Posted on 11/16/2019 3:27:03 AM PST by Erik Latranyi
The climate change cult is insane... then again what they do to forests is a drop in the buckets compared to their plans for us.
Its never really been about the climate. Its about power.
Goodness gracious. EVERYTHING about the wind industry is bad for the environment. From the wasteful strip mining for rare Earth minerals to the smelting of the steel to the trucking of the components to the chopping of the birds to the blight on the landscape. And then, they never produce the energy it took to manufacture, transport and maintain themselves
There is a wind turbine design that was used in Spain where the turbine sits horizontally in side of a tower and the wind comes in through openings in the tower and drives the turbine. It is considered much safer for animals, it is sheltered out of the elements. It is considered to be 25 per cent less efficient and a little more costly than an exposed vertical wind machine but id the wind is free the 25 per cent less efficiency will be more than made up for. The tower with internalized turbine is also quieter.
If you are going to have wind turbine power, that is the way to do it!
Now that you put it that way, I'm leaning towards the wind industry.
Shouldn’t this be in Breaking Wind News?
Something, something petard, something, something hoist.
If wind energy was so great and safe the turbines would be located in the cities high above the billboards so urban dwellers can hum along to the tune as they enjoy the intermittant electricity.
Maybe that’s how they intend to do- drive everyone in the country nuts with noise and vibration so they’ll move to town for relative peace.
350 years of proven, recoverable coal in North America.
Why walk away ?
A turbine that is safer from slicing birds still does not stop the death of bats, the sound pollution driving people/animals insane and the fact wind cannot meet any cost/benefit analysis.
Its never really been about the climate. Its about power.
Only the insane ...
Since towers are only 25% efficient that makes the horizontal ones only about 18% efficient. By that metric, why bother? Besides the higher costs to manufacture, the power needed to make the component parts likely exceeds the lifetime power generation of the unit before failure.
No the Spanish enclosed versions are 25 per cent less efficient per given wind velocity and flow versus the exposed tower turbine blades....Yes you’d need a higher minimum speed to get them turning but once turning and brought up to speed, you have energy flow similar to the open 3 blade monsters.
The enclosed are more durable and don’t break down as frequently. They are more protected from the elements other than the wind. So the 25 per cent less efficiency start up speed is more than made up for by the savings in not having to repair or replace them as frequently. The turbine design is different...more like jet turbines, smaller blades at top and larger at bottom.
Cause and effect...
It’s ironic that they are destroying the environment by removing the CO2 scrubbers for a tech that also destroys the environment.
In the German Enviro wacko game, Red Kites trump kilowatts
In a rare instance of Euro enviros importing Spotted Owl balderdash from America, the Red Kite has become the stop gap. Normalcy is Ameri wackos copying from Euros
“...all to combat climate change.”
When I was in college, the Soviets were funding US Leftist groups to attack us from 2 angles: They paid for the anti-war (and anti-military) movement, obviously, and they also paid for the ‘environmental’ movement (all documented in the Venona Papers). To their surprise, and I’m sure delight (and probably shock), they got themselves a whole army of professors and media types to actually believe their garbage.
At the time, the prime goal of the Soviets was to obtain political, or at least psychological, control over Western Europe, and the best way to do that was to arm-up, and the point out to the Western Europeans that the US wouldn’t match them (and therefore likely wouldn’t not protect them either), so it was time to start cutting deals, starting with a huge natural gas pipeline. Then Reagan came along and that strategy quickly failed. The ‘environment’ was a longer-term play, intended to weaken our side economically.
So then, starting exactly on Earth Day, 1990, just as the Cold War was about over, all we heard was that the Earth was going to hell...and it’s still all we hear. “Climate change” is simply a cover, for if combating that was the REAL GOAL, you would be hearing a much different approach from them, starting with the following:
1) Demanding nuclear power plants be built and a huge push for fusion.
2) Demanding that hydroelectric plants be built and high voltage wires strung everywhere
3) Demanding that we look at shading options for the sun (in Earth orbit, or upper atmosphere), which are very compared to what’s being spent on the ground
4) Demanding real population control and reduction in the Third World, where the largest gains, by far, in carbon emissions are taking place as they modernize
5) Demanding a sharp reduction in the giant countries of China and India, and willing to use any means to accomplish that end.
6) Be will to accept technologies which permanently lock up carbon, and already exist
But they are NOT pushing any of the above. Therefore it’s only reasonable to conclude that their goals lie elsewhere. And given their history and what they despise (i.e., Western culture), it’s not hard to figure out what their ultimate goal here is, when they say ‘combat climate change’.
So, it’s probably best to stop taking them at their word and looking more at their actions.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.