Posted on 02/05/2023 8:39:54 PM PST by SeekAndFind
I wish they would stop building those monstrosities here in Maine.
The RATS and their ecofreak corrupt cohorts want to build 179 more of these awful windmills in the northernmost part of Maine, west of Houlton.
They have to clear cut an area the size of two football fields per windmill, take away chunks of mountain tops, and dig a fifteen foot hole to anchor each windmill, adding concrete and steel.
Many 100 foot wide roads have to be built to accommodate the movement of the giant blades to the construction site, plus an endless amount of new power lines have to be built.
The existing wind mills and solar farms have not reduced the cost of electricity; prices have been soaring.
The lobster fisherman have successfully blocked the construction of these eyesores offshore, so far.
These windmills kill huge amounts of birds, and the ecofreaks don’t say boo.
The penalty for killing a bald eagle is five years in prison. I’m sure these Maine windmills kill a number of them, but hey, no problem; leftwing billionaires love those taxpayers funded subsidies.
Wait till the car companies start reporting their electric car losses!!
Is this statement intended to imply that the turbine blades are compostable?!
Regards,
You can’t power modern civilization with wind and solar. Then there are all of the ecological reasons why windmills are a bad idea. Green extremist pipe dreams.
There's an old rule that whenever politics gets involved in anything--science, education, the media, energy production, racial harmony, even art--that thing is ruined.
That adage is true except for those trying (dishonestly) to make money on the thing that is ruined.
Punchline: “Dis-assed-her”
The thing is that I don’t have a problem with doing research on alternative energies, as long as it is an eye to optimize where it is actually useful. Dotting the coastline or across the country is not useful, but little units on houses or on mountain tops to power Ranger lookouts may be useful.
Line C should be: De-calf-inated. Otherwise it makes no sense.
.
Meanwhile the politicians state and federal, having received large cash contributions from the companies involved in building wind-farms, are determined to push through huge Atlantic Coast wind-farms, even though there is lots of evidence that they will utterly destroy marine life, including whales.
Basically, commercial and sport fishing will cease from New England waters down to Maryland/Delaware. Seafood restaurants will have to buy imported seafood; the shell fish industry will shut down as those stocks are not mobile.
The public will receive higher electrical bills and lose their favorite seaside vacation spots, spots whose view is blocked by wind-farms, and the eternal crashing of the waves is modulated by the hum from hundreds of giant wind turbines churning away.
At sea wind farms are not oil rigs in a different shape - oil rigs can be beneficial to marine life, but wind turbines are detrimental.
—
from:
The effects of offshore wind farms on marine life, Written by Owen Harris
https://marinemadnessdotblog.wordpress.com/2020/08/14/the-effects-of-offshore-wind-farms-on-marine-life/
Excerpts:
Environmental damage from construction
One of the first effects OWFs have on their nearby surroundings is physical damage caused by their construction. The main effects of this are seafloor habitat destruction and sediment suspension in the water column, caused by the disruption of sand and silt from the seafloor.
Sediment suspension is likely to have a negative impact on fauna by increasing turbidity, mobilising contaminants and smothering sessile suspension-feeding animals, such as corals, sponges and anemones. A reduction in visibility from sediment suspension can also affect photosynthesis in algae and disrupt key behaviours in visual animals.
Different types of OWF foundations will have different levels of effect on the seabed. Monopile foundations consist of a single tube which is hammered into the seabed. This type of foundation can only be used in shallower waters up to a depth of 30 m due to hydrodynamic forces.
Tripod (three-legged) and jacket (four-legged) foundations are more stable and therefore can be used at greater depths, but their construction will have a greater environmental impact due to the amount of material that is driven into the seabed. However there are alternative solutions, such as floating structures which can be anchored to the seabed and reduces the need for pile-driving.
Noise pollution
One of the main issues caused by the construction and operation of OWFs is that they emit a lot of noise into the marine environment. Known as marine noise pollution, this can affect the behaviors of marine animals as well as potentially causing serious injury. Pile-driving during the construction of OWFs can generate noise up to 200 dB, while the operation generates up to 120 dB.
This noise is mainly generated above the water but transmits through the tower and is then radiated into the surrounding water, adding to pre-existing noise from other sources. This can affect animal behaviour, particularly those that are more sensitive to sound, that rely on their use of vocalization for communication and those that use echolocation for navigation, such as cetaceans.
In salmon, bass and harbour porpoises, it has been found that 90 dB is the level of noise that causes avoidance behaviours. This amount of noise is not instantly harmful to these animals, but prolonged exposure for around 8 hours could equal exposure to 130 dB which can cause either temporary or permanent hearing damage.
An example of an affected species is harbour porpoises who have been found to initiate avoidance responses within 20 km of pile-driving activity, whilst pile-driving noise has also been shown to disrupt their vocalizations which can take up to 72 hours to return to normal.
Other affected species include cod and herring, who can detect pile-driving noise from up to 80 km away. Additionally, cod and sole have been found to have behavioural responses to pile-driving noise, which included initial avoidance, higher swimming speed and habituation after time.
When exposed to the sound produced by an air gun (222.6 dB which is 10% louder than the noise produced by pile-driving) pink snappers have also been found to have sustained ear damage, meaning they and many other fish species are likely to be impacted as well.
Another potential issue with OWFs is electromagnetic fields (EMFs), which are generated by the transportation of the acquired energy through electric cables that are built into the seabed. They could have an effect on the behaviour or physiology of fauna which use electroreception for detecting prey or conspecifics such as sharks and rays.
A study on the small-spotted catshark found that they showed avoidance behaviours when exposed to electric fields which were equal to the maximum output of undersea cables, despite being attracted to much smaller electric currents which mimicked their prey. Thornback rays and spurdogs have also shown avoidance behaviour in the presence of EMFs, but more research is needed.
Wind like solar were project designed to suck government monies up for big investors. They never had real life application.
Ever.
too high of wind velocities are even worse than no wind at all for these monstrosities ...
Disrobed,
Dis assed her
And… too many solar panels will suck all the sunlight out of the sun and we will end up in eternal darkness… forever!
You answered your own question. They need a public bailout. What don’t you understand?
I got it the first time, but when a joke has to be dissected to be understood, it's not that funny.
The guy might have been a great pilot, but he should have stayed with flying.
That’s my home, and while I never did a deep dive, I deduced the “government subsidies” part of it the minute I realized that they were building the things. I drive around a lot for work, and I hardly ever seem them turning.
When you remove energy from a system, its temperature goes down. About 35 years ago, a brilliant scientist colleague asked the question “How much would the air temperature change over Europe if they met 100% of their energy needs with wind?” He did the calculations and found that indeed the air temperature would drop a measurable and significant amount. I don’t remember the exact value, but I think it was a couple of degrees downstream of all the wind farms.
I’ve never seen anybody actually address this in a scientific paper.
That’s the problem, isn’t it? Electricity is produced on-demand and there is very limited storage available. There is no way batteries can ever store the amount of energy required. There are plenty of pumped hydro sites available, but the greenies won’t let you build on them. How in the world can you get through the many days of no wind before it starts blowing again?
Let’s hope those gusts don’t knock over any towers.
Groan! Come on, dad, knock it off!
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.