Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: garandgal

another thing Trump was right about.

5 Oct: Bloomberg: Revealing the Dark Side of Wind Power
Surprising new research suggests harvesting cleaner energy may have serious consequences for the environment.
By Mark Buchanan
Moreover, they found that wind plants encompassing the largest areas had the lowest power densities, as expected.

This figure implies that meeting current U.S. electricity needs alone would require wind farms to cover fully 12 percent of the U.S. land area…
https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2018-10-04/wind-power-isn-t-as-clean-as-we-thought-it-was

then there’s this!

7 June 2018: Daily Mail: Britain Becalmed: Turbines across the UK are at a STANDSTILL after wind ‘disappears’ for a week causing a two-year low in electricity production
•Since the start of June, wind farms have been producing barely any electricity
•The ‘wind drought’ has meant turbines have generated less than two per cent of the country’s power this month
By Joe Pinkstone

Forecasts show the calm conditions will continue until the middle of the month...

A drop-off like this in winter could be catastrophic should the UK become reliant upon renewable energy sources...
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-5812811/Wind-turbines-standstill-wind-disappears-thew-UK.html


11 posted on 10/04/2018 10:18:34 PM PDT by MAGAthon (O)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies ]


To: MAGAthon

Exactly...and let me reiterate...they are hideously ugly. We have (had) a beautiful landscape in this country. These things are an entirely unnecessary aesthetic blight for very little to no gain...other that to those who receive subsidies.

I would rather have the occasional stench of a hog confinement operation nearby.


12 posted on 10/04/2018 10:29:58 PM PDT by garandgal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]

To: MAGAthon
Ken Caldeira, a climate scientist at the Carnegie Institution for Science who wasn’t part of the research, said the study is sound.

“The climate effect of burning fossil fuels is cumulative,” Caldeira said in an email. “The longer you run a coal plant, the worse the climate change gets. In contrast, the climate effect of wind turbines is what it is. You build the wind turbine. Climate is affected. But as long as you run the wind turbine, the climate change doesn’t get any worse. So in the long run, as far as the climate is concerned, wind turbines are obviously better than fossil fuels.”

Except that you are affecting YEARLY rainfall & other weather events (thus crop yields) in the very areas that produce most of your food, you IDIOT.

Don't any of you worry about it though...we'll just make up for the lack of rain & disrupted weather patterns with a healthy dose of Brawndo.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/wind-power-found-to-affect-local-climate/

16 posted on 10/05/2018 1:12:04 AM PDT by garandgal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson