>> What doesn't sound reasonable about plowing from a rotating structure?
>
>> You need to establish that it cannot be done physically and when you
>> fail at that then you need to come up with some numbers that show is
>> cheaper to spend $100 billion a year on diesel.
>
>>> Think about whether it's easier to harvest grain, or corn, or whatever
>>> with a combine in a field with straight or spiral furrows and it might
>>> dawn on you.
>
>> Well? �Don't keep us settin' on the edges of our chairs.
>
> I have posted links in the other (original) thread about circular fields.
> This is already being done for irrigation using a center pivot, and I'm
> fairly sure the ground is tilled and crops planted the same way. The total
> amount of land unused compared to square fields is something like 15-20%%,
Even square fields "waste" some land as staging or storage areas.
> and I contend that the unused areas can be beneficial, as a windbreak,
> erosion control, or for planting other crops that can be cultivated by
> hand.
Plenty of room for the wind turbine, PV or dish Stirling to power the
pivot and grid.
> Some crops may be more suited to circular planting and harvesting
> than others, but it is more a matter of getting used to it, and adopting
> new technology.
No one suggested abolishing every last diesel tractor this very
second.
Pickens wants to put as much truck and bus transportation as possible
on natural gas which is, admittedly a faster if interim solution.
But that won't last.
In the long run we'll have to electrify the fields.
> What is the problem with, essentially, attaching an electric tractor to the
> pivot arm, which will have a power cable on a reel, and have it traverse
> the field in a circular pattern? If the tractor needs to be moved to
> another location, there can be a path to a grid of roadways outside the
> swing of the pivot arm. The tractor could have a small battery pack to
> allow it to move to a new location where it can pick up mains power. If the
> tractor is not working, the power requirements to move to a new location on
> a flat road are minimal.
> Also, a 300 HP diesel tractor can be replaced by a 100 to 200 HP electric,
> because the diesel is rated at maximum, while the electric motor has a much
> better HP/torque curve, and is also capable of short time overloads of 2x
> to 3x if needed.
Now we are really talking cost and weight savings. Farmers don't like
to pack the soil with heavy equipment. That's why those rubber track
tractors are so popular.
> For a large farm, it should be possible to build a biomass-powered
> electrical generator that can run more efficiently and cleaner than the
> equivalent diesel tractor.
The bio mass needs to be hauled down the road to a _real_ power plant.
Bret Cahill
