Skip to comments.
Debate swirls as wind power grows rapidly across country
ap on Bakersfield Californian ^
| 1/1/06
| John Christofferson - ap
Posted on 01/01/2006 12:25:56 PM PST by NormsRevenge
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-58 next last
To: NormsRevenge
While windmills may evoke quaint images of yesteryear, they're sparking growing debate, particularly as the first offshore projects are proposed in popular tourist areas, such as Cape Cod, Long Island, N.Y., and the New Jersey shore. Critics, including a member of the influential Kennedy family, worry that some projects could harm national treasures.
"All of a sudden you're transferring an asset used by 5 million people into the hands of private industrial speculators," said Robert F. Kennedy Jr., an environmentalist who has objected to the Cape Cod proposal.
2
posted on
01/01/2006 12:26:41 PM PST
by
NormsRevenge
(Semper Fi ... Monthly Donor spoken Here. Go to ... https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
To: NormsRevenge
Don't the climate fanatics worry that diverting and slowing the prevailing wind patterns will cause; a) climate change, b) changing the earth's rotation or c) heating by compression?
3
posted on
01/01/2006 12:29:31 PM PST
by
Mike Darancette
(Mesocons for Rice '08)
To: NormsRevenge
Probably knows he won't get his 40% markup.
4
posted on
01/01/2006 12:29:56 PM PST
by
babydoll22
(If you stop growing as a person you live in your own private hell.)
To: NormsRevenge
NIMBY syndrome alert!
If they did not have Kennedy and Kerry MA would have no wind.
5
posted on
01/01/2006 12:29:58 PM PST
by
oxcart
(Remember Bush lied.......People DYED... THEIR FINGERS!)
To: NormsRevenge
"If we could just find a way to make them invisible," Gray said, "we'd have something everybody could get behind." I wonder how long it will be before some congresscritter tries to make a law.
6
posted on
01/01/2006 12:33:08 PM PST
by
Fzob
(Why does this tag line keep showing up?)
To: NormsRevenge
experts expect wind to generate at least 5 percent by 2020. Insufficient. Non-OPEC oil production will level out in ten years, and OPEC production will decline substantially by 2026 or 2030. Nukes is the only cost-effective way to go, or relax the constraints on coal plants.
7
posted on
01/01/2006 12:33:11 PM PST
by
RightWhale
(pas de lieu, Rhone que nous)
To: NormsRevenge
Watch utilities grow parallel power capacity in nuclear and coal plants to keep power cached when rotors stand still [exerience in Germany which has highest prop power in world].
This drives up the cost of the whole system since it increases redundancy. Green logic for you.
8
posted on
01/01/2006 12:36:58 PM PST
by
seppel
To: RightWhale
agreed. nukes now, and then fusion.
9
posted on
01/01/2006 12:38:37 PM PST
by
seppel
To: NormsRevenge
Put some of those Windmills in D.C.plenty of blow hards there
10
posted on
01/01/2006 12:40:42 PM PST
by
al baby
(Father of the beeber)
To: RightWhale
Well, does this mean that Nuclear power is now back on the table?
11
posted on
01/01/2006 12:42:02 PM PST
by
RobbyS
( CHIRHO)
To: NormsRevenge
Kennedy & Kerry do not want eysores fouling up the vista's from their dacha's. Let the scum freeze in the dark!
12
posted on
01/01/2006 12:44:55 PM PST
by
johnny7
(“Iuventus stultorum magister”)
To: Mike Darancette
I saw a report that said massive use of windmills does indeed have climate altering effects because the air is heated as energy is extracted. On a small scale there will be micro climate effects in the vicinity of a large windmill farm and on a macro scale there will be significant atmospheric heating. There is no free lunch.
13
posted on
01/01/2006 12:51:35 PM PST
by
saganite
(The poster formerly known as Arkie 2)
To: saganite
I saw a report that said massive use of windmills does indeed have climate altering effects because the air is heated as energy is extracted. On a small scale there will be micro climate effects in the vicinity of a large windmill farm and on a macro scale there will be significant atmospheric heating. There is no free lunch. Sounds like hogwash to me. What about the energy transferred by bending trees as winds flow through forests? Or the energy used to form whitecaps on oceans?
To: saganite
--
macro scale there will be significant atmospheric heating.--
--on about the same scale, it will slow down the rotation of the earth, thus making days longer and also adding to the sun's heating effect---WE'RE DOOMED--
15
posted on
01/01/2006 12:59:05 PM PST
by
rellimpank
(Don't believe anything about firearms or explosives stated by the mass media---NRABenefactor)
To: Cementjungle
What about the energy transferred by bending trees as winds flow through forests? Or the energy used to form whitecaps on oceans? The laws of physics would say that there would be some heat generated by both.
To: RobbyS
Oh yes. Some power companies are already getting their permits.
17
posted on
01/01/2006 1:05:36 PM PST
by
RightWhale
(pas de lieu, Rhone que nous)
To: NormsRevenge
Wind projects have sparked complaints around the country that the windmills cause noise, obstruct scenic views and kill wildlife, including thousands of federally protected birds in California. If the enviro-fascists weren't such hypocrites they might find themselves in bit of a pickle with these windmills.
18
posted on
01/01/2006 1:10:52 PM PST
by
manwiththehands
(My wish for the new year: I wish Republicans were running the country.)
To: RightWhale
To: NormsRevenge
Oil - Too icky
Coal - Too dirty
Nuclear - Don't even think about it
Wind - Kills birds and lowers the Kennedy's property values
Hydroelectric - Snail Darter
Wood - Tree killer
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-58 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson