Frankly, one place where I think we ought to be sticking both wind turbines and solar panels is sky scrapers. They, afaik, have relatively high wind speeds, and no one is going to claim that they're pristine, untouched bits of nature, or not already a hazard to birds. And, of course, they're out of the shadow of the shorter buildings around them, so they'd get sunlight for the solar panels.
Sure.....blanket the Bay area with them.....except let the private sector pay for them....and their maintenance.....no subsidies....No Taxpayer money whatsoever.
yes they should plus they got an island there to put them on to (Alcatraz island) and they could put it on the shore and the island so yes its a good idea
Ain't gonna happen.
just another bogus question from jello that has little to do with GW
Yes and right on Nancy Pelosi's property.
jello says, " San Francisco bay has enough wind power to support 250-400 wind mills. Do you support building up the bay, filling it will wind mills as a means to generate clean energy"
Should we consider where the wind speed is greatest when we install wind turbines?
Would that be in passes that funnel wind?
https://www.google.com/search?q=altamont+pass&tbm=isch
Would maintenance be easier and less expensive on land?
"Update : Wouldn't they look beautiful framing both sides of the Golden Gate Bridge? "
How hard would it be to install wind turbines around the GG bridge?
Consider the topography around the bridge:
http://d1435t697bgi2o.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/mmw-water-model-large.jpg
https://www.google.com/search?q=bay+model&tbm=isch
