Posted on 04/28/2019 6:18:33 AM PDT by NOBO2012
Over a hundred years ago Einstein presented his theory of relativity which paved the way for his theory of black holes.
It remained just that, a theory, for a century until it was “proved” more or less by a photo last month.
And yet, get a gaggle of second rate “climatologists” together to come up with the theory that the earth is melting because we heat our homes in order to prevent freezing to death during the cold season and “97% of (published climate) scientists” immediately subscribe to the goofy theory of “man-caused” global warming. And call you a science denier if you dare question them. I should note here that even Einstein doubted his own theory of black holes - but then, he was a real scientist.
Anyway, one whacky hockey puck graph and the next thing you know you’ve got these expensive eyesores sprouting like dandelions in springtime.
Iowa Giant Standing Tall In the Rain – somewhere along I-80 yesterday
Those who’ve been around awhile know that I complain about this at least once a year. That’s because it gets worse every year I travel I-80. Every. Single. Year. More of these inefficient monstrosities defiling the landscape in the flyover states, posing as viable alternatives to coal/gas fired electric generation plants.
Oh, they’ll tell you that wind is cheaper - free even. Remember, they also told us nuclear power would be, and I quote, “so cheap you can’t afford to meter it.” That of course was true only until federal regulators got a hold of it. But wind turbines and solar - they’re a pure con. Here’s how it plays:
Utilities in several states are attempting to run a con game on their respective states’ utility commissions and ratepayers. How? By claiming that their plans for prematurely shuttering existing, reliable, relatively inexpensive coal power plants and replacing them with expensive, intermittent renewable power sources will save ratepayers money “in the long run.” Meanwhile, they ask for an immediate increase in electric rates to pay for the transition.
The truth is, the “long run” never comes. Any 10-year-old child can tell you someone isn’t saving you money if he or she charges you more for something you already get for less.
So simple even Calvin and Hobbes can do it.
From Indiana to Iowa and beyond, electric utilities with existing coal plants are planning to replace them with wind power and, increasingly, solar power, the most expensive form of energy, excluding battery power.
Oh sure, they’ll produce reports showing how it works. All of the results will be accomplished through the judicious use of math-a-magicals. But never try to kid a kidder. I worked for an energy company and one of my departments ran financial models; tell me your desired outcome and I’ll create a model that demonstrates its viability. And you wonder why I’m cynical.
Climate studies are the same way. You want anthropogenic global warming? Bam! You’ve got it. Cooling? Bam! So don’t be a science-denier, get into the Math-a-magical con game today. Everybody’s a winner!
Those are some pretty mountains you’ve got there Wyoming, be a shame to wreck them with a bunch of metal monsters tilting at the wind
Posted from: MOTUS A.D
Almost nobody lives in Wyoming.
https://buckrail.com/wyomings-population-declines-for-the-third-straight-year/
Plus it’s pretty windy from Cheyenne to Rawlins.
50% of power is lost in transmission so it takes twice as much conventional fuel to power a battery car.
The vast amounts of rare earth minerals needed to build windmills has 2 consequences. First, and most obviously, it drives the cost of these behemoth machines to astronomical levels. What would normally cost about $50K to build approaches $1 mil, each. Second, rare earth minerals have a user life of about 20 years after which the magnetos driving the things diminish rapidly.
So, change out the magnets, you say. Not so fast.
It is less expensive to build an entirely new windmill than repair an old one.
But here’s the real catch. Because the materials used are controlled substances their disposal is expensive and laborious.
Now we have a device that cost $2 million every 20 years plus the burden of disposing of the old one, another $500 thousand. What is the net gain for all this folderol?
Wind turbines commonly produce considerably less than rated capacity, which is the maximum amount of power it could produce if it ran all the time. For example, a 1.5-megawatt wind turbine with an efficiency factor of 33 percent may produce only half a megawatt in a year — less if the wind isn’t blowing reliably.
How does this compare to a nuclear power plant? Good question.
The Palo Verde nuclear power plant in Arizona is the largest nuclear power plant in the United states with three reactors and a total electricity generating capacity of about 3,937 MW.
So, multiply 3,937 MW times 2 times $2.5 million and you have the actual cost of wind power to replace Palo Verde. that is $5,000,000,000,000. Cost of Palo Verde was about $10, bil in current dollars. Its life span is 60 years. Add 30% to the above figure and you have a number greater than 7 trillion dollars. Do the math.
The windiest place I’ve ever been is the Cajon Pass in San Bernardino County. It’ll blow you to the ground. Wind generators would be at peak capacity there, until being launched south with the birds.
False.
It is always interesting to see the windmills are not placed in areas with lots of wind. I guess a lot of this is the NIMBY attitude out here by Nantucket and other places.
I went back over my numbers and discovered I was being grossly conservative. The total cost of wind turbine to replace nuclear is $15,000,000,000.
You know it is. And it’s no secret.
Anyone who knows research math knows this is true.
I have a friend that used to work for a phosphate mining company in Florida. They did it all the time to satisfy the FL Dept of Environmental Regulation. Will the holding ponds work if we open this new mine? Sure, just estimate that there will be 2 fewer inches of rain in the 3rd quarter than we originally thought and the model works, the state is happy. Voila! Everything is copacetic.
This happens all...the...time. In every facet of the economy - especially with the government.
Does anyone recall during the Carter administration when he submitted a budget with a large deficit and the financial markets went bonkers, the prime rate jumped to 19%?
He submitted a new budget soon after with (magically) revised projections of income and outgo, Shazam! Deficit dramatically reduced. Nothing had changed in the real world, but suddenly everything was better.
Wind energy is not free energy.
Let E be the energy in the wind at a given point, and let e be the energy taken to drive a windmill at that point. E-e<>E (E minus e DOES NOT EQUAL E) because e is not zero if it’s driving the windmill.
I think there have been quite a number of Real Scientists suggesting that.
Are you missing three zer0s somewhere?
It’s no secret...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eJVvHj0USyA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xqS3opuRFLY
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.