Discussion in 'Environment' started by Quantum Windbag, Oct 19, 2010.
Impacts of wind farms on surface air temperatures ? PNAS
Just how green is green?
I all depends on the mix of yellow and blue. Sorry I couldn't resist.
The manufacturer of windmills releases more CO2 and pollution in the atmosophere than burning Coal.
Seems like there is just no pleasing some folks... Let's just go back to oil lights at night and give up on this shit.
Just where did you learn reading comprehension? Since when is very localized veritical mixing "climate"? And note that the article stated that the effects could be minimized by rotor design. And in the areas that have the most potential for wind farms, there is already enough natural turbulance that the mills would make no differance.
Wind power is not only here to stay, it will be one of the biggest sources of energy for this nation as we wean off of fossil fuels.
You have a problem with peer reviewed science now that it contradicts your worldview? Why am I not surprised?
All local changes to weather have global consequences. Apparently you are the one with reading comprehension problems. The authors identified some areas where the impact would be minimized, not eliminated. Ant the conjecture about rotor design is purely that, conjecture. Until someone succeeds in building a rotor that is both effective at generating electricity and minimizing air turbulence it is not worth anymore than those solar panels that are 90% efficient you keep talking about.
My point is really simple, but it does require the ability to think, which might be why you missed it.
That article hardly contradicts anything I have said concerning wind power. In fact, it states the potential even more strongly than I have.
And just where did it even state local weather was affected? It stated vertical mixing and local surface temperatures. As those in the immediate vicinity of the mill. No statement of local weather affected, no statement of climate affected.
Local affects can be minimized by changing rotor design. Not "might be minimized" but "can be minimized". As you stated, a peer reviewed paper published by the PNAS.
So, you admit there are "effects". And regarding fossil fuels, EIA reports indicate, year after year, that hydrocarbons will continue to be the dominant source of energy to 2030 and beyond.
I'm not slamming the importance or contribution of wind or any alternative power source for that matter. But reality and fantasy don't mix in the world of energy economics.
Local temperatures are not weather? When did that happen? Should I call my local meteorologist and inform him that temps are not part of weather?
You live under a windmill, numbnuts?
Separate names with a comma.