For those upset with bird deaths from wind turbines

Maybe the birds should get off alcohol laced bird seed and they would stop hitting the turbines.
 
I'm more upset with investing billions of dollars on a power generation method that only produces 25% or less of its rated capacity and has a lifespan of only a few decades or less
 
I'm more upset with investing billions of dollars on a power generation method that only produces 25% or less of its rated capacity and has a lifespan of only a few decades or less
Plus a lot of them spew oil everywhere and then blows it all over the ground.
 
I'm more upset with investing billions of dollars on a power generation method that only produces 25% or less of its rated capacity and has a lifespan of only a few decades or less

It always amazes me how you never seem to include the free fuel into your evaluations. What's the ratio between the cost of coal, natural gas and petroleum to either wind or sunshine (they all have the same value)?

Infinity.
 
Last edited:
I'm more upset with investing billions of dollars on a power generation method that only produces 25% or less of its rated capacity and has a lifespan of only a few decades or less

It always amazes me how you never seem to include the free fuel into your evaluations. What's the ratio between the cost of coal, natural gas and petroleum to either wind or sunshine (they all have the same value)? Infinity.

Free fuel versus reliability.
Which one matters more for a high tech economy?
 
I'm more upset with investing billions of dollars on a power generation method that only produces 25% or less of its rated capacity and has a lifespan of only a few decades or less

It always amazes me how you never seem to include the free fuel into your evaluations. What's the ratio between the cost of coal, natural gas and petroleum to either wind or sunshine (they all have the same value)? Infinity.

So what's the larger output?

25% of "free" or 80 to 90% of something you pay for? And don't forget the grid scale batteries you have to build to make that "free" fuel available when the sun isn't shining or the wind is not blowing or is blowing too fast

And FYI we have enough free fuel to power nuclear reactors for centuries.
 
Mining and processing uranium is most assuredly not done for free.

Let me add, though, that I am a proponent of nuclear power plants due to their lack of carbon emissions.
 
Last edited:
Read the fucking article. Till you do, your comments are simply a waste of everyone's time.
 
Read the fucking article. Till you do, your comments are simply a waste of everyone's time.

No thanks, I already know about the birds and the bees.

Thanks in advance.
 
Still wasting time.

And every minute wasted, a carbon atom earns it's wings and flies away.............................

Maybe they will evolve and replace the imperiled birds.
 
I'm more upset with investing billions of dollars on a power generation method that only produces 25% or less of its rated capacity and has a lifespan of only a few decades or less

It always amazes me how you never seem to include the free fuel into your evaluations. What's the ratio between the cost of coal, natural gas and petroleum to either wind or sunshine (they all have the same value)? Infinity.

So what's the larger output?

25% of "free" or 80 to 90% of something you pay for? And don't forget the grid scale batteries you have to build to make that "free" fuel available when the sun isn't shining or the wind is not blowing or is blowing too fast

And FYI we have enough free fuel to power nuclear reactors for centuries.
at least until we can invent technology.
 

Forum List

Back
Top