What’s so sad is that they are an example of Human talent, but also another example of how the talented can destroy or waste himself on a mistaken moral cause.
In a number of "scholarly" papers comparing various qualities of energy sources, wind advocates have been caught using one set of numbers for the CO2 intensity of concrete and steel for wind turbine foundations, and a completely different set of numbers for the concrete and steel that goes into a nuclear electricity generator.
It's been maybe a decade since I've heard of this particular thing, but it was quite common when the LCOE numbers were being established.
We had three wind turbines installed on our farm properties in 2009. At the time I didn't believe for a minute that these things were somehow going to prevent or slow down climate change. Having them on our Farms was simply good business. If we had turned them down, our neighbours would have gotten them and earned the income from them.
I watched as they were built and I recall the large number of truckloads of concrete and the massive amount of reinforcing rod that went into each foundation. These things are like icebergs. The part that is visible is just a fraction of the whole. It is impossible that a wind turbine could ever in it's lifetime be net zero for carbon emissions. The infrastructure and also the maintenance required to operate them is far too high for their output of electricity.
Net Zero 2035 or 2050 or name the year is one giant scam. If this was fiction, we couldn't make this stuff up!
In the 70's I used to read The Mother Earth News religiously, and was a flaming environmentalist. An "insider" you might say. Had grand ideas of starting a solar and wind power business. Then I got an engineering degree and woke up.
Going from 40 year ago memory, in thermodynamics there's something called a "control surface", which basically defines the extents of the process (inputs and outputs) of what you are studying. Proponents of these windmills define their control surface too narrowly to give an honest look at their energy viability.
I still think alternate energy is fascinating -- its just not practical, nor cost effective, it kills whales, and destroys the bird population, rapes the environment for raw materials, and wastes government money. Otherwise its wonderful... and it gives the "new" environmentalist something "sacred" to feel "holy" about.
In the permaculture world we talk about “Embodied Energy,” attempting to quantify ALL energy inputs into a system. Some go so far as to include the cost of educating the engineers, etc, who design the system.
There is also issues like,when the wind does not blow, there are run on diesel fuel.Also the blades have PFAS in them and when they fall off and/or burn,which they have done many times, they produce hazardous waste.And then, how can these be recycled? Oh, they cannot and are out into land fills and continue to degrade into hazardous materials.All to lose and nothing to gain!! Idiotic ideas !
well said! This proves they are not viable and would not be built without govt funding. And these are not more environmental than NG and other sources of energy like Nuclear. Look at the resources used and the type of resources used and the energy consumed to build them. And no recycling and reclamation requirements/plans. This is just wrong!
Can you imagine what ENEL has in front of them removing 80+ installed machines on the Osage lands? As ordered by the court last year - a massive project!
I bought a used oil company service truck from Michel's, a WI company. What impressed me was how detailed their service records are, with all the costs recorded, and what was done to them through the years owned.
Just like vehicles have odometers, and good businesses keep service records, each one of these windmills needs to have a KW meter, with real-time data-logging tracking the going rate $/KW electricity cost its providing, plus service costs, plus initial cost, for the life of each windmill.
Never seen anything that honest, but never looked very hard either. But from Jeff W's comment, I can be pretty sure the starry-eyed proponents cook the books to keep the clown show going.
What’s so sad is that they are an example of Human talent, but also another example of how the talented can destroy or waste himself on a mistaken moral cause.
To add injury to injury...
In a number of "scholarly" papers comparing various qualities of energy sources, wind advocates have been caught using one set of numbers for the CO2 intensity of concrete and steel for wind turbine foundations, and a completely different set of numbers for the concrete and steel that goes into a nuclear electricity generator.
It's been maybe a decade since I've heard of this particular thing, but it was quite common when the LCOE numbers were being established.
We had three wind turbines installed on our farm properties in 2009. At the time I didn't believe for a minute that these things were somehow going to prevent or slow down climate change. Having them on our Farms was simply good business. If we had turned them down, our neighbours would have gotten them and earned the income from them.
I watched as they were built and I recall the large number of truckloads of concrete and the massive amount of reinforcing rod that went into each foundation. These things are like icebergs. The part that is visible is just a fraction of the whole. It is impossible that a wind turbine could ever in it's lifetime be net zero for carbon emissions. The infrastructure and also the maintenance required to operate them is far too high for their output of electricity.
Net Zero 2035 or 2050 or name the year is one giant scam. If this was fiction, we couldn't make this stuff up!
In the 70's I used to read The Mother Earth News religiously, and was a flaming environmentalist. An "insider" you might say. Had grand ideas of starting a solar and wind power business. Then I got an engineering degree and woke up.
Going from 40 year ago memory, in thermodynamics there's something called a "control surface", which basically defines the extents of the process (inputs and outputs) of what you are studying. Proponents of these windmills define their control surface too narrowly to give an honest look at their energy viability.
I still think alternate energy is fascinating -- its just not practical, nor cost effective, it kills whales, and destroys the bird population, rapes the environment for raw materials, and wastes government money. Otherwise its wonderful... and it gives the "new" environmentalist something "sacred" to feel "holy" about.
In the permaculture world we talk about “Embodied Energy,” attempting to quantify ALL energy inputs into a system. Some go so far as to include the cost of educating the engineers, etc, who design the system.
That's something, considering the education expense is born by the individual, and is to their benefit, (unless its a useless degree)
There is also issues like,when the wind does not blow, there are run on diesel fuel.Also the blades have PFAS in them and when they fall off and/or burn,which they have done many times, they produce hazardous waste.And then, how can these be recycled? Oh, they cannot and are out into land fills and continue to degrade into hazardous materials.All to lose and nothing to gain!! Idiotic ideas !
It's always blowing somewhere. What we must do is share.
well said! This proves they are not viable and would not be built without govt funding. And these are not more environmental than NG and other sources of energy like Nuclear. Look at the resources used and the type of resources used and the energy consumed to build them. And no recycling and reclamation requirements/plans. This is just wrong!
Wind turbines are a thermodynamic disaster.
Can you imagine what ENEL has in front of them removing 80+ installed machines on the Osage lands? As ordered by the court last year - a massive project!
Maybe Trump needs to order that any one of those things that kills migrating birds or eagles MUST be removed.
I bought a used oil company service truck from Michel's, a WI company. What impressed me was how detailed their service records are, with all the costs recorded, and what was done to them through the years owned.
Just like vehicles have odometers, and good businesses keep service records, each one of these windmills needs to have a KW meter, with real-time data-logging tracking the going rate $/KW electricity cost its providing, plus service costs, plus initial cost, for the life of each windmill.
Never seen anything that honest, but never looked very hard either. But from Jeff W's comment, I can be pretty sure the starry-eyed proponents cook the books to keep the clown show going.
And for anyone that thinks that wind power is “green,” I’ve got a special on a bridge I’m looking to sell. What a friggen scam.
Thanks for sharing, David. Even worse than I thought!
Are the concrete foundations reused when a given turbine expires?