Wind Turbine's CO2 Emissions increasing and largest new source of CO2

[jon_berzerk]

Wind Turbines CO2 pollution, it is a theme of mine, and when I find new information that confirms this fact I like to share it. CO2, Wind Turbine manufacture (as well as Solar Panel manufacture) is now the largest new source of CO2 in the atmosphere. It is a figure that is never discussed and completely absent from all the Green Renewable energy websites.

This article looks like it is only addressing the rebar and concrete, neglecting the production of fiberglass and the other exotic materials

How Much CO2 Gets Emitted to Build a Wind Turbine?

Its carbon footprint is massive – try 241.85 tons of CO2.

Here’s the breakdown of the CO2 numbers.

To create a 1,000 Kg of pig iron, you start with 1,800 Kg of iron ore, 900 Kg of coking coal 450 Kg of limestone. The blast furnace consumes 4,500 Kg of air. The temperature at the core of the blast furnace reaches nearly 1,600 degrees C (about 3,000 degrees F).

The pig iron is then transferred to the basic oxygen furnace to make steel.

1,350 Kg of CO2 is emitted per 1,000 Kg pig iron produced.

A further 1,460 Kg CO2 is emitted per 1,000 Kg of Steel produced so all up 2,810 Kg CO2 is emitted.
45 tons of rebar (steel) are required so that equals 126.45 tons of CO2 are emitted.
To create a 1,000 Kg of Portland cement, calcium carbonate (60%), silicon (20%), aluminium (10%), iron (10%) and very small amounts of other ingredients are heated in a large kiln to over 1,500 degrees C to convert the raw materials into clinker. The clinker is then interground with other ingredients to produce the final cement product. When cement is mixed with water, sand and gravel forms the rock-like mass know as concrete.

An average of 927 Kg of CO2 is emitted per 1,000 Kg of Portland cement. On average, concrete has 10% cement, with the balance being gravel (41%), sand (25%), water (18%) and air (6%). One cubic metre of concrete weighs approx. 2,400 Kg so approx. 240 Kg of CO2 is emitted for every cubic metre.

481m3 of concrete are required so that equals 115.4 tons of CO2 are emitted.

View attachment 68267

thank god it is not the dangerous CO2 that the alarmists gripe about

 

[elektra]

Links, old girl,links. Post numbers without links, no credibility. Especially since you have lied repeatedly on this board.

The links are there, I can post them a second time just for you Old Crock, it is as easy as pie.

From post #14, that is 8 posts before your post old crock.

Wind Turbine's CO2 Emissions increasing and largest new source of CO2

http://ec.europa.eu/environment/lif....cfm?fuseaction=search.dspPage&n_proj_id=3283

The production of glass fibre consumes high levels of energy and material. For each kilogramme of glass melted, 1 kg of carbon dioxide (CO2) is emitted into the atmosphere, in addition to nitrogen oxide and dioxide (NOx), sulphur dioxide (SO2), chloride, fluoride, volatile organic compounds (VOC) and particles. Furthermore 17 GJ of power are consumed for every tonne of melted glass.

 

[elektra]

And the fiberglass, steel and cement to build a natural gas power plant?

The trains used to transport the millions of tons of coal necessary to run a coal fired plant?

Your threads are devoid of intellectual honesty.

I like intellectually honesty, so yes I admit before we even begin construction on a single Wind Turbine, we must first build a Natural Gas power plant to power the chemical industry that will increase production to meet the demands of manufacturing Fiberglass or Carbon Fiber for Wind Turbine components.

 

[Crick]

241.85 tons of CO2 to produce a wind farm with 20 COMPLETELY UNSPECIFIED wind turbines. That didn't make you suspicious that they had all those precise numbers for rebar and concrete but never managed to identify the size or capacity of the wind turbines they were talking about? Visiting another anti-wind-turbine site I find four "popular" models listed. Two make 1.5 MW, one makes 1.8 and one makes 2 MW. Let's take an average and say that 242 tons of CO2 were produced making 20, 1.7 MW turbines. When the wind's blowing, that farm will produce 34 MW. How long would it take to produce 242 tons of CO2 making 34 MW with natural gas or coal. Let's find out.

Consulting the table at How much carbon dioxide is produced per kilowatthour when generating electricity with fossil fuels? - FAQ - U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)
we find an average of 1.84 pounds of CO2 are produced per kwh from fossil fuel. To equal the 34 MW produced by the wind farm running at full tilt would require [(241.85 tons x 2000 pounds per ton) / (34000 kilowatts x 1.84 pounds CO2 per kilowatt)] = 483,700 pounds CO2 / 62,560 pounds CO2 per hour = 7.73 hours.

It's not clear from the article, but suppose we assume they weren't talking about an entire 20 turbine wind farm but only a single turbine. Why then it would take an incredible 7.73 hours x 20 = 154.6 hours or 6.44 days.

End this stupid fucking joke dude.

That is 241.85 tons per wind turbine, not per wind farm. At that it is a new source of CO2, pretty significant.

Okay, for your single turbine, the CO2 balance goes negative in less than one week. Are you having difficulty understanding that?

 

[elektra]

241.85 tons of CO2 to produce a wind farm with 20 COMPLETELY UNSPECIFIED wind turbines. That didn't make you suspicious that they had all those precise numbers for rebar and concrete but never managed to identify the size or capacity of the wind turbines they were talking about? Visiting another anti-wind-turbine site I find four "popular" models listed. Two make 1.5 MW, one makes 1.8 and one makes 2 MW. Let's take an average and say that 242 tons of CO2 were produced making 20, 1.7 MW turbines. When the wind's blowing, that farm will produce 34 MW. How long would it take to produce 242 tons of CO2 making 34 MW with natural gas or coal. Let's find out.

Consulting the table at How much carbon dioxide is produced per kilowatthour when generating electricity with fossil fuels? - FAQ - U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)
we find an average of 1.84 pounds of CO2 are produced per kwh from fossil fuel. To equal the 34 MW produced by the wind farm running at full tilt would require [(241.85 tons x 2000 pounds per ton) / (34000 kilowatts x 1.84 pounds CO2 per kilowatt)] = 483,700 pounds CO2 / 62,560 pounds CO2 per hour = 7.73 hours.

It's not clear from the article, but suppose we assume they weren't talking about an entire 20 turbine wind farm but only a single turbine. Why then it would take an incredible 7.73 hours x 20 = 154.6 hours or 6.44 days.

End this stupid fucking joke dude.

That is 241.85 tons per wind turbine, not per wind farm. At that it is a new source of CO2, pretty significant.

Okay, for your single turbine, the CO2 balance goes negative in less than one week. Are you having difficulty understanding that?

The only problem having a problem is you, first and foremost my thread is about manufacturing Wind Turbines and the increase in CO2 because of manufacturing.

We are constantly increasing production of World Wide Heavy Industry to manufacture Wind Turbines. It does not matter what you believe, as far as the little tiny bit of electricity they provide, the fact is that we have created a huge increase in heavy industry manufacturing that did not exist 10 years ago.

You wish to complain about CO2 in the atmosphere, then you must consider the billions of tons of CO2 that Wind Turbines contribute.

 

[Crick]

Are you really this fucking stupid? Wow, you better not put invest any money. It will seriously cut into what's in your wallet something awful.

You better not plant any seeds. It'll reduce your seed stock.

You better not drive to work tomorrow morning. It'll take you further and further away from home.

Jesus man, do you REALLY not get it?

 

[elektra]

Are you really this fucking stupid? Wow, you better not put invest any money. It will seriously cut into what's in your wallet something awful.

You better not plant any seeds. It'll reduce your seed stock.

You better not drive to work tomorrow morning. It'll take you further and further away from home.

Jesus man, do you REALLY not get it?

Wind Turbines have failed, major bankruptcies, entire nations suffering under the burden of Green Energy Policies, without the subsidies, Green Energy collapses, they just do not produce the power to pay for themselves. Green Energy can not supply power to the heavy industry needed to produce or manufacture wind turbines or solar panels.

At that, if you wish to reduce CO2, a logical place to look is the recent increase of CO2 which resulted from manufacturing the millions of tons of steel consumed by constructed the massive wind turbines.

I am all for investing money, but if I plant a seed I get a tomato plant that produces 12 great tomatoes, if that tomato plant is equivalent to a wind turbine, I must plant a 100 tomato plants to produce the same amount of tomatoes. It does not make sense that every house in America will now need its own power plant, that is a massive amount of consumption, an increase in the use of Heavy Industry, an increase in pollution.

Maybe in the future you will believe each American can save the earth by each of us owning individual refineries?

 

[Crick]

I guess you still do not get it.

Scenario A: We build a 34MW fossil fuel plant. It requires lots of heavy industry to do so. When we get it running, it produces 62,560 pounds of CO2 PER HOUR.

Scenario B: We build a 34MW wind farm. It requires lots of heavy industry to do so. When we get it running, it produces 0 pounds of CO2 PER HOUR.

The amount of CO2 produced during by construction is absolutely trivial compared to the amount of CO2 that will NOT be produced by the wind farm.

If you can't see that, I won't be responding to this thread anymore. Talking to you is beginning to resemble speaking to a brick wall.

 

[elektra]

I guess you still do not get it.
Scenario A: We build a 34MW fossil fuel plant. It requires lots of heavy industry to do so. When we get it running, it produces 62,560 pounds of CO2 PER HOUR.
Scenario B: We build a 34MW wind farm. It requires lots of heavy industry to do so. When we get it running, it produces 0 pounds of CO2 PER HOUR.
The amount of CO2 produced during by construction is absolutely trivial compared to the amount of CO2 that will NOT be produced by the wind farm.
If you can't see that, I won't be responding to this thread anymore. Talking to you is beginning to resemble speaking to a brick wall.

Well, crick, I would say that I would not like it if you quit responding to my threads or posts. But, as far as speaking to brick walls, I am making specific points you just do not wish to acknowledge, which is fine. I understand.

Take just this post, who builds a 34 mwh fossil fuel plant? Nobody, so first and foremost you start by stating a comparison that is simply not based in reality. Then you compare that to a 34 mwh Wind Farm? A 34 mwh Wind Farm does not produce 34 mwh's, at times it will produce zero for hours and hours, sometimes for days, or even weeks.

What can be said is for every 34 mwh contracted to be sold by a wind farm, they must have another 34 mwh of power from fossil fuel to provide power when the wind changes direction or does not blow.

A fossil plant? 62,560 pounds of CO2? For only 34 mwh? I think that would be closer to 600 mwh.

Yet, you can never quit building Wind Turbines, they are so weak that you must build them forever, at the least, it is impossible to replace one 34 mwh lng plant with a wind farm, the wind does not blow all the time.

Combined cycle power plants - Siemens Global Website

Much lower carbon dioxide emissions per kilowatt hour – 345g/kWh for modern combined-cycle plants, compared to 578g/kWh on average for power generating facilities worldwide

 

[Crick]

I provided you the numbers and the source from which I performed those calculations.

A wind farm could be of any size whatsoever. I used 34 MW* because that was the size I used in my earlier example.

Wind farms can indeed run day and night and so, in good locations, can be quite consistent. However, if you'd like to say it only produces half its rated power, we can take a full 13 hours or thereabouts to repay the CO2 load its manufacture cost.

* - 20 turbines (mentioned in your article) x 1.7 MW (the average of four popular models mentioned in another anti-wind article)

 

[elektra]

I provided you the numbers and the source from which I performed those calculations.

A wind farm could be of any size whatsoever. I used 34 MW* because that was the size I used in my earlier example.

Wind farms can indeed run day and night and so, in good locations, can be quite consistent. However, if you'd like to say it only produces half its rated power, we can take a full 13 hours or thereabouts to repay the CO2 load its manufacture cost.

* - 20 turbines (mentioned in your article) x 1.7 MW (the average of four popular models mentioned in another anti-wind article)

How much electricity will those wind turbines use, from the grid, to begin, they do not power themselves as we all know, do you have that number?

 

[Crick]

Why don't you concentrate whatever mental acuity you possess on Powell's study as this conversation is a complete waste of time for all involved. Claiming that a system that uses no fuel produces more waste gas than a system that uses nothing BUT fuel is about as stupid as stupid can get.

 

[elektra]

Why don't you concentrate whatever mental acuity you possess on Powell's study as this conversation is a complete waste of time for all involved. Claiming that a system that uses no fuel produces more waste gas than a system that uses nothing BUT fuel is about as stupid as stupid can get.

Powell, 1st you stated there was a percentage of scientists, then you presented a study by Powell of articles from where, the internet or a science forum? Can we see the articles that Powell rejects? No.

Wind Turbines? They must be built and that process uses Coal, that is what I have always stated by you wish to obfuscate that fact by implying I stated something completely different.

Wind Turbine's are manufactured by Heavy Industry typically in foreign counties willing to ignore the environment. The manufacture of Wind Turbines is a process occurring 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, spewing out CO2 forever.

You can not argue with the fact, all you can do is try to hide this fact and have people believe that once they are built the pollution ends. But that is not true either, first a Wind Turbine requires a constant source of power, which some estimate to be 12% to 55% of the electricity they are capable of producing. The constant power used to power a Wind Turbine is supplied from fossil fuel power plants.

How much power does a Wind Turbine consume a day?

 

[Old Rocks]

Current Wind Generation In 2014, wind energy provided 12.69% of all in-state electricity production. • Equivalent number of homes powered by wind: 695,000

http://awea.files.cms-plus.com/FileDownloads/pdfs/Oregon.pdf

Current Wind Generation In 2014, wind energy provided 9.00% of all in-state electricity production. • Equivalent number of homes powered by wind: 3.6 million

http://awea.files.cms-plus.com/FileDownloads/pdfs/texas.pdf

The Power of Wind Energy

Iowa's installed wind generators can produce enough power to provide electricity to over 1,500,000 average sized homes!

Iowa Wind Energy Association

Can do a lot more states, Elektra. Easy to show that you are a lying asshole.

 

[elektra]

Current Wind Generation In 2014, wind energy provided 12.69% of all in-state electricity production. • Equivalent number of homes powered by wind: 695,000

http://awea.files.cms-plus.com/FileDownloads/pdfs/Oregon.pdf

Current Wind Generation In 2014, wind energy provided 9.00% of all in-state electricity production. • Equivalent number of homes powered by wind: 3.6 million

http://awea.files.cms-plus.com/FileDownloads/pdfs/texas.pdf

The Power of Wind Energy

Iowa's installed wind generators can produce enough power to provide electricity to over 1,500,000 average sized homes!

Iowa Wind Energy Association

Can do a lot more states, Elektra. Easy to show that you are a lying asshole.

Oregon is powered by Coal and Natural gas, imported from Wyoming.

Why Oregon imports power from fossil fuels and exports renewable energy

According to Ken Dragoon, senior resource analyst with the Northwest Power and Conservation Council, 30 to 40 percent of that wind energy goes to California to meet renewable energy mandates down there. Meanwhile, nearly 40 percent of Oregon’s electricity consumption comes from coal-fired power plants – many of which are in Wyoming and Montana. About 15 percent of the state’s power comes from natural gas

 

[Crick]

Q: Why do we care where it goes, as long as it replaces fossil fuels?

A: We don't.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Q: Why do we care where it goes, as long as it replaces fossil fuels?

A: We don't.

Wind will never replace fossil fuels

 

[Crick]

It has already replaced a significant percentage of fossil fuel use. It is certainly likely that it will never replace all of it, but no one is asking it to do so. We also have solar thermal, solar PV, tide, OTEC, offshore currents and nuclear.

I guarantee you that in our children's lifetimes we will see fossil fuel use drop to a very small fraction of its current use.

 

[Skull Pilot]

It has already replaced a significant percentage of fossil fuel use. It is certainly likely that it will never replace all of it, but no one is asking it to do so. We also have solar thermal, solar PV, tide, OTEC, offshore currents and nuclear.

I guarantee you that in our children's lifetimes we will see fossil fuel use drop to a very small fraction of its current use.

Sorry but a power source that only produces 30% of its rated capacity will never replace fossil fuels

 

[Crick]

Sorry, but a fuel whose use is going to cause mass stavation, water shortages and force the relocation of hundreds of millions of people and the abandonment of hundreds of trillions of dollars worth of real estate and infrastructure can no longer be used.

I couldn't care less what energy technology replaces fossil fuel; only that it get replaced.