Excellent Documentary Regarding Windmill Scam

[Abraham3]

Finally watched the movie.

It said nothing about anthropogenic global warming.

It said nothing about the value of wind energy.

Some interesting comments about noise and lighting issues with large windmills. An interesting lack of comments re how the royalties for the windmills allowed people to hang on to property for which agriculture could no longer pay. Minimal value. Lead poster Pete's comments about liberals in the video are complete and utter nonsense. There was no scam.

 

[Abraham3]

SO you hate wind for the reason the left hates nuclear?

Both are stupid idiotic attacks... Both are good energy sources for our nations.

Nuclear is a RELIABLE 24/7/365 source.. Wind is an expensive gimmick that can't be scheduled, contracted for, or relied on..

There is no comparison..

If the "left" is that stupid. It's not my fault...

More reliable than a single windmill installation. NOT "24/7/365" (which is redundant BTW). Reactors, heat exchangers, turbines and generators need service and suffer breakdowns like any other machines.

 

[flacaltenn]

And that is why Germany is building more of them. LOL


Germany To Consider ‘Virtual Baseload’ In Expanding Renewable Targets

Germany is expanding its renewable energy targets under a grand coalition agreement by the country’s two major political parties, but is also toying with the idea of introducing the concept of “virtual base-load”.

In a 168-document released by Chancellor Angela Merkel’s centre right CPD party and the smaller centre left SPD, it is clear that the two parties remain committed to the “Energiewende”, the transition away from nuclear and into an electricity grid dominated by renewables.

The document confirms that nuclear will be phased out by 2022 at the latest, and introduces new “renewable energy corridors” that call for renewable penetration to be lifted to 40-45 per cent by 2025, and to 55-60 per cent in 2035.

This expands and upgrades the current targets, which are for 35 per cent by 2020, and 50 per cent by 2030. The long-term target remains 80 per cent by 2050.



One of the key issues is the cost of the Energiewende, and the structure of the energy market, which analysts say has been broken by the impact of renewables, because their short-term marginal cost is pulling down the wholesale price of electricity. They two parties have agreed that there will be no retrospective changes to the feed-in tariff payments.

The new government is looking at introducing a capacity mechanism, but not before 2018, but one interesting new aspect is the idea of creating “virtual base-load capacity”.

Read more at Germany To Consider 'Virtual Baseload' In Expanding Renewable Targets | CleanTechnica

I think ending nuclear is really dumb but Germany finds wind economical.

Again Matthew --- this is a POLITICAL GOAL.. Like the old FAILED political goal I just posted for you.. Like Al Gore's "Information SuperHiway" or Swartzeneggers "Hydrogen Hiway"..

MERKEL is not building any wind plants. Germany will be building less and less of them because of the experience they've had with the crap...


I noticed you totally skipped this part of the article...

The new government is looking at introducing a capacity mechanism, but not before 2018, but one interesting new aspect is the idea of creating “virtual base-load capacity”.

The government intends to investigate whether large renewable energy producers would need to guarantee a contribution to reliable baseload supply to enhance the security of supply.

They could possibly do this with contracts and individual agreements with storage operators, or get “insurance” from other electricity producers, such as gas-fired generation.

“This could mean that renewable generators may be forced to buy “insurance” from conventional stations to provide this baseload capability (given the strong intermittency of wind, solar); this could likely imply some sort of a capacity payments from renewable generators to utilities,” a note from Deutsche Bank analysts said.

This could be positive for the some of the large centralised generation companies such as RWE and EON and it could have an impact on earnings for soalr and wind operators. However, the analysts say that because this is likely to slow the growth of renewables, “and thus the whole Energiewende”, it probably won’t happen.

Read more at Germany To Consider 'Virtual Baseload' In Expanding Renewable Targets | CleanTechnica

Maybe skipping little details like that is how you're able to remain a salesman for these things.. Requiring renewable operators to provide "fossil fuel backup"? "Virtual Baseload"..

Oh yeah --- that'll get investors excited ----- Stupid leftist morons...

 

[flacaltenn]

Finally watched the movie.

It said nothing about anthropogenic global warming.

It said nothing about the value of wind energy.

Some interesting comments about noise and lighting issues with large windmills. An interesting lack of comments re how the royalties for the windmills allowed people to hang on to property for which agriculture could no longer pay. Minimal value. Lead poster Pete's comments about liberals in the video are complete and utter nonsense.

What a relief it didn't say anything about "your specialty".. So unsuscribe from the thread already. Guess you don't care about the details of "fixing" your little AGW fantasy problem...

 

[Abraham3]

Finally watched the movie.

It said nothing about anthropogenic global warming.

It said nothing about the value of wind energy.

Some interesting comments about noise and lighting issues with large windmills. An interesting lack of comments re how the royalties for the windmills allowed people to hang on to property for which agriculture could no longer pay. Minimal value. Lead poster Pete's comments about liberals in the video are complete and utter nonsense.

What a relief it didn't say anything about "your specialty".. So unsuscribe from the thread already. Guess you don't care about the details of "fixing" your little AGW fantasy problem...

Learn to spell, then learn to write pertinent comments with your new found skills.

 

[flacaltenn]

SO you hate wind for the reason the left hates nuclear?

Both are stupid idiotic attacks... Both are good energy sources for our nations.

Nuclear is a RELIABLE 24/7/365 source.. Wind is an expensive gimmick that can't be scheduled, contracted for, or relied on..

There is no comparison..

If the "left" is that stupid. It's not my fault...

More reliable than a single windmill installation. NOT "24/7/365" (which is redundant BTW). Reactors, heat exchangers, turbines and generators need service and suffer breakdowns like any other machines.

What is redundant in 24/7/365? This oughta be good... I contend solar is 6/6/300 and that wind is ??/??/220. I can have a system that generates 24/7 only in the summer or generates 100 days of year, but for only 2 hours on Tuesday.. There's NOTHING redundant in that description..

There's is NO relying on wind.. A wind production looks like this....

The green line is what the grid DEMANDS.. And the blue line is when wind decides to come to work.. Now draw a nice straight purple line over the green demand line --- that's what nuclear can provide..

I repeat.. There is no comparison..

 

[westwall]

What do you make of all the thousands of scientists that would have to be actively participating in such a scam? Are they crooked or stupid or both? The ones with the PhDs.

What, you mean the thousands who's lifestyles and careers are based on the fraud? Those asshats?

 

[WheelieAddict]

New York denies the science of hydraulic fracturing, yet embraces the slaughter of endangered birds.

On the fracking front people up here are scared to hell that the great abundance of fresh water sources we enjoy will be compromised, tons of beautiful lakes, streams, waterfalls, etc. up here. And many rural residents rely on well water.

As far as the science of hydraulic fracturing goes I agree it is sound. My fear would be the waste water and lax practices at sites that could compromise some of the cleanest water in the US. I like that the state is taking its time on the issue, I am for fracking as long as it is done as clean as possible and want regulations in place to ensure it goes well.

As far as wind farms go I am not aware of major problems with them here, I do not know too much about them and how many birds they kill.

 

[ScienceRocks]

This is why I am no longer a republican. These people are idiotic.

Wind is just as good as any other source of energy. To go nuts over a few dead animals is kind of dumb being the fact that we probably kill a few billion per year. Coal, oil and natural gas is way more destructive to the natural environment then renewables...This is just a fact. Say what you want about solar but at least it is done within a controlled factory environment....YOU CAN"T SAY THE SAME about coal, oil or natural gas that sprays all over the fucking area they fuck up.

Same could be said about our health as fossil fuels pollute our planet like no other. Hard to believe how many people are so stupid to be against good sources of energy like nuclear, solar, wind and hydro...

Makes me sick.

 

[WheelieAddict]

This is why I am no longer a republican. These people are idiotic.

Wind is just as good as any other source of energy. To go nuts over a few dead animals is kind of dumb being the fact that we probably kill a few billion per year. Coal, oil and natural gas is way more destructive to the natural environment then renewables...This is just a fact. Say what you want about solar but at least it is done within a controlled factory environment....YOU CAN"T SAY THE SAME about coal, oil or natural gas that sprays all over the fucking area they fuck up.

Same could be said about our health as fossil fuels pollute our planet like no other. Hard to believe how many people are so stupid to be against good sources of energy like nuclear, solar, wind and hydro...

Makes me sick.

Well the way I see it all methods of harnessing energy should be explored and given a chance not just dismissed because they aren't perfect at the moment. I understand the argument that money is wasted with subsidies and development, but that has always happened, and current energy sources are subsidized anyways. Just compromise and cap the amount of spending on development, but don't eliminate it.

 

[Pete7469]

And this is why major nations like China, Germany, Briton, India, Pakistan, Turkey, etc are running towards wind energy.

China has 74gw of it and plans to build a hell of a lot more. Has to as coal, hydro and other sources are becoming bad for their nation.
Germany wants to increase it.
Briton has the biggest offshore wind farms on earth. Wants to increase and in fact the latest news is they want to keep doing so.


They all understand that one day coal, natural gas and oil will be running low. Only a idiot wouldn't take advantage of their planets resources that are clean.

Good God son are you retarded or what?

None of those countries are "running" towards wind energy. China doesn't give a fuck about it's people, Germans are rejecting it, and if the Brits are doing it OFFSHORE that should tell you something, but you're too stupid to see it.

 

[Pete7469]

What do you make of all the thousands of scientists that would have to be actively participating in such a scam? Are they crooked or stupid or both? The ones with the PhDs.

I suppose the scientists who reject MMGW are crooked and/or stupid in your "mind" as well.

Most that I'm aware of are either stupid (Pielke, Soon, Spencer, etc) or are willfully blinding themselves to maintain their political positions. You hate liberals. I suspect that is a large part of your opposition to AGW.

No bed wetter, my opposition to AGW is based on common sense.

Forbes is just the high end of Fox News. James Taylor actually works for the Heartland Institute. Such results aren't worth the electrons it took to send them here.

And all of your "sources" are pristine arbiters of unbiased truth, beyond reproach right? There is no way anyone can question that credibility, but anything that compromises your programming is subject to the strictest scrutiny.

Imbecile.

I haven't read your list yet, but I'm willing to bet a dollar to a donut that we're going to find that you don't understand the proper use of the terms "know" or "true".

At least two peer reviewed studies have shown that the temperature trend of the last 150 years is unprecedented in the last 22,000 years (since the end of the last glaciation). That humans and hominids survived ice ages does not mean that modern man and his modern infrastructure will pass unscathed through another "incredible climate fluctuation", particularly when it comes on at ten times the pace of any prior change.

Yes, from AGW.

That is incorrect on every aspect. The beginning of the instrumented temperature record is very close to coincident with the beginning of the Industrial Revolution. All temperature data from the MWP and most of the data for the LIA are from proxies. The greatest fluctuation in all that period has been over the last 150 years.

I have to go to the store. More later.

You're going to have to translate this into English before I can make much of a comment. However, without getting loopy, isotopic analysis shows that virtually every molecule of CO2 above 1850's 270 ppm comes from the combustion of fossil fuel. That would make us responsible for 130/400ths, or 32.5% of the atmosphere's current CO2. And the percent symbol usually follows the number. "3%" not "%3"

Let me guess. You think volcanoes produce more GHGs than humans. Right? Wrong.

MMGW is bullshit, windmills are bullshit, and liberalism is all it's forms is once again exposed to be bullshit.

These would be unsupported assertions where they aren't factually incorrect. You've "exposed" absolutely nothing.

What delights me most about watching this movie though, is how many obviously mindless liberal twits opposed the windmills out of a concern for scenery, and then came to realize that windmills DO MORE DAMAGE to the environment according to their own misplaced concerns of MMGW.

Yet there are dipshit moonbats who will eat their own kind because their messiah promotes windmills. In their "minds" it has nothing to do with the massive amounts of money GE and Jeffery Imelt have invested in the democrook political machine.

I'll take that donut now.

Shove the donut up your ass bed wetter. All of your pseudointellectual drivel can be dismissed by the facts on the ground.

There has been no significant elevation in global temperature.

There hasn't been a recordable level of difference in ocean levels, I know this is a fact based on LIVING ON A SMALL PACIFIC ISLAND.

There are sociopaths making enormous amounts of money thanks to your ignorance, but you want the rest of us to pay on order to fix a problem that isn't even real.

It defies the theory of natural selection that you survived childhood.

 

[flacaltenn]

You're going to have to translate this into English before I can make much of a comment. However, without getting loopy, isotopic analysis shows that virtually every molecule of CO2 above 1850's 270 ppm comes from the combustion of fossil fuel. That would make us responsible for 130/400ths, or 32.5% of the atmosphere's current CO2. And the percent symbol usually follows the number. "3%" not "%3"

Bullshit and ignorance.. That isotopic ratio test cannot distinguish between "every molecule" of atmos CO2.. MANY natural sources are indistinguishable. The two isotopes are not singular valued, but come from 2 VERY CLOSE and OVERLAPPING distributions --- making interpretation very difficult.

Furthermore, there is no partition in the Carbon Cycle that PRECLUDES ancient CO2 from rising from the ocean deep after a 1000 yrs or being recycled. The NATURAL emission of CO2 from the land and ocean DWARFS man's emissions each year 20 Fold. And the atmos has no predilection for retaining only the EVIL CO2 that man produces..