"It's the greatest scam in history. The most expensive energy you can buy. They are ugly. A friend of mine comes from Minnesota... He said it's unbelievable what happened.... The most beautiful fields.... I was so looking forward to seeing them again... and they had windmills all over them. These horrible structures.... these ugly horrible things.... I looked at this field that was one of the most beautiful places in my own mind and imagination. It's littered with this garbage. It looked like a junkyard, he said. Then you get different manufacturers, and [the windmills] don't look alike. And they're not painted alike. Different colors. Even if they're white, one's a beige-y white, one's a darker white, one's a lighter white. And they start to rust after four or five years. And then they start to wear out. And nobody takes them because you're not allowed to bury the props... There's a certain type of fiber, and if it goes the ground, we are all going to die. What bullshit this is! Okay?... What they do is leave them up.... Windmills all over the place. Tall ones, short ones, dead ones, they're all dead. Some are hanging over by a thread...."
Said Trump today.
You may not like Trump's aesthetics all the time. We were just talking about all the gold leaf in the Oval Office. But he is attentive to the details of the visual world. He's an aesthete. What kind of man cares that the windmills are not painted alike even if they are all white because one's a beige-y white, one's a darker white, one's a lighter white? He not only cares, he will calmly detail the problem of shades of white as if you are expected to notice the variations and become unsettled by them as he is.
You are expected to see it as part of what should concern the President of the United States, this discontinuity of the whiteness of windmills.
I like this about him. I think it matters how things look. These places that are beautiful in our "mind and imagination" need to be kept beautiful. Anyone who modifies the landscape owes us all a duty to take care of this beauty. I don't think this comes naturally to most politicians, but it's something that Trump slowed down to contemplate out loud.
పోస్ట్లు
128 కామెంట్లు:
I appreciate his concern for the visual destruction of the landscape. Acres permanently needed for energy production. How many KW per acre? I feel the same way about solar farms.
I have no problem with wind turbines, whether they're white, blue-white, off-white, cream or otherwise. They fill a niche.
I do have a problem with governments, especially the U.S. or Chinese governments, subsidizing them. And that includes tax breaks, tax credits, tax incentives, tariff protection or outright tax transfers for manufacturing, installation, operation and disposal.
"I think it matters how things look. These places that are beautiful in our "mind and imagination" need to be kept beautiful. Anyone who modifies the landscape owes us all a duty to take care of this beauty."
I hate windmills with a burning passion. To add insult to injury, they are a terrible energy source.
The solar farms are not bad at all.
What they've done in SW Wisconsin, between Montfort and Fennimore, is a travesty.
Anyone here seen the solar panel farms north and south of Las Vegas? Eyesores.
Windmills are an eyesore. and they do not last. And they kill birds.
Behind every green energy panacea - is a greed machine, uncaring about actual green energy.
That giant field of solar panels outside of Las Vegas - I hear it's dead now.
Windmills have served their purpose. They’ve spread the graft in all the right directions.
Hawaii has a ton of dead rusted windmills - littering the view.
But Trump has no problem with off shore drilling and open pit coal mines.
"WINDMILLS SUCK! WE HATE 'EM!" - The Birds (interpreted with the aid of a cockatoo)
We need a tax on Democrats only, to tear them all down and bury the rubbish in yards of Democrats.
Are wind farms required to set aside funds for dismantling these things when they've reached the end of their short lives? If not, why not?
"Anyone here seen the solar panel farms north and south of Las Vegas? Eyesores."
The entire landscape north and south of Las Vegas qualifies as an eyesore. I live in AZ, and for the most part, this state would be beautified if it were covered in solar panels. It's a shame they are intermittent, and battery technology is unsuited to grid scale storage.
I mind the look of s wind farm less than that of a solar farm. But a pumpjack takes up a lot less visual space, and looks kind of like a cute dinosaur or one of those birds that you could cause to bob up and down and drink water. And a Christmas tree doesn't take up much visual space either. Nevertheless, neither is actually pretty.
Basically, energy production isn't generally attractive. Hydro - I suppose that depends on whether you're looking at it from the reservoir ("lake") side or the dam side.
The windmill removes energy from the climate, which we are assured is not infinite, converts it to electricity, and ships it elsewhere, where a fair portion is turned into heat. There's no such thing as a free lunch.
But Trump has no problem with off shore drilling and open pit coal mines.
[shrug] Well, whatever else you can say about these methods of energy production (and there's a lot to say), you at least must admit they don't tend to occur right next to the freeway.
Things that don't make economic sense in their own un-incentivized way, become offending to the eye. It offends one's sense of the relationship between merit and purpose. There is a place for solar in places with lots of sun and the right latitude.
Putting solar panels on top of Walmarts to supply power for its own A/C during the peak heat of the day, makes sense and offends nobody. Converting crop land in Iowa to a solar farm makes no sense at all, just as growing corn to make gasoline makes no sense at all.
Small modular nuclear power plants that require 50 acres to power 10 counties make great sense.
The windmill removes energy from the climate, which we are assured is not infinite, converts it to electricity, and ships it elsewhere, where a fair portion is turned into heat. There's no such thing as a free lunch.
I've been wondering about this for years, but I don't have the math. I mean, turning a wind turbine - much less a whole bunch of them - must have an effect, however small, on wind speed and energy in the immediate area of the wind farm, and therefore at least hyperlocal climate.
Of course, the best news out of this marathon briefing by Trump is that V-8s will probably be coming back, and they won't be shutting off at the red lights, either.
"But Trump has no problem with off shore drilling and open pit coal mines."
You have to generate energy somehow, so it behooves us to consider the footprint. The footprint/energy-produced of oil production is minuscule compared to wind and solar. We can probably do without coal (how many coal mines are left?); gas is cleaner and has a much smaller footprint. At least coal mine sites have to be reclaimed once they're done. How about wind and solar farms?
I care how they look and I fully agree with Trump--they look junky, they are a blight. And they are an expensive and environmentally destructive source of power.
There is nothing good to say about windmills.
Trump smearing shit all over the wall and Althouse declaring it high art.
Aggie said, "...and they won't be shutting off at the red lights, either."
Absolutely the worst effing feature of new cars these past 10 years, and there are many. That 'feature' can FOAD.
Readering said...
But Trump has no problem with off shore drilling
Who doesn't? And if they do, what is their annual energy use? Is it properly kept to nearest tenth of a KW/hr?
This (Trump’s focus on aesthetics) reminds me of something you said, I think back in 2016 - something along the lines of Trump being able to capture and communicate things like a woman, and that surprisingly being some of his appeal.
"But he is attentive to the details of the visual world."
He builds high-end hotels, condos, and resorts. Of course he is.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WEhS9Y9HYjU
Readering said...
But Trump has no problem with off shore drilling and open pit coal mines.
Choices.
One open air coal mine or thousands of windmills that kill thousands of birds and whales.
Aesthetically one coal mine is obviously preferable.
TeaBagHag said...
Trump smearing shit all over the wall and Althouse declaring it high art.
I appreciate TBH for reminding people how stupid, vicious, and awful the average Democrat voter is.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fmbZwxEnAFc
I have been decrying windmills as wasteful eyesores for years. Travel west in MN into SD and you are assaulted by their ugliness, whether ruining farm field vistas or the ridges overlooking the Missouri River - to say nothing of the unsightly transmissions lines cluttering up the countryside. The Sioux Falls dump is piled high with turbine parts that can neither be reused nor recycled. If some one in NYC wants to put one on his building fine with me, but leave the countryside alone. The only good thing about the wind turbines is that they can be dismantled and removed when we come to our senses and build modular nukes to power the country.
I don’t see how anyone can back windmills and still call himself or herself and environmentalist, given all the protected species of birds that the damned things kill. It’s illegal to kill a bird belonging to a protected species unless it’s a windmill, in which case it’s okay to slaughter them by the dozens?
Green Blight
.. when we come to our senses and build modular nukes to power the country.
@minnesota farm guy, that’s if we ever come to our senses.
Thinking about nuclear power some more, one thing to keep in mind is thst it differs in a significant way from fossil fuels. If we don’t dig up the coal or pump out the oil, it’s still there. However the radioactive materials will decay whether we tap into that power or not. I get that everyone is still spooked by the movie “The China Syndrome,” but it came out in 1979, and it’s just ever slightly possible we’ve learned more about nuclear plant safety in the intervening 46 years. That’s especially with Fukashima and Chernobyl to remind plant workers who is first on the scene of an accident.
"What kind of man cares that the windmills are not painted alike even if they are all white because one's a beige-y white, one's a darker white, one's a lighter white?"
SNL did a spoof commercial 10 or so years ago - I think it was called Gay-agra, for a drug that got you back to full gayness. The "before" segments included Fred Armisen as a gay guy who no longer gave a damn if something was bone or ecru or ivory, etc: "damn it, Cedric, they're all WHITE!"
JSM
One open air coal mine or thousands of windmills that kill thousands of birds and whales.
You do realize that coal mining not only kills miners with black lung, but the emissions and waste from burning coal and mine tailings are also deadly to birds. Abandoned mines also leak of toxic chemicals.
If Trump wants to get rid of windmills all he has to do is endorse them, and watch the left do it for him. Those big beautiful windmills.
"You do realize that coal mining not only kills miners with black lung, but the emissions and waste from burning coal and mine tailings are also deadly to birds. Abandoned mines also leak of toxic chemicals."
Where do think the materials for the windmills and solar panels come from?
I've been wondering about this for years, but I don't have the math. I mean, turning a wind turbine - much less a whole bunch of them - must have an effect, however small, on wind speed and energy in the immediate area of the wind farm, and therefore at least hyperlocal climate.
And yet, in yet in Trump's world (and maybe yours, too), burning fossil fuels doesn't affect the climate at all.
"However the radioactive materials will decay whether we tap into that power or not."
U-235 has a half-life of 700 million years, so it's not like it's going to decay away. Perhaps I'm missing your point.
Freder Frederson said...
One open air coal mine or thousands of windmills that kill thousands of birds and whales.
You do realize that coal mining not only kills miners with black lung, but the emissions and waste from burning coal and mine tailings are also deadly to birds. Abandoned mines also leak of toxic chemicals.
People like you are here in bad faith
We are doing what we can to create a system where we mitigate these effects as much as possible. Everyone understands there are trade offs in everything.
You can’t pretend that windmills are any better for the environment than coal mines. Windmills are made out of fiberglass and they are piling up in landfills right now.
And the cost benefit of windmills is terrible. They are unreliable for electricity generation and they cannot support a variable draw alternating current electrical grid.
Really if you believed a single word you said you would go live in a cave off grid and hunt for your food.. But you don’t. You are just dishonest about everything.
I am a political conservative. I will defend wind and solar power on national security grounds. I lived through the energy crisis of the 1970s and the shortages caused by an embargo, and the rise in natural gas prices by 30% two years running.
Wind and solar power, at industrial voltages and quantities, are a miracle. The energy arrives on its own with no infrastructure, and no traders on the NYMEX jacking up the price in a shortage. Tradeoffs exist. I will take the tradeoffs for power from American wind and American sunshine.
Where do think the materials for the windmills and solar panels come from?
My point is not that windmills are completely benign, but to advocate burning fossil fuels because it is somehow better for the environment is complete and utter bullshit.
We are doing what we can to create a system where we mitigate these effects as much as possible.
Well, that is just a stupid statement. Trump has pretty much signaled that any restrictions on the fossil fuel industry is an anathema.
Freder Frederson said...
And yet, in yet in Trump's world (and maybe yours, too), burning fossil fuels doesn't affect the climate at all.
The affects are certainly negligible. A 350 to 400 ppm level of CO2 will not change anything significantly.
This is born out by analysis of arctic ice core samples which track temperatures and CO2 levels. They all show CO2 is a lagging indicator to temperature.
CO2 levels have been higher than current levels for 95% of the earth’s history. People in the global warming cult believe climate history started 10000 years ago after the ice age.
You are just silly people.
Had a new AC condenser coil put in today. My 5 year old unit uses R410A which replaced the older R22 which was phased out. They put in 4 pounds at $153.00 per pound.
But wait there's more! The R410A is being phased out and the newer refrigerant is, according to the tech, even more expensive!
Save the whales my ass.
All the PhD climate experts disagree with Achilles, save a fringe few RFK “I dId MuH owN rESearCH!” mouth breathers. We can ask for your expertise when we need a squirrel skinned or advice on killing’ commies!.
The first windmills I saw were on a ridge on I-81 near Scranton or Hazleton PA in the Aughts. Looked like a good location. They were gone by 2019 if not earlier. The solar farms are horrible, too. Put some panels on your roof if you like.
Without CO2 there is no photosynthesis, so no plants, and therefore no herbivores and, eventually no humans. I was born in the first year of the Baby Boom, and in my day they taught us in sixth grade science class how plants use sunlight, CO2, and water to make organic compound, not to mention the oxygen we breathe. If it was up to a Freder we’d all die from his ignorance.
Both the coal mine advocates and the hippy dippy sunshine and wind power advocates are full of it.
The future is nuclear. Modern fission reactors for now, using fail-safe technologies like pebble-bed and thorium and molten salt, then eventually fusion power. It will be the greatest advance in human well-being since we learned to make fire.
" If we don’t dig up the coal or pump out the oil, it’s still there. "
There's a very curious gap in the consciousness of modern society. They don't seem to realize just how much of their modern life is made possible by hydrocarbons. If we did the smart thing and converted 100% of our electrical power generation needs to nuclear, and did it overnight, we'd still be drilling for oil and gas. It is the pervasive building block of raw materials for society, with the exception of water, stone, and wood. Most of the chemicals that go into our raw materials - textiles, plastics, even pharmaceuticals - are harvested from petroleum.
My point is not that windmills are completely benign, but to advocate burning fossil fuels because it is somehow better for the environment is complete and utter bullshit.
@Freder, if that really was your point, you haven’t succeeded in making it.
TeaBagHag said...
All the PhD climate experts disagree with Achilles, save a fringe few RFK “I dId MuH owN rESearCH!” mouth breathers. We can ask for your expertise when we need a squirrel skinned or advice on killing’ commies!.
The problem with this is it is not true.
Many scientists question the existence of anthropomorphic global warming both the hypothesis and the results of efforts to prove the hypothesis.
The problem is that any scientist who questions the global warming cult has their career ended and they can no longer get grants for research.
Isn’t it shocking that government will cut your funding if you don’t support narratives that give the government more power?
Anyway TBH is stupid and doesn’t realize she made my point for me. Global warming is a cult that operates for the benefit and power of the tribe. There is no actual science behind it.
Hassayamper said...
Both the coal mine advocates and the hippy dippy sunshine and wind power advocates are full of it.
The future is nuclear. Modern fission reactors for now, using fail-safe technologies like pebble-bed and thorium and molten salt, then eventually fusion power. It will be the greatest advance in human well-being since we learned to make fire.
Terrestrially this is true. But it will still take a few years to transfer over.
In space solar is the future unless we find a way to do hydrogen capture fusion in space. But that seems a bit far off.
Like fine wine, Trump's communication skills are getting better with age. More reflective, temperate, magnanimous, wise, but delivered with the same bite when calling-out his opponents' foolishness.
I think it is due to the advice he's getting from his team and his having survived the assassination attempt.
On Tuesday I nearly missed suffering a life-changing injury and, after a couple nights of reflection and restless sleep about what that might have meant for the remainder of my life, my priorities and outlook have certainly changed.
"Anyone who modifies the landscape owes us all a duty to take care of this beauty." LOL. Progs aim to destroy the landscape in order to save it. They have a duty to the planet, you know, not to fellow humans, and especially not bourgeois aesthetes.
Coal has one advantage (besides the vast quantities of it that exist) that is seldom mentioned. It can be stockpiled at the location of the power plant. Natural gas flow can be interrupted by power outages, see TX blackouts.
Most of the chemicals that go into our raw materials - textiles, plastics, even pharmaceuticals - are harvested from petroleum.
Non-fuel consumption is about 7% of oil and gas and 5% of coal. Your point is the definition of bullshit.
"Coal has one advantage (besides the vast quantities of it that exist) that is seldom mentioned. It can be stockpiled at the location of the power plant."
That hadn't occurred to me. Nuclear has that advantage too, I guess.
I was born in the first year of the Baby Boom, and in my day they taught us in sixth grade science class how plants use sunlight, CO2, and water to make organic compound, not to mention the oxygen we breathe. If it was up to a Freder we’d all die from his ignorance.
More bullshit from Big Mike. When have I, or anyone else in the entire fucking world, advocated removing all CO2 from the atmosphere? Next you will be telling us that CO2 scrubbers in submarines are completely unnecessary.
Aggie said...
"...Putting solar panels on top of Walmarts to supply power for its own A/C during the peak heat of the day, makes sense and offends nobody. Converting crop land in Iowa to a solar farm makes no sense at all, just as growing corn to make gasoline makes no sense at all."
The city library in Wisconsin Rapids has a solar array on its roof. Does great on sunny summer days. Clouds put a damper on efficiency, but still there's enough power for the day. Winter is another story. Shorter daylight hours, snow on the panels, even though they're slanted, but a 10" or better storm requires someone on the roof to clean them off. Output on cloudy days is dismal. Latitude determines attitude.
The affects are certainly negligible. A 350 to 400 ppm level of CO2 will not change anything significantly.
Considering that CO2 levels are currently at 430 ppm, what is your point?
The problem is that any scientist who questions the global warming cult has their career ended and they can no longer get grants for research.
Just like those brave physicists who have alternative facts regarding the laws of gravity and inertia are run out of the profession. I’ll light a candle.
"You are just silly people."
They'd be silly if they were just rounding up volunteers willing to eliminate fossil-fueled power from their lives and leaving normal people alone. But they're not doing that. They're attempting to destroy a working power grid and in it's place, build one that'll run on unicorn farts.
And that makes them evil people.
"Just like those brave physicists who have alternative facts regarding the laws of gravity and inertia are run out of the profession."
The nature of gravity is very much a matter of debate.
Exactly! Are those folks run out of the profession or is Ashillees as full of shit as a Christmas goose?
I can't stand the massive wind farms. Driving by the spinning Giants from San Gregorio pass towards Palm springs I got the serious case of the leans because they were all spinning in the same direction.
If both produced the same power, would he choose oil derricks over windmills?
The Altamont Pass windfarm of old was always entertaining with the variety of small scale ludicrous designs in various spectrums of operational to scrap heep. Milking Tax benefits was the goal I suspect.
Achilles said …
Many scientists question the existence of anthropomorphic global warming both the hypothesis and the results of efforts to prove the hypothesis.
The problem is that any scientist who questions the global warming cult has their career ended and they can no longer get grants for research.
Absolutely. If Michael Mann and the other climate alarmists were able to bust up the career of Judith Curry, arguably the foremost American climatologist and unarguably in the top ten, then they can wreck the careers of lesser scientists. It adds to my contempt for 21st century feminists that they would not rally to support a female scientist under professional assault by a cabal of males.
I’ve yet to meet a mathematician who respects the mathematical models that underlie climate alarmism.
In the oil bidnez the derricks are mobile workover rigs not parked on all wells. It's not the There Will be Blood era. anymore. Google images Signal Hill derricks for the old timey days.
But Trump has no problem with off shore drilling and open pit coal mines.
Neither do I. What's your point?
Non-dispatchable power at grid scale is bad. Just bad.
Good thing Knox County, Nebraska banned them yesterday by resolution. I drafted the resolution and cited the President’s EO of 1-20-25, “Unleashing American Energy.”
It was a $1.3 billion project consisting of 155 wind towers that would have been 650 feet high.
A question to all. Who thinks a modern, industrial society can run on "renewables" as available today?
Not a trick question, the answer should be no one.
(And there are a crap ton of other issues.)
"..Non-fuel consumption is about 7% of oil and gas and 5% of coal. Your point is the definition..."
There's a Good Boy Freder !
Ann Althouse, “ These places that are beautiful in our "mind and imagination" need to be kept beautiful. Anyone who modifies the landscape owes us all a duty to take care of this beauty.”
I might just use this quote in my motion for summary judgment brief.
Knox County is beautiful.
My favorite president. I am right there with you brotha. I absolutely despise with the heat of a thousand suns these disgusting bird munching eyesores. And in texas when the need for electricity is the highest you can see them sitting idly, physically shut down. Get rid of them. Solar panels are not so great but nothing like these abominations.
My favorite president. I am right there with you brotha. I absolutely despise with the heat of a thousand suns these disgusting bird munching eyesores. And in texas when the need for electricity is the highest you can see them sitting idly, physically shut down. Get rid of them. Solar panels are not so great but nothing like these abominations.
And they don't even work. Not for electricity Reposting the story of Broken Hill Australia. I posted in another comment stream last month
====≠=====
you should read about the outage in Broken Hill Australia last October. Town of 25m people, typical peak demand is @35MW, typical load is 25MW. They have a 50 MW battery that can provide 2-3 hours of backup.
They also have 53MW (nominal) of solar and over 200MW (nominal) of wind.
None of it will function unless connected to australia's grid, mainly powered by rotating generators. When a transmission tower was blown down, the town was without electricity for several weeks, even though there was no damage to the wind, solar or battery.
(Pikers. We were without juice for 4 months in 2017-18)
John Henry
Solar is even more of an eyesore. Search "taihang mountains solar panels" images
https://youtu.be/a10oY4MXn4Y?feature=shared
An entire Chinese mountain range completely covered in solar panels mile after mile.
And nothing, nothing, will grow under them but a few weeds.
How many millions of trees have been cut down for these panels?
John Henry
"They have a 50 MW battery"
MW-hours?
Wind/solar are not even cheap. Our power company publishes the price for juice by source in near real time
Coal 3-5 cents
Combined cycle gas turbine 9-11 cents
Bunker oil steam plant 15-22cents
Gas turbine 15-22 cents
Wind 18-22cents
Solar 18-22cents
Landfill gas 10 cents
https://genera-pr.com/data-generacion
Prices vary hour to hour but generally within the ranges above. This is wholesale pricing sold by generators to the distribution utilitu
John Henry
Omg. Trump is like Steve Jobs.
Jamie,
I attended a conference 10-15 yrs back on alternatives energy.
One of the sessions was on the effect of windmills on micro climate in one of the Dakota.
Large winfarms definitely have an effect on weather patterns and precipitation.
Not just locally to the windmills but for scores or hundreds of miles around
John Henry
Per Grok 3 just now 67%of us coal is surface mined 33% underground mined.
John Henry
White windmills, white robots, white Star Wars Stormtroopers = toxic white racism.
My idea was to leave the open land alone and turn the empty shopping malls into solar farms. Is it a dumb and unworkable idea? Sure, but maybe dumb enough and unworkable enough that it just might work.
I get that everyone is still spooked by the movie “The China Syndrome
Most Pro-nuke propaganda film ever. Go watch it again
Every weld in the plant was suspect (implied)
Built on a fault line
Shoddy materials
Crazy guy (lemon) trying to shut the plant dowe
Entire control system rejiggered on the fly, with the plant operating and lemon locked in the control room
SWAT team blows up the control room
And the plant shut down safely.
Anyone who is spooked by it is nuts.
John Henry
"Large winfarms definitely have an effect on weather patterns and precipitation."
They also have an effect on threatened/endangered species. You know- the ones leftists say should be protected by law unless they interfere with leftist's plans. Then, it's okay to kill them.
Fredo spiralling pretty badly this week.
Don't get me started, Mike!
The stories all talked about 50MW battery. Most stories and ads about batteries talk about mw a kw and it drives me up a wall.
A 50MW battery will put out 50MW but that doesn't tell us for how long.
Could be 5 minutes or 5 days.
In Broken hill I was able to find more technical articles but they did not agree on mwh. It seems to be something between 50 & 100mw.
If average load is 25mw, 100mwh will light the town for 4 hours.
Don Quixote Trump & JD Panza at your service.
Lazarous
Solar requires about 5 acres per nominal megawatt, about 20-25acres per actual mw.
How many acres is a shopping mall?
John Henry
The other problem is they are noisy and they kill birds. Some places - out in the desert in Nevada - can probably use wind mills. Although solar power would make more sense.
As someone said, Nuclear is the way to go. But...stupidity.
Coal powered electrical plants are now every efficient and have relatively low pollution levels. But y'know...stupidity.
One problem with the using the word "Windmills" is people think of the pretty Dutch windmills.
@darkisland "How many acres is a shopping mall?"
It drives me nuts, when I can't resolve these things in my mind. Why, in virtually all of Texas, aren't solar installations commonplace, especially in urban areas? At the IAH airport, you pay extra for covered parking. Why not put up panels that provide covered parking, and generate power? The heat in Texas from June to September is brutal, that's 1/3 of the year ! But I have yet to see a study that is focused on cost-benefit of both providing passive benefit as well as peak-shaving power, both when most-needed.
Not saying it hasn't been done, because I haven't looked hard for it. It seems to me that every large industrial facility ought to have it though, if solar was such an obvious benefit to Green Energy, then this would be the optimal use thereof. The only thing it demonstrates, is that solar energy isn't that obviously cost-beneficial when the government isn't propping it up out of misplaced virtue.
Tearing apart what currently exists with not much more than a "let's try this and see what happens, maybe it'll work" approach is not a plan.
If you eco-nuts really wanted to show everyone how it's done, you'd have built a demonstration project somewhere that ran on 100% solar/wind, with no fossil fuel backup, that provided power as reliably as fossil fuels do. That would take care of the claim that it won't work.
And yet, there are no such projects.
Trump just doesn’t like windmills… a graveyard for birds apparently. We all know how much he loves birds. And the noise from them will give you cancer. He’s very concerned about that.
Wind turbines are the most expensive form of electricity in terms of lifetime output. When newly installed and tuned, they are at peak efficiency. Thereafter their efficiency decays until the cost of maintenance and repair accelerates the decay into the negative -- the market value of the output is exceeded by operational costs.
Generally, the consumers of wind turbine power do not shoulder those operational costs, either because they aren't affluent enough to pay the premium rates, or they are sufficiently affluent to wield the political influence required to shove the burden onto the entire taxpayer class, the residents of Martha's Vineyard being a signal example of this non-fungible cost-shifting that keeps the "wind power" swindle profitable.
Wind turbines are the most expensive form of electricity in terms of lifetime output.
Funny, I was assured my electrical bill would be Gone with the Wind.
I have been decrying windmills as wasteful eyesores for years
Yep. they're eyesores. Again, in the western desert its just sagebrush, so that's probably not a problem there.
Aggie,
We have at least a dozen such installations I know of in pr. I like the idea of parking in the shade and shelter from the rain.
But as you note: cost.
Solar is already expensive. Putting it on steel supports10' up probably trebles or quadruplets the cost.
Ditto maintenance and cleaning costs that now must be done on a ladder or sky jack.
Rooftop solar presents 2 additional problems besides height
Can the roof support all the extra weight without danger of collapse? (downward load)?
Can it withstand wind pulling it up?
Can it withstand the dynasty of both loads?
Lots and lots of penetration to keep from leaking too
John Henry
"Again, in the western desert its just sagebrush, so that's probably not a problem there."
Depends on your point of view. I don't live on the coast, so they're not an eyesore there, either.
Dynamics, not dynasty
my iowa Littered with windmills.
You can drive from Ames to West Union and VERY seldom be out of sight of windmills. There are THOUSANDS of them
"my iowa Littered with windmills."
Your electric bill must really be low. All the eco-nuts say that renewable energy is the cheapest.
Kak: "Don Quixote Trump & JD Panza at your service."
They've got a pretty good track record so far at realizing Impossible Dreams!
JSM
Grundoon,
". The energy arrives on its own with no infrastructure,"
That's the stupidest thing anyone will read here today - - and yes I'm taking into account the fact that Freder is commenting too.
Or, are you being unskillfully facetious?
We must have Nuremberg-style trials for all those who opposed nuclear power. A few thousand hangings will do much to improve humanity.
"Anyone who modifies the landscape owes us all a duty to take care of this beauty. I don't think this comes naturally to most politicians, but it's something that Trump slowed down to contemplate out loud."
Althouse thinks it's great that DJT wants to use the power of the government because he is emotionally upset when things are not pure white.
Sheesh.
Either jarring or beautiful, the eye of the beholder I guess, the windmills of Pagupod , Ilocos Norte - https://www.philippine-resources.com/articles/2022/3/pagudpud-wind-farm-now-biggest-in-ph-to-boost-renewable-energy
Pagudpod is best known for its pleasant little beach resorts. It is also slated to host a large set of firing positions for US and Philippine (Brahmos) missiles directed at Chinese ships and bases.
Windmills, beach resorts and a battlefield in preparation.
@Old and slow: "Natural gas flow can be interrupted by power outages, see TX blackouts...."
This was mostly a self-induced single point failure as a result of green energy policy. Pipelines require energy input boosts along the way to overcome frictional losses from flow. For liquids, it's pump stations. For gas, it's compression. In the past, they've used fuel gas taken from the pipelines to run the compressors, making perfect sense. The gas cost is inconsequential and it's right there, obviously.
But Green Principles say we must cut emissions wherever it is humanly possible, gee, wouldn't it be great if we used electricity to run the compressors instead? And so they did. It worked wonderfully, until the grid collapsed and the predictions of every single petroleum engineer came true. And of course, once flow ceased, heat dispersed, and everything froze right up, which was really hard to reverse to get flow re-started again. A self-induced, self-compounding failure to keep it simple, stupid. All of that has mostly been corrected now.
Thanks, John Henry!
Meanwhile...
And yet, in yet in Trump's world (and maybe yours, too), burning fossil fuels doesn't affect the climate at all.
The question, before we go and destroy every economy but particularly the burgeoning ones of the developing world, is the size of the effect. A second question is what the best response is, with the same caveat - and how do we calibrate the response to the size of the effect.
But apparently those questions just... burn up in the blinding, broiling sunlight of climate alarmism.
"The question, before we go and destroy every economy but particularly the burgeoning ones of the developing world, is the size of the effect."
It's not about climate, it's about control. Of your life, and how you'll be allowed to live it.
Can't really stockpile much with coal due to the huge volumes of it continually rolling behind long trains to the power plants. With nuclear, one can easily due so, yes.
Freder Frederson said...
The affects are certainly negligible. A 350 to 400 ppm level of CO2 will not change anything significantly.
Considering that CO2 levels are currently at 430 ppm, what is your point?
That 500 ppm wouldn't matter either.
The earth spent more time above 2000 ppm than it did below 2000 ppm. Plants prefer 1500ppm and grow faster up to that point. They also respire more producing more oxygen.
The point is you are a fucking idiot that doesn't even understand what a hypothesis is or what supporting research is. You don't understand how ludicrous the hypothesis you pretend to espouse is because you couldn't even explain it if you were reading it.
About 20 years ago I got a copy of the alumni magazine from the New England liberal arts college I attended. The cover depicted a formerly pristine wooded Vermont mountainside with about a dozen massive wind turbines and the bare spaces around the bases. I immediately thought it was going to be a piece decrying the environmental carnage wrought.
Silly me.
The primary industry of the beautiful state of Vermont is tourism. That the state would be so blinded by "environmentalism" as to destroy the view for dozens of miles in every direction by permitting such monstrosities is pure folly.
I recall Ted Kennedy decrying the wind turbine farms off of Cape Cod. He was a hypocrite, but it was something I agreed with him about. He lost, and the view--which is what Cape Cod is all about--really sucks.
Readering said...
"But Trump has no problem with off shore drilling and open pit coal mines."
If you were smart you'd know why coal and petroleum are preferred. But just to help you a little, both fossil fuels offer much greater energy per unit than either solar or wind. Both of which are wildly inefficient and toxic to build.
You know where the feedstocks come from to make wind turbines? You guessed it petroleum.
Aggie.
You ever see what a tornado does to a solar installation? How about a hail storm?
Freder Frederson said...
"Most of the chemicals that go into our raw materials - textiles, plastics, even pharmaceuticals - are harvested from petroleum.
Non-fuel consumption is about 7% of oil and gas and 5% of coal. Your point is the definition of bullshit."
Bullshit? Go through your house and lay your hands on everything that is natural. Everything after that has used some form of petroleum or coal product to manufacture.
The percentage might be small, but it isn't bullshit.
You know that synthetic oil you put in your car? Guess where it comes from?
John Hinderaker at Powerline did a piece last year on how much virgin copper is required for each new wind turbine--slightly less than 4 tons--and how copper is mined.
Also--energy is the primary vehicle for improving the quality of life --of everybody, but most significantly for the poorest of the poor in 'developing' countries.
all of that cheap energy in the ground in the form of petroleum reserves is going to be used, until and unless by some unlikely miracle a cheap and portable alternative is invented.
So all of the "alternative energy as a means of saving the planet from CO2 emissions" stuff is nonsense.
Windmills are connected to the grid. Not only to provide electricity but they also use electricity from the grid to keep their systems at optimal temperature. That means when there is no wind they wind turbines use electricity.
కామెంట్ను పోస్ట్ చేయండి
Please use the comments forum to respond to the post. Don't fight with each other. Be substantive... or interesting... or funny. Comments should go up immediately... unless you're commenting on a post older than 2 days. Then you have to wait for us to moderate you through. It's also possible to get shunted into spam by the machine. We try to keep an eye on that and release the miscaught good stuff. We do delete some comments, but not for viewpoint... for bad faith.