*************
Good question. But how do the oil platforms and facilities withstand the impact of hurricanes in the GOM. Lot of them scattered out in the GOM.
Posted on 03/09/2021 7:48:48 AM PST by AT7Saluki
But how would they fare in a Hurricane Sandy type storm?
we’ll need a committee to track dead seagulls..
It was estimated that to supply enough electrical power for the metropolitan Phoenix area alone (the Valley of the Sun), it would require massive solar panel fields 100 miles wide that would cover the entire desert from Phoenix to Tucson, a distance of over 120 miles.
The problem with climate change advocates, as with all democRATic schemes, is the unintended consequences of their not-so-well-thought-out ideas.
If seals eat sea gulls and birds and sharks eat seals we'll see increases in both. Where's Capt. Tom when you need him.
*************
Good question. But how do the oil platforms and facilities withstand the impact of hurricanes in the GOM. Lot of them scattered out in the GOM.
How much in taxpayer subsidies are involved???
“...is the unintended consequences of their not-so-well-thought-out ideas...”
Tis true but the whole concept is driven by the carbon/global warming hoax.
It’s my perception that large wind hasn’t worked out.
Private property wind to charge personal power banks is a better
use of the concept. As long as the units don’t cause excessive
noise, it’s a good way to harvest energy.
Ideally, a solar and wind combination for personal property
is a good idea.
It is dependent on location, annual days of sun, and the frequent
presence of wind.
True that but then that is a given.
In a play on words, a ruse is a ruse is a ruse....
My comments from a similar thread:
Climate Change Made Simple:
The issue with the liberals is never their stated issue.
The issue is always their wet dream to destroy fossil-fueled capitalism and replace it with their big government socialism/communism system.
Climate change is not about the climate, the weather, the temperature, the environment, the levels of CO2 or saving the planet. The Left doesn't care about any of that.
Climate change is about fooling the public into emptying their wallets now under the guise of keeping the temperature of the earth from rising 1 degree a 100 years from today when no one alive today can challenge their long con game.
And that is not their Inconvenient Truth but their Convenient Lie.
Spot on!
800 megawatts (intermittently) of visual blight. Good.
They should learn from the Europeans how offshore windfarms kill seabirds, that fall in the water, and attract sharks and other predators. They should also learn that windfarms are inefficient energy generators and how Germany has abandoned many of them. The only company that benefit from their production is Siemens and the politicians that promote their use. Just follow the money.
They are engineered to withstand a 100 year storm
“It was estimated” wrong. Phoenix uses 75 TWh per year of power, which would require 203 square miles of space. Your “estimate” is off by a factor of 60.
Correction, the 75TWh figure is for the whole state of AZ.
Plus it was years ago and not my estimate. I read it in the newspaper back when I used to do that. And I'm sure technology has improved since then. sort of thing.
But you sound like a bean counter and may have missed my point in looking at the forest for the trees. Don't sharpen your pencil too much. I'm looking at the general picture, not the specific math.
Who wants to cover the entire desert with solar panels in lieu of one or two nuclear power plants like Palo Verde that Arizona Public Service utilizes or the hydroelectric power from the Salt River Project? Or cover it with miles and miles of wind turbines?
San Diego in California, committed to producing 15% pf their electric power by some date in the future I don't recall now, but when they proposed to build solar panels in the desert east of the populated area, the environmentalists pushed back and stopped their plans because it would destroy the natural desert. The green nuts want their cake and eat it too.
These green energy folks want to eliminate fossil fuels but don't want to destroy any of the flora and fauna it would require to accomplish it. Nobody, including non-climate change people, really wants a landscape covered in wind turbines or solar panels.
How does destroying the earth save the planet?
I guess you missed my comment that this was the usage and surface area of panels required for all of AZ. So surprising that you pulled “the estimate” straight out of your ass, just to spread disinfo.
The virtue signalers will call them, "artificial reefs."
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.