towers spinning in unison is kind of awe-inspiring to me.

Mike, the answer to your commentary is something called "net metering". With a couple of wind turbines a business might be able to generate more power than it could ever use, but there are times when that business still needs to get power from somewhere else. The answer, then, is that the business connects its power system to the nationwide electrical grid, and then sells excess power back to the power utility. That way, if the windmill is generating more power than the business can use, the excess power goes into the grid, and the power company sinks it, probably by throttling back on one of their existing gas turbines or steam plants. When the windmill generates less power than the business can use, the business buys the remainder from the power company.

The trick is that if you are relying on photovoltaic or wind power (or any other less-than-reliable source) you cannot rely *solely* on that source for uninterruptible power. Instead, you combine those sources with other, more conventional and more controllable supplies so that as an electrical utility you can use whatever sources are available to minimize your cost of producing power while matching your output to the requirements of the grid.

Rapids, that's exactly how some of the hybrid coaster braking systems work. The magnetic brakes are used as trim brakes to bleed off most of the energy, then conventional friction brakes are used to park the train in the station.

The thing is, right now it makes the most sense to dump the braking energy as heat. It's reliable, it's safe, and given the complexity of equipment that would be necessary to collect the energy from a coaster braking system into a regenerative brake, rectify that to DC, then modulate it to AC, and synchronize it with the power grid...there are enough expensive components to the system and enough losses in all the conversions that the system would never pay for itself, even if you could get around the potential safety issues. If there is no payoff, then why do it?

--Dave Althof, Jr.

Sure, Dave, net metering is the simpler way to go -- if you want to stay on the grid and so long as intermittent renewables don't exceed that magic maximum. What kevinj was asking about was taking CP off the grid and making it self-sufficient.