Big Wind gets a kick in the shorts

[elektra]

For christ's sake. Do you remember posting that you expected to get crickets from me? It was a fucking joke you idiot.

Really a joke? In that case hahahahahahahahhahahhahahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahah'

My reply was also a fucking joke, which makes you a bigger fucking joke. Are you really this stupid or is this your attempt to denigrate me.

everyone who reads both responses, knows they are joke, except for cricket, who only recognizes crick's lame joke

 

[elektra]

Are we confused as well? Cloud cover and rain do not affect wind turbines. Neither does nightfall.

Rain does affect wind turbines. Are you this insane. That is like saying rain does not affect airplanes

Hell, wind alone affects wind turbines, we should start discussing the micro plastics problem from the leading edge of the turbine deteriorating.

But, who cares, right, as long as it is wind turbines and solar panels polluting it is okay, cause we call them green.

 

[elektra]

For christ's sake. Do you remember posting that you expected to get crickets from me? It was a fucking joke you idiot.

It's hard to believe you're this stupid. The values in that table in post #489 are the values of CO2 produced per kWh over the manufacture, installation and operatonal lifetime of those wind turbines. Almost every single gram of that is produced during the turbine's manufacture and installation. Virtually NONE is produced while it is operating.

Now I'm presuming that you actually DO know the difference between a Watt and a Watt-Hour and that your earlier mistake was just a typo of sorts. So since that table provides us CO2 per kWh, rather than looking at how many coal plants are being built versus how many wind turbine are being built, we can look either at the installed capacity or the actual power consumption. We can determine, for instance, how much CO2 would be produced supplying the world's current demand solely with fossil fuels and, alternatively, solely with wind turbines. And when we do that, we will find that in the absolute best case (for you), a world powered solely by natural gas would produce more than 17 times as much CO2 as a world powered entirely by the wind turbines with the worst carbon footprint around.

DO YOU FUCKING UNDERSTAND WHAT I AM SAYING?

As we all know, it was you who did not understand what gwh, meant. You attempted to correct be, telling us that it means, giga watts x hours. Crick is wrong and pretending, that mistake was not crick's lack of knowledge.

Wind and Solar do replace coal power plants, that would be Natural Gas

A world entirely powered by wind turbines? That would be a world full of poverty, and just the rich.

Wind and Solar give us poverty, nothing more, unless you are the rich than you get millions in subsidies.

 

[elektra]

146,000,000 tons of CO2 emitted by solar panels and wind turbines, every year.

 

[elektra]

, a world powered solely by natural gas would produce more than 17 times as much CO2 as a world powered entirely by the wind turbines with the worst carbon footprint around.

DO YOU FUCKING UNDERSTAND WHAT I AM SAYING?

Yes, you are saying you are an idiot that does not understand we can not power the world with Wind Power but we can power the world with Natural Gas

146,000,000 tons of CO2 emitted by solar panels and wind turbines, every year.

 

[Crick]

Yes, you are saying you are an idiot that does not understand we can not power the world with Wind Power but we can power the world with Natural Gas

146,000,000 tons of CO2 emitted by solar panels and wind turbines, every year.

No, that is not what I said. Wow. I didn't think you were actually that stupid.

 

[ding]

Just another attempt by the white man to screw the Indians.