Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 08/14/2008 2:11:37 PM PDT by Bill Dupray
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: Bill Dupray

Can someone answer me something. We have a wind farm recently put up in our area. You can see it as you drive out in the country. It’s in the distance. THere must be fifty of these things and the number is growing.

EACH AND EVERY TIME I DRIVE BY THE PROPS ARE TURNING REGARDLESS IF THERE IS WIND OR NO WIND. ON DAYS WHEN THERE IS NO WIND THE PROPS ARE GOING.

How can this be? Is someone fooling us?


2 posted on 08/14/2008 2:15:51 PM PDT by nikos1121 (The first black president of the US should be at least a "Jackie Robinson.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Bill Dupray

“Well we don’t get wind power from pin-wheels. We get it from thousands of huge, industrial grade wind turbines, which, for the dim bulbs on the left, are machines.”

Machines are great and wonderful things. I think conservatives need to be just a-okay with wind from an environmental view (the economics are another thing).

I am all for letting the liberals be the NIMBYs on wind and for conservatives to be the problem-solvers.
Texas Land Commissioner Jerry Patterson, who touted the fact that Texas leads the nation in install wind power capacity, notes that, after a few generations, we’ll have smarter birds. ;-) And I think its hilarious that the liberals in Cape Cod stopped wind, and now - hey wait a sec - a conservative Texas *oil man* is getting big Govt subsidies for doing something “green”... Huh?!? Only Al Gore was supposed to be in on that scam!!

The scam part is not the technology - it works - or the environmental impact - yeah, its probably noisy, but its noisy in the flat plains where few people live. The scam part is how we have to fund ‘alternative’ and ‘renewable’ energy to the tune of billions via taxpayer money. If it really works, let the free market carry it forward.

Despite its downsides, wind is not too bad and it only proves a conservative point that ANY REAL TECHNOLOGY will have pros and cons. Solar? Chews up a lot of land, expensive, and PV cell production uses lots of icky chemicals. And technology to power 290 million AMerican lifestyles will have steel, electric towers, large-scale plants and run by corporations. Meanwhile the nuclear power the libs love to hate is the #1 worlds source of CO2 emissions free power - safe, reliable, environmentally friendly. Slap a Green Sticker on all those nukes! Build 400 nuclear power plants and say good bye to global warming and hello to energy independence.


6 posted on 08/14/2008 2:21:58 PM PDT by WOSG (http://no-bama.blogspot.com/ - NObama, stop the Hype and Chains candidate)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Bill Dupray
T-Bone Pickens and Nancy Pelousi have something going here with TB's CLNE venture. One of the largest stockholders is none other than Miss Nance.

Nance stands to clean up with CLNE while the rest of us suffer what a Democrat-controlled congress has done to our 'bankrolls.'

Democrats are the reason for the stock market decline and for the prices in grocery stores.

14 posted on 08/14/2008 2:34:14 PM PDT by IbJensen (Ali Bama isn't going to make it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Bill Dupray

Even if its not the solution to all energy problems, wind power is a good thing. Sure, it has peak-to-average power problems, and isn’t yet as cheap as hydrocarbon power, but its getting there.

I live on Cape Cod, where its almost always windy offshore. An offshore wind farm would supply up to 75% of the Cape’s power requirements. The adversaries to the project, of course, are people like Kennedy and Kerry, who don’t want to see the turbines 5 miles out to see from their yacht docks.

Boone Pickens might not be completely right on the natural gas side of his proposition, but he’s rich enough and old that he doesn’t have to talk his book up. I think he’s sincere, even if he is betting financially on the things he’s recommending.


20 posted on 08/14/2008 2:37:10 PM PDT by Pearls Before Swine (Is /sarc really necessary?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Bill Dupray

I would love to have a windmill on my property to generate electricity.


24 posted on 08/14/2008 2:42:01 PM PDT by ViLaLuz (2 Chronicles 7:14)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: Bill Dupray
Screw the “environmental impact” for a moment and think of this. Haven't any of these guys taken a basics physics, chemistry or basic biology class? Don't they know that carbon combustion IS THE ONLY renewable source of energy? I know many of these guys are lawyers so maybe they should familiarize themselves with the laws of thermodynamics. Law #1: you can't get more energy out of a system than what is put in and Law #2 states that law 1 cannot be truly achieved as nothing is 100% efficient. Amongst the substances is nature, carbon combustion especialy from hydrocarbons purified from petroleum is the most efficient source in nature. Of all the sources of energy wind and solar power are the most ineffiecient as the amount of lost kinetic energy to the system is huge. These simple measurement of the particle density of air would predict that. These are simple physical principles but I guess they are like road runners who never really studied law.
30 posted on 08/14/2008 3:19:44 PM PDT by Pharmer (How am I supposed to rule the world when I surrounded by freakin liberal idiots!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson