Posted on 01/11/2006 8:39:11 PM PST by george76
Within the space of a single week, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and Sen. Edward Kennedy have managed to mangle reality with op-ed pieces in two of the nation's leading newspapers.
''As an environmentalist, I support wind power,'' began RFK Jr.'s op-ed piece in the New York Times, ...
Then he proceeded to once again propagate the inaccuracies repeated like mantras by those opposed to the Nantucket Sound wind farm.
''The noise of the turbines will be audible onshore. A transformer substation would house...40,000 gallons of potentially hazardous oil...
The Humane Society estimates the whirling turbines could every year kill thousands of migrating songbirds and sea ducks.''
If RFK Jr. had taken the trouble to join me and others last year in Denmark... he would know that the ''noise'' of modern turbines can't be heard even at the base of the towers, much less ''onshore.''
The ''hazardous oil'' in the transformer is mineral oil.
Our mothers gave that to some of us as a laxative when we were kids.
If, by some astronomically impossible chance, a meteorite from outer space happens to penetrate the triple-hulled substation Cape Wind has proposed for Nantucket Sound, we might get a bunch of fish with diarrhea.
And, if RFK Jr. really cares about birds, let me set his mind at ease. The ''whirling turbines'' don't whirl; they rotate slowly and gracefully in the wind.
A week later, in an op-ed piece in the Boston Globe on Dec. 22, Senator Kennedy repeated the hoax that ''a college student in Massachusetts had two government agents show up at his house because he went to the library and asked for the official Chinese version of Mao Tse-tung's 'Communist Manifesto'.''
Er'...'¦Senator, Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels wrote ''The Communist Manifesto.''
Mao's book is ''Quotations from Chairman Mao Tsetung.''
(Excerpt) Read more at capecodonline.com ...
That's it! Thanks.
Environmental groups have been enticed by Cape Wind, but they should be wary of lending support to energy companies that are trying to privatize the commons - in this case 24 square miles of a heavily used waterway. And because offshore wind costs twice as much as gas-fired electricity and significantly more than onshore wind, the project is financially feasible only because the federal and state governments have promised $241 million in subsidies.
Bobby Jr. is not aware that most wind farms "lease" the land upon which they place turbines, generating (figuratively and literally) revenue for the land-owner; in this case the Federal or State government perhaps. And yes, on/offshore wind has a higher $/MWh installed/capital cost compared to gas-fired electricity, but it also doesn't require a fossil fuel source nor generate CO2 emmissions (the whole environmental argument for wind energy, no?). Offshore winds are also generally stronger and more consistent than onshore locations, which over time off-sets the initial capital cost differential between on and offshore wind farms.
If Cape Wind were to place its project further offshore, it could build not just 130, but thousands of windmills - where they can make a real difference in the battle against global warming without endangering the birds or impoverishing the experience of millions of tourists and residents and fishing families who rely on the sound's unspoiled bounties.
Bobby Jr. first complains how unfeasibly expensive this offshore wind farm is, then he suggests it be built further offshore, in deeper waters, which would make it even MORE expensive/unfeasible. I've never heard any tourists or fisherman in Santa Barbara complaining of their impoverishment due to all the offshore oil rigs. And how can the Nantucket Sound be so "unspoiled" as he claims if it's a "heavily used waterway?"
Slow enough that I wonder if the birds can't perch on them. (What's birdie for "Wheeeeeeeeee!"?)
In Teddy's case this is accomplished by blowing all ballast tanks.
Mary Jo would have preferred to just stay on the road!
Intersting title, but sh*t doesn't roll uphill [to the high road], especially in such quantity.
"The blade of a large wind turbine move at more than 100 miles per hour. That may be moving "gracefully" but not my idea of "slowly". Be careful, the writer of this article may have his own agenda"
Recent studies show they don't kill more birds than other manmade structures like bridges, tall buildings, radio towers, etc.
There were wind turbines all over the area where we lived in central Germany.
They made no noise, and having hiked to a couple of them, I did not even once see a dead bird. Ever.
Actually, I thought they were picturesque and added to the scenery.
To them; ALL the roads are 'higher'!
"The blade of a large wind turbine move at more than 100 miles per hour"
Doesn't that depend on the speed of the wind?
Actually, it's just too easy to point out the stupidity of any member of the Kennedy family. They're all morons, and they've all spent their whole lives in an atmosphere where nobody ever tells them they're wrong.
They have an automatic control to vary the pitch of the blades so that they always turn the same speed.
If there is not enough wind to turn them that fast, they stop.
They must match the 60 Cycles per Second of the power line they are feeding into.
The Cycles Per Second is determined by the speed they spin.
The birds that dying from wind turbines are in the same vein as the whales that are being made extinct by cruise ships. Sensational extrapolations from recorded events.
The Kennedy boys had stand-ins take their science exams....
Preferably one that does not cross a small bridge.
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.