Friday, November 13, 2009

Green Infighting And More On Bird-Blenders


Reading this article will make your head spin:

Solar Flare Ups

A fight over the future of clean energy is pitting environmentalists against one another.

True or false: California's plan to generate massive amounts of clean, sustainable solar power is a win for everyone—liberal or conservative, environmentalist or business executive.

Answer: True ... but only in principle.

In practice, the state's new solar gold rush is generating far more conflict than current. At issue is not whether we should green the grid, but how to do so: Should we build massive solar-powered generating plants deep in the Mojave Desert on ecologically sensitive public lands to take advantage of some of the most sun-drenched landscapes on earth? Or would it be just as effective, with less impact on the environment, to deploy thousands of smaller solar arrays closer to civilization—on abandoned farms, urban "brownfields," and rooftops?

When environmentalists clash with giant utilities on such questions, no one is surprised. But what is surprising is how much this issue is pitting environmentalists against each other.

Now click the link and continue onward.

Great comment posted there:

One of the reasons that the utilities won't commit to only using the transmission lines for renewable energy only is that they would have to reveal the deeply held secret... that they generate very little and since they are intermittent in nature, need a lot of "back up" power from conventional sources. In essence, the utilities need the same amount in back up or spinning reserve as installed capacity. This is a DUPLICATION of energy that we the rate and tax payers have to pay along with bankrolling their transmission lines! The bottom line is that "we the people" are getting fleeced for this useless energy, that because of its unpredictability cannot be used as base load, cannot be called on upon demand. Note that the developers always only state their installed capacity, not how much they generate and the times of generation. Wind power is most notable for this. For instance, all the windmills [close to 600 MW]in the San Gorgonio Pass only generate an average of 100-/+ MW per year, of which 6 MW are generated at peak need time and the rest, 61% off peak and 33 MW mid peak. the wind is only good enough for them to generate 14-20% of installed capacity. To put this in context, Edison uses over 13,000 MW per year. And this will do what to enhance our power supply? For years we have been fed their propaganda and misleading information that is never checked by the news media for accuracy. I have yet to see any reporter ask them for their production records. I managed to obtain 15 years of these records from Edison that backs up my assertions as well as I live here, where I can see when they work and mostly don't. The only green transmission has been the $'s from the tax and rate payers into theirs! Anyone interested in obtaining these records can e-mail me at bobweit@msn.com
The young lady who wrote that is the one who's been trying to get me some info on that Palm Springs wind farm boondoggle that I wrote about in - Breaking Wind In Taxpayers' Faces.

To continue that discussion....apparently there was a widely-disseminated WSJ article on bird-blenders, aka wind turbines, only a couple of months ago:

On Aug. 13, ExxonMobil pleaded guilty in federal court to killing 85 birds that had come into contact with crude oil or other pollutants in uncovered tanks or waste-water facilities on its properties. The birds were protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, which dates back to 1918. The company agreed to pay $600,000 in fines and fees.

ExxonMobil is hardly alone in running afoul of this law. Over the past two decades, federal officials have brought hundreds of similar cases against energy companies. In July, for example, the Oregon-based electric utility PacifiCorp paid $1.4 million in fines and restitution for killing 232 eagles in Wyoming over the past two years. The birds were electrocuted by poorly-designed power lines.

Yet there is one group of energy producers that are not being prosecuted for killing birds: wind-power companies. And wind-powered turbines are killing a vast number of birds every year.

A July 2008 study of the wind farm at Altamont Pass, Calif., estimated that its turbines kill an average of 80 golden eagles per year. The study, funded by the Alameda County Community Development Agency, also estimated that about 10,000 birds—nearly all protected by the migratory bird act—are being whacked every year at Altamont.



I've also discovered, that the windmill blades are very toxic, they catch fire quite often emitting said toxins, and that firemen/maintenance can't really do anything to extinguish them. In fact the composition of these blades is so toxic....look how they have to be produced:



Real organic....real green, huh?

And I also learned, from this video, that the blades are so toxic, they cannot be *recycled* in any way shape or form. At the current course of proliferation, we're looking at a future mountains of hazardous scrap metal from this eco-pagan initiative.

That source also profiles a family living in proximity to the Palm Springs wind farm boondoggle. When the all-too-frequent turbine fires are near them....their property gets littered with burning toxic fiberglass. It's so bad they literally can't breathe; and they have to vacate their own home.

Summing it up, we have:

Fire hazards, toxic waste, bird genocide, no economics,....

Oh yeah, and wind turbines are hideous to look at.

Our government is doing so many things, so profoundly wrong at the moment - I submit it all but guarantees imminent financial collapse.

11 comments:

paul mitchell said...

C-Nut, on my honeymoon to Palm Desert, I got the resort to arrange a tour to see the turbines because I thought they looked graceful. Man was I wrong.

The dude that drove us out said pretty much the very same things that you have posted here and I saw the carnage first hand. My wife even got ill. Granted she was a little squeamish by nature.

But, such is the "outcome" of everything liberal. Stupidity squared.

CaptiousNut said...

Can I bust your stones about that?

That you tried a *green* honeymoon.

I thought that when you got married....everyone went to the Poconos - for the Valentine-shaped tubs.

paul mitchell said...

It wasn't a green honeymoon at all, it was a ten rounds of golf at Indian Wells and the wife did the spa. When we drove into the valley, the windmills were there and I asked the Concierge to get us a ride out there to see them close-up. Bummer, really.

Don't dis the Poconos, they were awesome. We did the Champagne glass tub though.

Anonymous said...

To the "drive by" people that don't live in this gorgeous San Gorgonio Pass, just before Palm Springs in the San Jacinto National Monument have no idea that actual people live here. That the views are magnificent. All they are told is that the wind blows 24/7 which it doesn't, I wouldn't set my coffee maker to it.
The wind developers and Edison state that the wind here can generate enough power for 250,000 homes! [By the way, Edison is in the wind developing busines also], so for them to lie to their customers is a violation of business ethics and of course the wind developers never had any to begin with. How can wind, which only generates a little bit of power randomly supply even one home is beyond belief! We get no benefit, it just goes into the grid, the little that is generated. However, because most people have no idea as to how the grid and the supply of power gets to their light switch have bought into this "snake oil" salesman pitch. Along with the wind developers lining the local politicians pockets with money, our voices are just cries in the wildness as they have impacted us with noise, destroyed our views and property values along with all our birds. I would like the wind developer that posts here to refute my claims. None of the developers live here, so they have taken advatage of us because we are small rural communities that love not living with urban noise and traffic. They are the scum of the earth along with our politicians that think that this horse and buggy technology will get us anywhere except having us live like moles when there is no power going through all the billions of $'s spent on tranmission lines with nothing going through them.

panner said...

buildings kill more birds than wind turbines. windows kill thousands of birds per year.

http://www.eartheasy.com/article_birds_windows0704.htm

"over 100 million birds die each year in collisions with buildings and skyscrapers in the United States and Canada alone"

also, "todays units are larger turbines (1.5 MW to 3 MW) and generate 120 times as much electricity as the 1980s models at one-fourth the per-unit cost."

http://www.awea.org/newsroom/pdf/Wind_Energy_Basics.pdf

the 1980s models are the ones seen on the hills in the deserts out west.

wind turbines are beautiful, graceful, and elegant.

Anonymous said...

to anon who lives in california near wind turbines, why do you believe that you are owed anything? why do you believe that you own that view? why do you believe that you should benefit from the energy generated (or not generated) by a wind farm near where you live? what claims are you asking to be refuted, exactly?

no wind developer or stakeholder claims that the wind blows 24/7. it is well known that it blows most at night.
also, nobody claims the units operate at full capacity. it's typically in the 30% range plus or minus.
as far as view - that is purely matter of opinion. and like any development, the aesthetic impact of a project is open to debate. but, let's say we agree on that - they're ugly. so what?
and let's see some data on your property values getting destroyed because of these. most likely, your property values increased through the 80s, had a slight dip in the 90s, and then increased annually until about a year ago or so. just like every other market in the country, the values increased for no good reason. at least cities have fluctuating (often increasing) population growth. whereas, your area is pretty much a negative growth trend, except for the resort development activity.
and, take a better look at your argument - that these developers are lining the pockets of politicians to be able to build machines that don't create any power. can you explain that better? i doesn't make sense to me. and before you or Cnut claim that the utilities or other industries are being mandated to buy green credits, keep in mind that there are only credits if the wind blows. it doesn't remove the fact that there is private capital being put at risk to build the turbine and generate the power to sell to a user.

I mean, look, I wouldn't want to live next to a wind farm either. But I wouldn't expect a several billion project to stop because it offends my senses.

Anonymous said...

people, you should do your own research. go to www.awea.org. granted, it is a website that is very much pro wind. however, it has links to other sites and links to data.

i know for sure that a google search for wind turbines and almost any town on the coast of Massachusetts (i haven't done it for other towns in other states) will show a feasibility report for the potential of a wind turbine project in that town. the reports have data. historical data using MET towers on site, and using other project data nearby. the data for the hull project is available. There's a project in Portsmouth, RI that has data.

If you want to know anything about this business, technology, etc., read it for yourself. the information is public. do not take the word of others regardless of how many quotations they put around their so-called *excerpts*.

what i'm suggesting is don't accept the AWEA propaganda, and don't accept the anti-development propaganda. Look at the data for yourself.

Anonymous said...

The awea website that is run by the wind indusrty is a work of fiction. There is little there that is based on fact.
I have 15 years of wind energy production records and the 4,000 +/- turbines in the Pass only generate an average of 100 -/+ MW [usually on the minus side] per year intermittently. Edison uses about 13,000 MW per year. Edison keeps more in their spinning reserve than wind generates. This is why wind is a DUPLICATION of power the utiliteis already have to have to avert blackouts, running and ready to take over at a moments notice when wind goes off line. The claims to saving pollution is more fabrication to fool the masses. Their miniscule production doesn't match the "time of need" profile. 6 MW at peak, 33 MW midpeak and 61 MW off peak! It is useless as baseload and can't be called on upon demand. All they do is generate some kWh randomly when the wind decides to blow which is only 14-20% of installed capacity. The devastation that they create and no they do not enhance property values. They keep siting a study that was incomplete and factually incorrect, however, it is well known now that because of the noise and strobe lights, people have had to abandon their homes and in some cases the developer has had to purchase them as they were unlivable. And yes, they still kill birds and views add value to your property. They are so arrogant that they think that just because we live in the Country we are stupid and of course the urban dwellers don't know any better, so if it sounds to good to be true...it probable is!
If wind was so great and generates so much, then why are you all still taking subsidies? When the subsidies stop, you all file for bankruptcy HMMMM?
You keep deceiving people as to how many homes you can supply power for, when in fact you can't even supply one! Just more hogwash.
As for greasing the politicians pockets... all you have to do is check their campaign contributers, which are public records and they rubber stamp anything you guys want! We did file a lawsuit against Enron and the County of Riverside where the County in order to fast track cut a few corners and changes a few ordinances improperly.
We have plenty of the new big turbines out here and there still isn't any more output, in fact the records show that the production went down. Why? Because you still need wind and there isn't/hasn't been that much. You can't just snap your fingers to bring it on. And more and more people are getting on to your scam. After 25 years... you still have nothing to show, except a lot of bluster and "hot air"!

Anonymous said...

As far as veiws go... they certainly don't belong to the wind industry, they don't even live here! They belong to everyone and what gives you the right to come here and trash our neighborhoods? What if we went to your neighborhood and tried to wreck your view. And what of the the hypocrite Teddy Kennedy...he sure didn't want them in his front yard! But, it's fine in someone elses.

Anonymous said...

i have data that shows they are profitable and deliver a 15% yield on net basis, after government subsidies, on average.

pow!

Anonymous said...

Anon.

Of course you can show a 15% profit after ripping off the RATE AND TAX PAYER for SUBSIDIES. Something to really brag about!
What about showing a profit without robbing us for your scam industry?