Maybe a Chinese company can build a Wind Turbine at a cheap price to see if it can work before building more.

Meh bin read in AFC papah that dem want gee abe wind and small watafall hydro. Dem bin a talk bout rum fuh gee cyar. But meh hope dem AFC bais nah will tek away all abe rum. Meh want meh rum to.

quote:

Originally posted by Wally:
I am thinking instead of this Hydro project which cost massive amounts of money for Guyana and will add to Guyana's foreign debt for future generations to pay. It may be a strain for a very small population such as Guyana to pay. What about putting a bunch of wind turbines on the shore of the Atlantic ocean. It can pick up the wind from the Atlantic ocean. One wind turbine can provide power for 25 thousand people a year Also,Guyana has lots of sun so solar power should not be a problem.

What do you guys think.

I think that's a recipe for being stuck in a dankey cart economy until the end of time. The whole point of developing an economy, by moving to technologies with higher energy flux density, is that the nation becomes able to afford basic necessities such as reliable electricity, safe mass transit, adequate law enforcement, well stocked libraries, high quality universal health care, an efficient postal system, and so on. Then maybe Guyana's population wouldn't be so small. Investing in real development and not dankey cart technologies is the way to accomplish that.

Henry, with Hydro we are dealing with thick Jungle. The jungle is relentless. It means that there will be a cost in trying to keep the jungle from reclaiming the land used for the Hydro project. That together with the massive loans needed to build the Hydro could mean financial problems in the future if our population remains small and the mine export sector slumps.

quote:

Originally posted by Henry:

quote:

Originally posted by Wally:
I am thinking instead of this Hydro project which cost massive amounts of money for Guyana and will add to Guyana's foreign debt for future generations to pay. It may be a strain for a very small population such as Guyana to pay. What about putting a bunch of wind turbines on the shore of the Atlantic ocean. It can pick up the wind from the Atlantic ocean. One wind turbine can provide power for 25 thousand people a year Also,Guyana has lots of sun so solar power should not be a problem.

What do you guys think.

I think that's a recipe for being stuck in a dankey cart economy until the end of time. The whole point of developing an economy, by moving to technologies with higher energy flux density, is that the nation becomes able to afford basic necessities such as reliable electricity, safe mass transit, adequate law enforcement, well stocked libraries, high quality universal health care, an efficient postal system, and so on. Then maybe Guyana's population wouldn't be so small. Investing in real development and not dankey cart technologies is the way to accomplish that.

How in the world do you know that batteries will not be developed with greater capacity with smaller foot print and that low energy use devices like LED lighting would not make these technologies far more cost efficient and less polluting than these existing fossil fuel technologies? I know the Larouche cultists are hyped up on Nuclear tech but the piling up of uranium mine tailing, spent fuel rods, radioactive water not to mention Chernobyl and the ***ushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant in thenear worse case of the potential of error here.

quote:

Originally posted by Wally:
Henry, with Hydro we are dealing with thick Jungle. The jungle is relentless. It means that there will be a cost in trying to keep the jungle from reclaiming the land used for the Hydro project. That together with the massive loans needed to build the Hydro could mean financial problems in the future if our population remains small and the mine export sector slumps.

The PPP government on some study has determined we do not have the wind energy necessary to power wind turbines.

quote:

Originally posted by Henry:
I think that's a recipe for being stuck in a dankey cart economy until the end of time. The whole point of developing an economy, by moving to technologies with higher energy flux density, is that the nation becomes able to afford basic necessities such as reliable electricity, safe mass transit, adequate law enforcement, well stocked libraries, high quality universal health care, an efficient postal system, and so on. Then maybe Guyana's population wouldn't be so small. Investing in real development and not dankey cart technologies is the way to accomplish that.

Wind turbine is far from donkey cart technology. It is now big business and expanding. So wake up from your bad dream.
Additionally, hydro power won't provide well stocked libraries etc.
The hydro plant is far too expensive. It will take more than one generation to pay off that debt. But more worrying is that the PPP regime devised that scam in order to siphon off money. So the project is unlikely to ever be completed.
The international banks know this, which is why they don't want to lend Guyana the money. Our track record in completing any project on time and on budget is extremely poor. To complete a project as big and complicated as a hydro dam requires a kind of commitment and workforce that Guyana is unable to provide. Mistakes can cost lives. In the case of the Suriname hydro dam, several people are buried inside the cement dam. All of them were the cause of accidents, and it would have been far too expensive and of high risk to try to retrieve the bodies. Most hydro dams building projects have had high rates of accidents. The Guyanese project would very likely surpass them all.

quote:

Originally posted by Wally:
I am thinking instead of this Hydro project which cost massive amounts of money for Guyana and will add to Guyana's foreign debt for future generations to pay. It may be a strain for a very small population such as Guyana to pay. What about putting a bunch of wind turbines on the shore of the Atlantic ocean. It can pick up the wind from the Atlantic ocean. One wind turbine can provide power for 25 thousand people a year Also,Guyana has lots of sun so solar power should not be a problem.

What do you guys think.

Presently, I am building 50 protoype wind generator for New Brunswick Hydro. These things have 16 permanent magnets. The Stator is built by another company. The Rotor and the accompanying components are manufactured by us.

This project was suggested to Guyana's Prime Minister. There were no funding for this kind of venture and I was discourged to build and insatlled at my expense. The reason, private selling of electricity is prohibited in Guyana. U have to sell to GPL. I then, requested that I manage GPL. That was a definite No No. The PPP boys are in those cshy jobs.

Who in the world build 50 prototypes? what is the output of these machines and if this is the testing phase why have they rejected existing tech?

These are the sort of things that make me accept that Guyana will remain an undeveloped country. When the government is more interested in what is in it for them, rather than how can Guyana benefit from a project, the country is doomed to failure.

quote:

Originally posted by Wally:
I am thinking instead of this Hydro project which cost massive amounts of money for Guyana and will add to Guyana's foreign debt for future generations to pay. It may be a strain for a very small population such as Guyana to pay. What about putting a bunch of wind turbines on the shore of the Atlantic ocean. It can pick up the wind from the Atlantic ocean. One wind turbine can provide power for 25 thousand people a year Also,Guyana has lots of sun so solar power should not be a problem.

What do you guys think.

Who is listening?. This is not in the budget.

It's not a question of whether it is in the budget. We are discussing the options, not the PPP thieving routine.

quote:

Originally posted by Mr.T:
Wind turbine is far from donkey cart technology. It is now big business and expanding.

In our present collapsed economy, there is a trend toward investment in primitive technologies. Despite the Adam Smith types, the "market" shouldn't decide what is best for us.

quote:

Originally posted by Mr.T:
Mistakes can cost lives. In the case of the Suriname hydro dam, several people are buried inside the cement dam.

There is a mortality rate associated with all energy technologies, and in fact, most forms of economic activity. In the case of energy production, coal is by far the worst due to mining accidents (all facets of the production chain must be examined.) Here are the safest, calculated by deaths per terawatt of energy produced:

Solar (rooftop) 0.44 (less than 0.1% of world energy)
Wind 0.15 (less than 1% of world energy)
Hydro 0.10 (europe death rate, 2.2% of world energy)
Hydro - world including Banqiao) 1.4 (about 2500 TWh/yr and 171,000 Banqiao dead)
Nuclear 0.04 (5.9% of world energy)

see also http://nextbigfuture.com/2011/...y-energy-source.html

http://wind-works.org/articles/BreathLife.html

http://www.earthtechling.com/2...on-wind-power-rules/

However, there are other calculations which should be made, which are mortality rates associated with remaining in a dankey cart economy, including infant mortality, various kinds of public health hazards from inadequate refrigeration of food, inadequate inoculation against disease, lack of pest control, etc.

quote:

Originally posted by Henry:

quote:

Originally posted by Mr.T:
Wind turbine is far from donkey cart technology. It is now big business and expanding.

In our present collapsed economy, there is a trend toward investment in primitive technologies.

I agree with you. hydro projects are indeed primitive. The later electricity generating projects like wind turbine, or even nuclear, would be far more modern.

quote:

Originally posted by D2:
Who in the world build 50 prototypes? what is the output of these machines and if this is the testing phase why have they rejected existing tech?

I have the purchase order for 50 units and I am building them right now. The first was built and tested August 2011.

quote:

Originally posted by Mr.T:

quote:

Originally posted by Henry:

quote:

Originally posted by Mr.T:
Wind turbine is far from donkey cart technology. It is now big business and expanding.

In our present collapsed economy, there is a trend toward investment in primitive technologies.

I agree with you. hydro projects are indeed primitive. The later electricity generating projects like wind turbine, or even nuclear, would be far more modern.

There is a scientific basis for deciding what is and what is not primitive. It is called energy flux density, a measure of the amount of energy transferred across a unit of area per a unit of time. The history of human civilization has been the progression toward technologies with higher energy flux density. Wind and solar do not represent progress.

quote:

Originally posted by Henry:

quote:

Originally posted by Mr.T:
Wind turbine is far from donkey cart technology. It is now big business and expanding.

In our present collapsed economy, there is a trend toward investment in primitive technologies. Despite the Adam Smith types, the "market" shouldn't decide what is best for us.

quote:

Originally posted by Mr.T:
Mistakes can cost lives. In the case of the Suriname hydro dam, several people are buried inside the cement dam.

There is a mortality rate associated with all energy technologies, and in fact, most forms of economic activity. In the case of energy production, coal is by far the worst due to mining accidents (all facets of the production chain must be examined.) Here are the safest, calculated by deaths per terawatt of energy produced:

Solar (rooftop) 0.44 (less than 0.1% of world energy)
Wind 0.15 (less than 1% of world energy)
Hydro 0.10 (europe death rate, 2.2% of world energy)
Hydro - world including Banqiao) 1.4 (about 2500 TWh/yr and 171,000 Banqiao dead)
Nuclear 0.04 (5.9% of world energy)

see also http://nextbigfuture.com/2011/...y-energy-source.html

http://wind-works.org/articles/BreathLife.html

http://www.earthtechling.com/2...on-wind-power-rules/

However, there are other calculations which should be made, which are mortality rates associated with remaining in a dankey cart economy, including infant mortality, various kinds of public health hazards from inadequate refrigeration of food, inadequate inoculation against disease, lack of pest control, etc.

that is the kind of use of statistics comparable to the case of a butcher pretending he is a surgeon. If a fossil fuel plant explodes the loss of life is immediate and the casualty rate fixed. At max it can be a few hundred people and no land is lost. We had explosions of refineries and pip[elines in urban centers and we have not lost one square inch of land.

The same will not be if a nuclear plant explodes. The death rate is on going and the destruction of plant an animal life constant and never ending and the land loss in the hundreds of square miles for thousands of years. It is about the danger of these tech as well as their cost. We do not have the technology to store nuclear by products in vast accumulating quantities and that is not forthcoming.

Clean nuclear power as fusion is in the research stage with no viable plant design existing.

quote:

Originally posted by Henry:
There is a scientific basis for deciding what is and what is not primitive. It is called energy flux density, a measure of the amount of energy transferred across a unit of area per a unit of time. The history of human civilization has been the progression toward technologies with higher energy flux density. Wind and solar do not represent progress.

. Bai Henry, get out of the jungle and see the world. Solar and wind powered generators are now big business. Even the Americans, Russians etc use solar power to control and power up satellites, supply extra electricity to airplanes, etc. Wind power does not require flooding land and displacing population. Running costs are also the lowest from all other commercial electricity generating processes.
I bet you never knew this. Still using outdated textbooks at skool?

It nah gonna mek any difference to the debate. If you feel like a donkey, being ridden by different people, that's your choice.

It look like Henry never sit down at the Georgetown seawall at night (Instead he was probably having dinner with Prince Phillip).
The force of the wind and the waves is energy that can be used.

At the end of the day we need every Guyanese to have a very cheap source of electricity.

In a perfect world large scale Hydro energy would be the best option. But in Guyana 1. With less than a million people. 2. A spread out population. 3. Thick unexplored jungle. Large scale hydro project would be costly to build and maintain.


I do not mind very small scale hydro projects. A few years ago I was going to buy shares in a Canadian company call "Canadian Hydro Developers". I think this company got bought out recently by a large company. I looked at " Canadian Hydro Developers" Hydro projects and I notice that they were all very small scale Hydro projects on small rivers and lakes in some isolated parts of Canada that I never heard of. But when I add up the total energy out put of all these small Hydro projects that the company owned it amazed me. This company was a medium size North American energy producer


It did not cost the company much to build these small scale Hydro projects.

So small scale hydro projects that are easy/cheap to build near cities and towns that cost little to maintain combine with wind and solar I feel is the way to go for Guyana to have cheap electricity.

quote:

Originally posted by Wally:
It look like Henry never sit down at the Georgetown seawall at night (Instead he was probably having dinner with Prince Phillip).
The force of the wind and the waves is energy that can be used.

I have spent many an evening enjoying the breeze over the seawall. And as I do it, I contemplate the gold that is out there in the ocean. Fabulous amounts of gold are out there -- far more than in the interior. 20 million tons of it, in fact. The only problem is that it is very dilute, so that each liter of seawater contains, on average, about 13 billionths of a gram of gold. So now matter how attractive the idea may seem that we could just wade out there and help ourselves to free gold, I'm afraid we're just going to have to find a more efficient way to obtain it. The same goes for the energy in the wind and the waves. To put it differently -- we know from millenia of experience that the dankey cart economy works. We can survive, however miserably, with a dankey cart economy. But there are other options, nowadays. Asian countries will pursue those options. We can join them, or we can listen to the World Bank and the NGOs.

Henry every Asian country is going with wind. I will give you a list of major wind turbine Manufacturing companies that are operating in Asia.

Sinovel (China)

Dongfang Electric (China)

Goldwind (China)

Aeolus Windpower (China)

Ming Yang (China)

SANY (China)


Shandong Swiss Electric (China)


Hyundai Heavy Industries (Korea)


Hyosung (Korea)


Hanjin (Korea)



Samsung Heavy Industries (Korea)


Mitsubishi Heavy Industries (Japan)


SRC Green Power (India)

Suzlon (India)


Wind combined with Solar and small Hydro plants is only way to achieve cheap electricity for every Guyanese.

Wally I think biogas from garbage can be added to the list of Wind, Solar and small hydro.

I don't know about biogas but I know in Guyana context with so much water, sun and wind then Wind, Solar and small hydro is the way to go.

I think some of you fellows have a tough time seeing beyond the dankey cart, so perhaps this will give you a useful shock:

Henry I hope you are not trying to convert us to Scientology. I am not follower of Ron Hubbard.

Wally is not Scientology it is the other cult LaRouche

Look this is a serious website not some cult recruitment place.

After some PPP coke even Henry can generate ill winds .