Karakoram Glaciers EXPANDING!!!

[westwall]

And wind is producing what percentage of the US's electrical needs? 2% if you're lucky? Solar is STILL UNDER 2% even with all of that growth. And that power costs more per kwh than from a fossil fuel source, and the systems will wear out in 20 years or less. What has been the success rate for your vaunted wind power here in Nevada????? Oh, yeah not too good.

Take a looky here, the city of Reno invested 416,000 TAXPAYER DOLLARS into wind turbines. So far that investment has netted 2,800 in savings.

So MENSA BOY, how many years will it take to pay off that 416,000 dollars? Here's a clue....it's almost half as long as this country has been around. And you think that's a good investment?

"A year later, however, Hamilton’s warning appears to have been spot on.

The electricity produced by NV Energy’s $46 million wind rebate program has fallen far short of expectations.
In a startling example, the city of Reno’s wind turbines — for which the city received more than $150,000 in rate-payer funded rebates — produced dramatically less electricity than the manufacturers of its turbines promised.

“These manufacturers, when they gave us the turbines, they said they were designed to be mounted on a parapet at this height, and that’s what we did,” said Jason Geddes, who runs the city of Reno’s renewable energy program. “But when we started getting actual wind flow patterns, we realized their claims were wrong.”

As first reported by the Reno Gazette-Journal, one turbine that cost the city $21,000 to install saved the city $4 on its energy bill. Overall, $416,000 worth of turbines have netted the city $2,800 in energy savings."



NV Energy windmill program generates rebates, little electricity - Friday, March 30, 2012 | 2 a.m. - Las Vegas Sun

In other words, there wasn't the wind at the point the turbines were mounted. Kind of like building a water turbine where there is not the flow it was designed for, then saying hydro is not an effective means of generating electricity. But the kind of nonsense we have come to expect from Walleyes.

They don't work when installed and used as the manufacturer suggests and then you say that the buyer is at fault for buying the failed device and using it as directed?

This is Liberalism, folks.

Insanity by another name....

 

[Star]

West..........until now, I never thought we'd see a board member come in here who was more beyond gone than Chris. But you realize......if they are out there, eventually, the most nutty of the nutty-asses find this place. Like Chris, this guy really believes his own shit............but the rest of the world knows renewbles go belly up without lots and lots of public monies. And the bottom line is, the arguments for renewables are dead in this country. Shit......even Salon Magazine of all places is now talking about it!! Check it out West.......maybe the best article Ive found in recent years that sums up the reality of where this debate is right now and moving forward. I call it Realville..................the poop>>> Everything you've heard about fossil fuels may be wrong - Energy - Salon.com


None of these assholes have their feet on the ground................

To members of the Republican -do-nothing- party, you make perfect sense -- but for the rest of us, we believe in working to solve recognizable problems pre-emptively. Did you miss out on investing in Microsoft too, cuz you didn't want to support those nerdy fooking liberals?






As climate change and clean energy have become first-tier political issues, many otherwise smart people who know precious little about either subject are suddenly making pronouncements on both as if they were opining on who should win American Idol.

A case in point is Michael Lind, whose title is “policy director of the economic growth program at the New America Foundation,” though as we’ll see, his ideas make it sound more like an Old America Foundation and make him sound more like Dr. Doolittle.

Ironically, while the “think small” centrists help undermine the political consensus for even modest climate action, every year we delay ensures that when we do act to address global warming, we will have to think very, very big. As the executive director of the International Energy Agency said last year, “we need to act urgently and now. Every year of delay adds an extra USD 500 billion to the investment needed between 2010 and 2030 in the energy sector”.

<snip>

How much money did Microsoft receive in Government subsidies prior to it becoming profitable?

Why is it that a Liberal cannot understand that if something is needed and efficient, a government subsidy is not needed. If it is so poorly conceived and so ignored by the buying public that it cannot exist on its own value, it might mean that it's not needed.

Every year of delay reduces the money wasted on technology that is daily shown to be wastefully inefficient.

I can understand why you would want to ask and answer your own question rather than addressing my question but-----but my question was/is; "Did you miss out on investing in Microsoft too, cuz you didn't want to support those nerdy fooking liberals?"


But what the hay, it's a public M/B you can change the subject if you so choose.

 

[westwall]

To members of the Republican -do-nothing- party, you make perfect sense -- but for the rest of us, we believe in working to solve recognizable problems pre-emptively. Did you miss out on investing in Microsoft too, cuz you didn't want to support those nerdy fooking liberals?






As climate change and clean energy have become first-tier political issues, many otherwise smart people who know precious little about either subject are suddenly making pronouncements on both as if they were opining on who should win American Idol.

A case in point is Michael Lind, whose title is “policy director of the economic growth program at the New America Foundation,” though as we’ll see, his ideas make it sound more like an Old America Foundation and make him sound more like Dr. Doolittle.

Ironically, while the “think small” centrists help undermine the political consensus for even modest climate action, every year we delay ensures that when we do act to address global warming, we will have to think very, very big. As the executive director of the International Energy Agency said last year, “we need to act urgently and now. Every year of delay adds an extra USD 500 billion to the investment needed between 2010 and 2030 in the energy sector”.

<snip>

How much money did Microsoft receive in Government subsidies prior to it becoming profitable?

Why is it that a Liberal cannot understand that if something is needed and efficient, a government subsidy is not needed. If it is so poorly conceived and so ignored by the buying public that it cannot exist on its own value, it might mean that it's not needed.

Every year of delay reduces the money wasted on technology that is daily shown to be wastefully inefficient.

I can understand why you would want to ask and answer your own question rather than addressing my question but-----but my question was/is; "Did you miss out on investing in Microsoft too, cuz you didn't want to support those nerdy fooking liberals?"


But what the hay, it's a public M/B you can change the subject if you so choose.

And you havn't addressed my point. Pot, meet kettle.

 

[Star]

How much money did Microsoft receive in Government subsidies prior to it becoming profitable?

Why is it that a Liberal cannot understand that if something is needed and efficient, a government subsidy is not needed. If it is so poorly conceived and so ignored by the buying public that it cannot exist on its own value, it might mean that it's not needed.

Every year of delay reduces the money wasted on technology that is daily shown to be wastefully inefficient.

I can understand why you would want to ask and answer your own question rather than addressing my question but-----but my question was/is; "Did you miss out on investing in Microsoft too, cuz you didn't want to support those nerdy fooking liberals?"


But what the hay, it's a public M/B you can change the subject if you so choose.

And you havn't addressed my point. Pot, meet kettle.

And I won't---<yawn!>
You can choose to change the subject from Global Climate Change to Microsoft if you want to-----I choose to save my comments about Microsoft for a thread pertinent to the threads title-----but you're -free- to talk about whatever you want. Wanna talk about liberal entrepreneurialism -- start a thread -- I may or may not respond, but what the hay -- it's a M/B dude/dudette.

 

[Star]

Like I said West......to the far left, there is no such thing as having to answer the question, "At what cost?". Invariably, it is a non-issue. Its actually fascinating to me on some level!! These people are not at all intellectually challenged, however, somehow, the thought processing gets muddled..........and there is a world of difference between the two. Most of the population possess the abilty to weigh necessary tradeoffs in life........but not these people. This 76 trillion non-issue is a perfect example..........thinking its a perfectly viable option.

"At what cost?"



Katyusha! went right over your head huh?

Renewable energy is a growth industry of the profit making kind, funded primarily via private investment -- you got problem with that?


Cost? -- ROI, dude/dudette.

Please, please show us TWO profitable renewable energy companies that don't recieve one dime from the taxpayers....ON ANY CONTINENT. Good luck.

Just two?
The Tennessee Valley Authority and the Bonneville Power Administrion to name just two, bring in more money than they spend then---then they turn around and invest in other profit making enterprises. For example; if not for BPA the aluminum industry wouldn't be what it is today, a good portion of our agriculture industry wouldn't have water to irrigate their fields, and flooding would wipe them out anyway, and lots-o-fun is had on the lakes behind the dams - cabins are rented, meals are eaten in restaurants that wouldn't otherwise exist... and many other profit making ventures. BPA and TVA et al were funded with public money but now, now these public entities give their profits back to the communities they serve plus providing a lot of good jobs for people that pay "secretary" level taxes. IOWs our public investment has paid off-----handsomely.


Howzit public investment can be profitable-----I just showed you how and, and they don't take one dime from we the people, er, we the taxpayers-----in fact, we the taxpayers are getting a huge ROI.


OK, I answered your question, take your best shot at debunking my answer --- if you think you can.





The Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) is an American federal agency based in the Pacific Northwest. BPA was created by an act of Congress in 1937 to market electric power from the Bonneville Dam located on the Columbia River and to construct facilities necessary to transmit that power. Congress has since designated Bonneville to be the marketing agent for power from all of the federally owned hydroelectric projects in the Pacific Northwest. Bonneville, whose headquarters are located in Portland, Oregon, is one of four regional Federal power marketing agencies within the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE).

Although BPA is part of the DOE, it is self-funded and covers its costs by selling its products and services at cost.[1] The BPA provides about 35% of the electricity used in the region.[1] BPA transmits and sells wholesale electricity in eight western states: Washington, Oregon, Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, Utah, Nevada, and California.[1]
BPA's first industrial sale was to Alcoa in January 1940, to provide 32,500 kilowatts of power.[2] This, and the following 162,500 killowatt order, led to complaints of the Bonneville Power Act's anti-monopoly clause.[2] The cheap price of aluminum from Alcoa helped aluminum sales grow in the post-World War II market.[2]


<snip>


The power generated on the BPA's grid is sold to public utilities, private utilities, and industry on the grid. The excess is sold to other grids in Canada, California and other regions. Because BPA is a public entity, it does not make a profit on power sales or from providing transmission services. BPA also coordinates with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation to regulate flow of water in the Columbia River and to carry out environmental projects such as salmon restoration.

 

[westwall]

"At what cost?"



Katyusha! went right over your head huh?

Renewable energy is a growth industry of the profit making kind, funded primarily via private investment -- you got problem with that?


Cost? -- ROI, dude/dudette.

Please, please show us TWO profitable renewable energy companies that don't recieve one dime from the taxpayers....ON ANY CONTINENT. Good luck.

Just two?
The Tennessee Valley Authority and the Bonneville Power Administrion to name just two, bring in more money than they spend then---then they turn around and invest in other profit making enterprises. For example; if not for BPA the aluminum industry wouldn't be what it is today, a good portion of our agriculture industry wouldn't have water to irrigate their fields, and flooding would wipe them out anyway, and lots-o-fun is had on the lakes behind the dams - cabins are rented, meals are eaten in restaurants that wouldn't otherwise exist... and many other profit making ventures. BPA and TVA et al were funded with public money but now, now these public entities give their profits back to the communities they serve plus providing a lot of good jobs for people that pay "secretary" level taxes. IOWs our public investment has paid off-----handsomely.


Howzit public investment can be profitable-----I just showed you how and, and they don't take one dime from we the people, er, we the taxpayers-----in fact, we the taxpayers are getting a huge ROI.


OK, I answered your question, take your best shot at debunking my answer --- if you think you can.





The Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) is an American federal agency based in the Pacific Northwest. BPA was created by an act of Congress in 1937 to market electric power from the Bonneville Dam located on the Columbia River and to construct facilities necessary to transmit that power. Congress has since designated Bonneville to be the marketing agent for power from all of the federally owned hydroelectric projects in the Pacific Northwest. Bonneville, whose headquarters are located in Portland, Oregon, is one of four regional Federal power marketing agencies within the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE).

Although BPA is part of the DOE, it is self-funded and covers its costs by selling its products and services at cost.[1] The BPA provides about 35% of the electricity used in the region.[1] BPA transmits and sells wholesale electricity in eight western states: Washington, Oregon, Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, Utah, Nevada, and California.[1]
BPA's first industrial sale was to Alcoa in January 1940, to provide 32,500 kilowatts of power.[2] This, and the following 162,500 killowatt order, led to complaints of the Bonneville Power Act's anti-monopoly clause.[2] The cheap price of aluminum from Alcoa helped aluminum sales grow in the post-World War II market.[2]


<snip>


The power generated on the BPA's grid is sold to public utilities, private utilities, and industry on the grid. The excess is sold to other grids in Canada, California and other regions. Because BPA is a public entity, it does not make a profit on power sales or from providing transmission services. BPA also coordinates with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation to regulate flow of water in the Columbia River and to carry out environmental projects such as salmon restoration.

Oh please, hydro electric power systems have been around for decades and everyone knows they work. We are talking about the new "green energy" systems you clowns wish to sink billions of dollars into. Try and stay on the subject. I realise you can't cause when you do you lose your ass. But try any way.

 

[westwall]

I can understand why you would want to ask and answer your own question rather than addressing my question but-----but my question was/is; "Did you miss out on investing in Microsoft too, cuz you didn't want to support those nerdy fooking liberals?"


But what the hay, it's a public M/B you can change the subject if you so choose.

And you havn't addressed my point. Pot, meet kettle.

And I won't---<yawn!>
You can choose to change the subject from Global Climate Change to Microsoft if you want to-----I choose to save my comments about Microsoft for a thread pertinent to the threads title-----but you're -free- to talk about whatever you want. Wanna talk about liberal entrepreneurialism -- start a thread -- I may or may not respond, but what the hay -- it's a M/B dude/dudette.

I didn't. try reading for comprehension some day. You think you're good at deflection but you're not. Every time you try it you simply look more foolish. Instead of dodging the hard questions try answering them. You might actually learn something. Though I doubt you really care to learn anything. You're to devout.

 

[Star]

Please, please show us TWO profitable renewable energy companies that don't recieve one dime from the taxpayers....ON ANY CONTINENT. Good luck.

Just two?
The Tennessee Valley Authority and the Bonneville Power Administrion to name just two, bring in more money than they spend then---then they turn around and invest in other profit making enterprises. For example; if not for BPA the aluminum industry wouldn't be what it is today, a good portion of our agriculture industry wouldn't have water to irrigate their fields, and flooding would wipe them out anyway, and lots-o-fun is had on the lakes behind the dams - cabins are rented, meals are eaten in restaurants that wouldn't otherwise exist... and many other profit making ventures. BPA and TVA et al were funded with public money but now, now these public entities give their profits back to the communities they serve plus providing a lot of good jobs for people that pay "secretary" level taxes. IOWs our public investment has paid off-----handsomely.


Howzit public investment can be profitable-----I just showed you how and, and they don't take one dime from we the people, er, we the taxpayers-----in fact, we the taxpayers are getting a huge ROI.


OK, I answered your question, take your best shot at debunking my answer --- if you think you can.





The Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) is an American federal agency based in the Pacific Northwest. BPA was created by an act of Congress in 1937 to market electric power from the Bonneville Dam located on the Columbia River and to construct facilities necessary to transmit that power. Congress has since designated Bonneville to be the marketing agent for power from all of the federally owned hydroelectric projects in the Pacific Northwest. Bonneville, whose headquarters are located in Portland, Oregon, is one of four regional Federal power marketing agencies within the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE).

Although BPA is part of the DOE, it is self-funded and covers its costs by selling its products and services at cost.[1] The BPA provides about 35% of the electricity used in the region.[1] BPA transmits and sells wholesale electricity in eight western states: Washington, Oregon, Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, Utah, Nevada, and California.[1]
BPA's first industrial sale was to Alcoa in January 1940, to provide 32,500 kilowatts of power.[2] This, and the following 162,500 killowatt order, led to complaints of the Bonneville Power Act's anti-monopoly clause.[2] The cheap price of aluminum from Alcoa helped aluminum sales grow in the post-World War II market.[2]


<snip>


The power generated on the BPA's grid is sold to public utilities, private utilities, and industry on the grid. The excess is sold to other grids in Canada, California and other regions. Because BPA is a public entity, it does not make a profit on power sales or from providing transmission services. BPA also coordinates with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation to regulate flow of water in the Columbia River and to carry out environmental projects such as salmon restoration.

Oh please, hydro electric power systems have been around for decades and everyone knows they work. We are talking about the new "green energy" systems you clowns wish to sink billions of dollars into. Try and stay on the subject. I realise you can't cause when you do you lose your ass. But try any way.

What's yer point? It worked!-It's green!-It's profitable!-It's mature!-It has track record!-It was created thru public funding!

Righties fought FDR tooth and nail on hydro power, now people with the same rightwing mind set want to stop more investment in America and-----and as you so succinctly point out, that mind set was wrong then and that rightwing mind set is wrong now --- thanks for the concession. Now it's time for you to pick the wool from your eyes, invest in America, believe in America, am I asking to much of the righties? Why do you hate an American success story?

What's yer point?-It worked!-It's green!-It's profitable!-It's mature!-It has a track record!-It was created thru public funding!

I think this is yours, I found it on a thread titled
"Karakoram Glaciers are expanding!!!"​

 

[skookerasbil]

The k00ks hype the shit out of renewables as iif they are on the precipice of dominance..................


yuk.........yuk..........


Windpower Reconsidered: Testimony before the House Science, Space, and Technology Committee &#8212; MasterResource



Still nothing but a far left fantasy!!!

 

[westwall]

Just two?
The Tennessee Valley Authority and the Bonneville Power Administrion to name just two, bring in more money than they spend then---then they turn around and invest in other profit making enterprises. For example; if not for BPA the aluminum industry wouldn't be what it is today, a good portion of our agriculture industry wouldn't have water to irrigate their fields, and flooding would wipe them out anyway, and lots-o-fun is had on the lakes behind the dams - cabins are rented, meals are eaten in restaurants that wouldn't otherwise exist... and many other profit making ventures. BPA and TVA et al were funded with public money but now, now these public entities give their profits back to the communities they serve plus providing a lot of good jobs for people that pay "secretary" level taxes. IOWs our public investment has paid off-----handsomely.


Howzit public investment can be profitable-----I just showed you how and, and they don't take one dime from we the people, er, we the taxpayers-----in fact, we the taxpayers are getting a huge ROI.


OK, I answered your question, take your best shot at debunking my answer --- if you think you can.





The Bonneville Power Administration (BPA) is an American federal agency based in the Pacific Northwest. BPA was created by an act of Congress in 1937 to market electric power from the Bonneville Dam located on the Columbia River and to construct facilities necessary to transmit that power. Congress has since designated Bonneville to be the marketing agent for power from all of the federally owned hydroelectric projects in the Pacific Northwest. Bonneville, whose headquarters are located in Portland, Oregon, is one of four regional Federal power marketing agencies within the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE).

Although BPA is part of the DOE, it is self-funded and covers its costs by selling its products and services at cost.[1] The BPA provides about 35% of the electricity used in the region.[1] BPA transmits and sells wholesale electricity in eight western states: Washington, Oregon, Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, Utah, Nevada, and California.[1]
BPA's first industrial sale was to Alcoa in January 1940, to provide 32,500 kilowatts of power.[2] This, and the following 162,500 killowatt order, led to complaints of the Bonneville Power Act's anti-monopoly clause.[2] The cheap price of aluminum from Alcoa helped aluminum sales grow in the post-World War II market.[2]


<snip>


The power generated on the BPA's grid is sold to public utilities, private utilities, and industry on the grid. The excess is sold to other grids in Canada, California and other regions. Because BPA is a public entity, it does not make a profit on power sales or from providing transmission services. BPA also coordinates with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation to regulate flow of water in the Columbia River and to carry out environmental projects such as salmon restoration.

Oh please, hydro electric power systems have been around for decades and everyone knows they work. We are talking about the new "green energy" systems you clowns wish to sink billions of dollars into. Try and stay on the subject. I realise you can't cause when you do you lose your ass. But try any way.

What's yer point? It worked!-It's green!-It's profitable!-It's mature!-It has track record!-It was created thru public funding!

Righties fought FDR tooth and nail on hydro power, now people with the same rightwing mind set want to stop more investment in America and-----and as you so succinctly point out, that mind set was wrong then and that rightwing mind set is wrong now --- thanks for the concession. Now it's time for you to pick the wool from your eyes, invest in America, believe in America, am I asking to much of the righties? Why do you hate an American success story?

What's yer point?-It worked!-It's green!-It's profitable!-It's mature!-It has a track record!-It was created thru public funding!

I think this is yours, I found it on a thread titled
"Karakoram Glaciers are expanding!!!"​

And they are still PUBLIC entities! They are NOT private companies and are shining examples of how Public Works projects SHOULD be done. They are also a well proven and well known technology and they are also under attack by the greenies who don't want any more to be built and in fact want the ones in existence to be destroyed because they make the rest of the green energy programs look stupid and incompetent.

You see it's A-OK for windmills to kill 150,000 birds a year but dams are anathema, an oil company that kills ten birds gets a major fine but you windmill folks can kill millions in a decade and that's A-OK.

Frauds.

 

[Star]

Oh please, hydro electric power systems have been around for decades and everyone knows they work. We are talking about the new "green energy" systems you clowns wish to sink billions of dollars into. Try and stay on the subject. I realise you can't cause when you do you lose your ass. But try any way.

What's yer point? It worked!-It's green!-It's profitable!-It's mature!-It has track record!-It was created thru public funding!

Righties fought FDR tooth and nail on hydro power, now people with the same rightwing mind set want to stop more investment in America and-----and as you so succinctly point out, that mind set was wrong then and that rightwing mind set is wrong now --- thanks for the concession. Now it's time for you to pick the wool from your eyes, invest in America, believe in America, am I asking to much of the righties? Why do you hate an American success story?

What's yer point?-It worked!-It's green!-It's profitable!-It's mature!-It has a track record!-It was created thru public funding!

I think this is yours, I found it on a thread titled​

"Karakoram Glaciers are expanding!!!"​

And they are still PUBLIC entities! They are NOT private companies and are shining examples of how Public Works projects SHOULD be done. They are also a well proven and well known technology and they are also under attack by the greenies who don't want any more to be built and in fact want the ones in existence to be destroyed because they make the rest of the green energy programs look stupid and incompetent.

You see it's A-OK for windmills to kill 150,000 birds a year but dams are anathema, an oil company that kills ten birds gets a major fine but you windmill folks can kill millions in a decade and that's A-OK.

Frauds.

hahaha-----now you're an environmentalist worried about bird kills in windfarms?-----pooleese, if you're worried about bird kills begin a petition drive to shut down Eisenhower's Interstate Highway system, or become a real environmentalist and search for ways to save bird lives, but a lot has already been done for you.

As the wind industry matures we're discovering;

Large surface area blades kill few birds.


Siting windfarms outside of migratory pathways saves bird lives (thank God for Nixon's EPA)


We're not talking birdbrains here (LOL) birds are smart-----the number of birds that die as a result of flying into a blade decreases the longer the windfarms are in place.

Up to a billion birds are killed on our highways every year, that compares with 2.19 bird deaths per turbine per year.


I for one don't want to see environmentalists like yourself take away my ability to hunt but-----but if you're unhappy about 150,000 birds being killed in windfarms every year, you must be pulling your hair out at the thought that hunters account for an annual death toll in the U.S. that includes 42 million mourning doves, 28 million quail, 20 million pheasants, 14 million ducks, and thousands of geese, swans, et al. Are you suggesting taking away people's guns or are you sugesting we just stop selling birdshot?


BTW - thanks for your concern for bird life.




Are Wind Turbines Really Killing Birds?

By Sam Schrader
Monday, April 16th, 2012

Environmentalists torn over supporting onshore windfarms because of their supposed devastating effects on bird populations can now rest easier.

According to a new study conducted by British researchers from the environmental group RSBP, Scottish Natural Heritage and British Trust for Ornithology (BTO), there is no evidence of long-term damage to bird populations as a result of wind turbine operations.
In the study, the authors looked at how 10 key species of the British upland bird would be affected, including some with severe preexisting population crises. The conservationists concluded that a large majority of the species could co-exist or even thrive with operational windfarms.



Species that showed little or no harm from the operational turbines include:

• Meadow pipit
• Golden plover
• Wheatear
• Skylark
• Whinchin
• Dunlin
• Lapwings
• Stonechat

One drawback the researchers found was some bird species were affected during the initial construction of the turbines. This revelation caused the researchers to advise inspecting the land before beginning construction.
“It was a bit of a surprise that the impact on windfarms seemed to be happening during construction rather than operation…It means we should look at ways in which these negative impacts can be minimized. The next step will be to find out whether those steps are effective,” lead author and principal ecologist at the BTO James Pearce-Higgins explained.

However, the study also concluded the skylark and the stonechat actually flourished during the construction of the turbines.

Editor's Note: From solar and wind to geothermal and biofuels, Green Chip readers want to know which renewable energy resource will take over where fossil fuels leave off. The answer is...all of the above!

There is no one single solution to today's energy crisis. However, the combination of all viable renewable energy resources, coupled with energy efficiency, conservation and smart grid development will not only lead us to energy independence and a cleaner, more sustainable energy infrastructure — but also to what will soon prove to be the greatest investment opportunity of the 21st Century.

 

[westwall]

What's yer point? It worked!-It's green!-It's profitable!-It's mature!-It has track record!-It was created thru public funding!

Righties fought FDR tooth and nail on hydro power, now people with the same rightwing mind set want to stop more investment in America and-----and as you so succinctly point out, that mind set was wrong then and that rightwing mind set is wrong now --- thanks for the concession. Now it's time for you to pick the wool from your eyes, invest in America, believe in America, am I asking to much of the righties? Why do you hate an American success story?

What's yer point?-It worked!-It's green!-It's profitable!-It's mature!-It has a track record!-It was created thru public funding!

I think this is yours, I found it on a thread titled​

"Karakoram Glaciers are expanding!!!"​

And they are still PUBLIC entities! They are NOT private companies and are shining examples of how Public Works projects SHOULD be done. They are also a well proven and well known technology and they are also under attack by the greenies who don't want any more to be built and in fact want the ones in existence to be destroyed because they make the rest of the green energy programs look stupid and incompetent.

You see it's A-OK for windmills to kill 150,000 birds a year but dams are anathema, an oil company that kills ten birds gets a major fine but you windmill folks can kill millions in a decade and that's A-OK.

Frauds.

hahaha-----now you're an environmentalist worried about bird kills in windfarms?-----pooleese, if you're worried about bird kills begin a petition drive to shut down Eisenhower's Interstate Highway system, or become a real environmentalist and search for ways to save bird lives, but a lot has already been done for you.

As the wind industry matures we're discovering;

Large surface area blades kill few birds.


Siting windfarms outside of migratory pathways saves bird lives (thank God for Nixon's EPA)


We're not talking birdbrains here (LOL) birds are smart-----the number of birds that die as a result of flying into a blade decreases the longer the windfarms are in place.

Up to a billion birds are killed on our highways every year, that compares with 2.19 bird deaths per turbine per year.


I for one don't want to see environmentalists like yourself take away my ability to hunt but-----but if you're unhappy about 150,000 birds being killed in windfarms every year, you must be pulling your hair out at the thought that hunters account for an annual death toll in the U.S. that includes 42 million mourning doves, 28 million quail, 20 million pheasants, 14 million ducks, and thousands of geese, swans, et al. Are you suggesting taking away people's guns or are you sugesting we just stop selling birdshot?


BTW - thanks for your concern for bird life.




Are Wind Turbines Really Killing Birds?

By Sam Schrader
Monday, April 16th, 2012

Environmentalists torn over supporting onshore windfarms because of their supposed devastating effects on bird populations can now rest easier.

According to a new study conducted by British researchers from the environmental group RSBP, Scottish Natural Heritage and British Trust for Ornithology (BTO), there is no evidence of long-term damage to bird populations as a result of wind turbine operations.
In the study, the authors looked at how 10 key species of the British upland bird would be affected, including some with severe preexisting population crises. The conservationists concluded that a large majority of the species could co-exist or even thrive with operational windfarms.



Species that showed little or no harm from the operational turbines include:

• Meadow pipit
• Golden plover
• Wheatear
• Skylark
• Whinchin
• Dunlin
• Lapwings
• Stonechat

One drawback the researchers found was some bird species were affected during the initial construction of the turbines. This revelation caused the researchers to advise inspecting the land before beginning construction.
&#8220;It was a bit of a surprise that the impact on windfarms seemed to be happening during construction rather than operation&#8230;It means we should look at ways in which these negative impacts can be minimized. The next step will be to find out whether those steps are effective,&#8221; lead author and principal ecologist at the BTO James Pearce-Higgins explained.

However, the study also concluded the skylark and the stonechat actually flourished during the construction of the turbines.

Editor's Note: From solar and wind to geothermal and biofuels, Green Chip readers want to know which renewable energy resource will take over where fossil fuels leave off. The answer is...all of the above!

There is no one single solution to today's energy crisis. However, the combination of all viable renewable energy resources, coupled with energy efficiency, conservation and smart grid development will not only lead us to energy independence and a cleaner, more sustainable energy infrastructure &#8212; but also to what will soon prove to be the greatest investment opportunity of the 21st Century.

Yes, I DO care about the wildlife killed by all means unlike you clowns who think it's OK to kill birds in your misbegotten belief that windpower is the best way to fleece the public of their hard earned cash. Windpower is failing worldwide, solar power is failing worldwide, and you people will kill any number of birds and other wildlife to furhter your goals. You don't care about the environment, you care about money and power.

I raise your self serving and poorly done study with video proof.


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1RcTjdY1aN4&feature=related]Vulture accident - YouTube[/ame]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RtgBWNKwBkE&feature=related]Fatal Attraction: Birds and Wind Turbines - KQED QUEST - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Star]

Too funny -- but typical rightwinger, the most easily debunked dude/dudette on the USMB "spews his/her bunk-----again.


"Windpower is failing worldwide" -- Lie
"solar power is failing worldwide"-- Lie


Time after time after time righties make absurd claims they not only "don't have facts to back this up" but they're so easily debunked that I have to believe they like getting flagellated, but what the hay some people like being dominated by an Alpha-----whatever turns ya on dude/dudette.

Check out the map below and watch the wind industry grow.​

​

 

[skookerasbil]

Too funny -- but typical rightwinger, the most easily debunked dude/dudette on the USMB "spews his/her bunk-----again.


"Windpower is failing worldwide" -- Lie
"solar power is failing worldwide"-- Lie


Time after time after time righties make absurd claims they not only "don't have facts to back this up" but they're so easily debunked that I have to believe they like getting flagellated, but what the hay some people like being dominated by an Alpha-----whatever turns ya on dude/dudette.

Check out the map below and watch the wind industry grow.​

​

Indeed.........and if this woman got a makeover, she'd be a total babe!!! ( ie: like I always say.......the lefty can never make his case when he must face the question, "As compared to what?")

There are two types of far left guys............ones that try to provide disinformation in an effort to persuade the hopelessly duped, and those who have just consumed too much k00L-Aid. This dolt here is that latter, Im afraid.


Heres the real poop on wind and solar ( note my sources by the way)..........they are niche energy sources. Will be for decades. There are always some real smart guys who will get duped losers to invest in anything...........even bags of dog doo if its packaged just right. Just like there are smart entreprenuers who come up with brilliant idea's to sell BS items to depressed assholes on cable TV at night...........like the belt hole punch tool or the Turbonator in "As Seen On TV". There are always going to be a handful of dopes out there who will buy into anything. Just like BS green energy. Many far left guys simply cant think on the margin. These people see a commercial ad for a TV gimmick ( or a whack job enviro-link) and think the whole world has been enlightened.

As promised...............and as is realized by the majorityI might add!!!!!!!!!!!

Job Losses From Obama Green Stimulus Foreseen in Spanish Study - Bloomberg

RealClearEnergy | Green Jobs Lead to Many Red Faces

RealClearEnergy | Overtaxing Oil to Subsidize Failing Alternatives

Future of federal solar programs in doubt - USATODAY.com

Kim Strassel: Cap and Trade Is Dead - WSJ.com

Looming Loss of Federal Incentives Darkens Future of Solar Power Stocks - Money Morning

What Will Replace Oil? Natural Gas Vs. Biofuels - Seeking Alpha

Sober Look: Cap-and-Trade is dead, even in California

Wind Developers Have Same Problems as Keystone XL | The Energy Collective

Taxpayer-Funded Green Job Losses Easy as A123 | National Legal and Policy Center

Like It Or Not, Fossil Fuels Are Going To Be Our Main Source Of Energy For A Long Time - Investors.com

The Green Jobs Myth - Investors.com

And shit..........even the New York Times ( of all places ) concedes that the future of wind and solar are shit without government help!!!!

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/26/business/energy-environment/future-of-solar-and-wind-power-may-hinge-on-federal-aid.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all













So much winning........................

 

[skookerasbil]

Hey Star......................

 

[code1211]

Too funny -- but typical rightwinger, the most easily debunked dude/dudette on the USMB "spews his/her bunk-----again.


"Windpower is failing worldwide" -- Lie
"solar power is failing worldwide"-- Lie


Time after time after time righties make absurd claims they not only "don't have facts to back this up" but they're so easily debunked that I have to believe they like getting flagellated, but what the hay some people like being dominated by an Alpha-----whatever turns ya on dude/dudette.

Check out the map below and watch the wind industry grow.​

​

All of the gyrations needed to go Green are justified if the reasons are reasonable. Are they?

Right now we have the cheapenst and most portable energy ever used in the history of the Planet. The use of Fossil Fuels which are abundant, cheap and portable have allowed the population to rise to levels that would have caused unremitting famine and pestilence in the past and yet it now allows a steadily rising standard of living and comfort around the world in areas of all climates.

The CO2 concentration rises are pointed at as the worst thing imaginable and yet ALL of the predicted disasters are not happening. The fear mongering liars are continuing to predict dire consequences which never materialize.

Simply arguing the wisdom of wasting billions on something that is not needed, not justified and not prudent in light of the vastly superior alternatives puts the cart before the horse.

Prove the case that the disaster is happening and you'll deserve an audience. Until then, direct that hot air at the big fan on the hill. It will serve at least some purpose in that setting.

 

[westwall]

Too funny -- but typical rightwinger, the most easily debunked dude/dudette on the USMB "spews his/her bunk-----again.


"Windpower is failing worldwide" -- Lie
"solar power is failing worldwide"-- Lie


Time after time after time righties make absurd claims they not only "don't have facts to back this up" but they're so easily debunked that I have to believe they like getting flagellated, but what the hay some people like being dominated by an Alpha-----whatever turns ya on dude/dudette.

Check out the map below and watch the wind industry grow.​

​

If windpower is so wonderful why did T. Boone Pickens pull out of it and sell all of his stuff to Canada?