It's the wind's fault!
1 posted on
06/06/2016 1:15:40 PM PDT by
Lorianne
To: Lorianne
Luckily it’s sunny enough!
2 posted on
06/06/2016 1:17:57 PM PDT by
Stosh
To: Lorianne
Damn wind! (Or lack thereof).
3 posted on
06/06/2016 1:19:56 PM PDT by
SamAdams76
(Delegates So Far: Trump (1,239); Cruz (559); Rubio (165); Kasich (161)
To: Lorianne
There is a reason commercially viable windmills are placed near places such as Palm Springs, California, the ridge line of the Allegheny Mountains in Pennsylvania and off Cape Cod: because they have a consistent and steady supply of wind.
Woops! Scratch Cape Cod, because the Royal Family in Massachusetts didn't want them spoiling their backyard view.
4 posted on
06/06/2016 1:20:08 PM PDT by
Vigilanteman
(ObaMao: Fake America, Fake Messiah, Fake Black man. How many fakes can you fit into one Zer0?)
To: Lorianne
Shun the unbeliever. SHUN!
To: Lorianne
If it’s too winding they can’t operate. If there’s no wind they can’t operate. If it’s too hot they can’t operate and if it’s too cold they can’t operate.
6 posted on
06/06/2016 1:21:18 PM PDT by
SkyDancer
("They Say That Nobody's Perfect But Yet Here I Am")
To: Lorianne
I lived in Yorkshire for a while, and it’s damn sure windy enough there.
7 posted on
06/06/2016 1:22:12 PM PDT by
PLMerite
(Compromise is Surrender: The Revolution...will not be kind.)
To: Lorianne
No place is windy enough to run these things without massive subsidies and without standby backup generators.
8 posted on
06/06/2016 1:22:41 PM PDT by
Paine in the Neck
( Socialism consumes EVERYTHING!)
To: Lorianne
10 posted on
06/06/2016 1:23:44 PM PDT by
freedumb2003
(Don't mistake my silence for ignorance, my calmness for acceptance, or my kindness for weakness)
To: Lorianne
Locate those machines closer to Parliament.
11 posted on
06/06/2016 1:24:52 PM PDT by
GingisK
To: Lorianne
So, are there plans to lift the anchors and tow it someplace more windy?
12 posted on
06/06/2016 1:25:36 PM PDT by
rktman
(Enlisted in the Navy in '67 to protect folks rights to strip my rights. WTH?!)
To: Lorianne
The obvious solution is to spend massive amounts of tax payer money building wind machines, giant blowers, to power the windmills.....DUH!
13 posted on
06/06/2016 1:33:08 PM PDT by
PROCON
To: Lorianne
Perhaps someone broke the wind?!
14 posted on
06/06/2016 1:37:21 PM PDT by
rfreedom4u
(The root word of vigilante is vigilant!)
To: Lorianne
England is not windy enough to justify building any more onshore wind turbines, the chief executive of wind industry trade body has admitted.We wonder if England has coal. It was produced by solar energy, was put in the "bank" many years ago, and works 24/7 without subsidies.
Much money is wasted on the uneconomically viable, limited to when there is wind, kills eagles, bats, and other birds, and is aesthetic pollution.
This money could have been spent on harvesting the products of combustion of coal to make it clean, dependable energy, 24/7.
15 posted on
06/06/2016 1:39:05 PM PDT by
olezip
To: Lorianne
An island on the Atlantic ocean isn’t windy enough? Really?
17 posted on
06/06/2016 1:50:34 PM PDT by
Bullish
(Face it, insanity is just not presidential.)
To: Lorianne
all the stats told them that BEFORE they started. idiots
To: Lorianne
If financial support required by onshore wind is less than that required by gas, the industry argues it should no longer be regarded as subsidy.
Ha! That’s certainly creative thinking. So if I borrow less money from the bank than someone else borrowed, it really shouldn’t be regarded as a “loan”, eh?
To: Lorianne
The next question is whether the British Isles sunny enough to justify solar energy investment.
To: Lorianne
23 posted on
06/06/2016 3:09:39 PM PDT by
Red in Blue PA
(war is peace, freedom is slavery, ignorance is strength, obama loves America)
To: Lorianne
That’s a LAUGHER! When did economics ever have anything to do with the quest for ‘alternative energy’?
27 posted on
06/06/2016 3:55:03 PM PDT by
BobL
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson