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

[Old Rocks]

Tesla's grid scale batteries at $250 per kw/hr will more than likely lead to the reuse of those towers. As the grid scale batteries come on line, wind and solar will be the preferred vehicle for the generation of the power of this nation.

 

[Crick]

I get to New London once or twice a year and Newport less often than that. I'll keep an eye out.

 

[elektra]

I have been working with the submarine fleet for many years. Perhaps we will run into each other somewhere.

My office is next to New London, Just finished inspecting the USS Hartford, a Los Angeles Class submarine. I have now worked on the Virginia Class, and the Columbia Class.

 

[elektra]

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.

Then your position that we can use that fuel to build Wind Turbines and Solar panels is a position not based on knowledge, to be nice about it.

Crick, I bring this old thread up because you have accused me of never offering any proof of the CO2 emissions of wind and solar. This is one thread I started that has facts in it that you have not refuted, you have denigrated my comments, but you have not offered any proof that what I state is not accurate.

I most likely will use the links in this thread to start another, or maybe build upon what I started. I left this thread when I changed where I live from southern california to the New London area, where I can work on submarines.

 

[Crick]

Using Heavy Industry to process raw materials into Steel, and Concrete which Wind Turbines has increased demand for does not increase CO2, proportionately?

I would love to hear you explanation of this miracle, to produce billions of tons of materials for wind turbines yet not increase CO2

A very large wind turbine might weigh 500 tons. You would need 2 million of those to make ONE billion tons of material. According to the USGS, we currently have 70,800. In total, they weigh something less than 3,540,000 tons. You are off by a factor of several hundred. When I told you that you should stay away from math and science, I wasn't kidding.

 

[Crick]

My office is next to New London, Just finished inspecting the USS Hartford, a Los Angeles Class submarine. I have now worked on the Virginia Class, and the Columbia Class.

I am retired now. What were you inspecting?

 

[Crick]

Then your position that we can use that fuel to build Wind Turbines and Solar panels is a position not based on knowledge, to be nice about it.

I have a bachelors in engineering. You do not. This is a ridiculously old thread. What fuel were we talking about?

Crick, I bring this old thread up because you have accused me of never offering any proof of the CO2 emissions of wind and solar. This is one thread I started that has facts in it that you have not refuted, you have denigrated my comments, but you have not offered any proof that what I state is not accurate.

And where is this proof? Back in the OP?

I most likely will use the links in this thread to start another, or maybe build upon what I started. I left this thread when I changed where I live from southern california to the New London area, where I can work on submarines.

The weather in New London sucks.

 

[Crick]

I've reread your linked article in the OP. As others have noted STT is about as reliable as that guy at the corner on the soapbox. But they give a value of 241.85 tons of CO2 released during the creation of a wind turbine material. I could not find anywhere where he identified how large a wind turbine he might be talking about, so lets be conservative and say it's 3 MW.

"3.2.1. Natural gas avoided​

The quantity of natural gas that is used to produce 1 MWh of electricity is required and was determined using the following for Trinidad and Tobago: (1) The electrical demand for Trinidad and Tobago for the year 2015 was 9,689,987 MWh [42] and (2) this electrical demand was produced from 107,675 MMSCF natural gas [46]. Accordingly, the natural gas required to generate 1 MWh of electrical power is 9,689,987 MWh/107,675 MMSCF x 1.037 = 11.52 MWh/MMBtu, using a conversion factor of one thousand cubic feet of natural gas being equivalent to 1.037 MMBtu of natural gas [47]. Therefore, the generation of 1 MWh of electricity requires 11.52 MMBtu of natural gas.
"
Transitioning from 100 percent natural gas power to include renewable energy in a hydrocarbon economy.

For a 3MW wind turbine, then, it's output would require 34.56 million Btu of natural gas PER HOUR.

"Natural gas is a relatively clean burning fossil fuel. About 117 pounds of CO2 are produced per million British thermal units (MMBtu) equivalent of natural gas compared with more than 200 pounds of CO2 per MMBtu of coal and more than 160 pounds per MMBtu of distillate fuel oil."

Natural gas and the environment - U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)

Environmental issues, effects, and impacts of natural gas production and use.

www.eia.gov

So, replacing that 3MW wind turbine with a natural gas plant would produce 34.56 x 117 = 4,043.5 pounds of CO2/hour.

(241.85 tons x 2000 lb/ton) / 4,043.5 pounds/hour = 119.6 hours

So, to save all the CO2 created during its manufacture, a 3MW wind turbine would have to operate at capacity for a touch less than 5 days. Got that? 5 days. Now take your obsession for a long walk off a short pier.

 

[elektra]

I have a bachelors in engineering.

I have a bachelors degree in engineering as well.

Which field is yours.

 

[elektra]

I am retired now. What were you inspecting?

I use a scientific method to inspect metals for corrosion, pitting, thinning, cracking, etc..

 

[elektra]

A very large wind turbine might weigh 500 tons. You would need 2 million of those to make ONE billion tons of material. According to the USGS, we currently have 70,800. In total, they weigh something less than 3,540,000 tons. You are off by a factor of several hundred. When I told you that you should stay away from math and science, I wasn't kidding.

I stated billions of tons of materials, used to produce wind turbines. That is not simply the finished product but the materials that are used to produce. So, we can see you are already a bit off on your amount of materials. Which is fine, I do not expect you to know anything about wind turbines. I am here to teach you.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A very large wind turbine might weigh 500 tons.

No, a large wind turbine weighs over 2000 tons, Crick inadvertently (i am being real nice) leaves out the base which is at least 1500 tons. 70,800 x 2,000t = 156,000,000t

A very large wind turbine is the Haliade-X, which weighs more than 7000 tons! That includes the base.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

According to the USGS, we currently have 70,800

Crick obviously looked this number up. How can I, possible explain away a number, that is...

Crick, that number is as of January 2022. Further, Crick, that number is just the USA. I have never every stated my numbers are for the USA, only.

There are over 340,000 wind turbines on the planet.

Crick, we have always talked about Global Warming. I have always addressed how Wind Turbines increase the pollution in the atmosphere in the context of Global Warming. That means, all the Wind Turbines in the World, not just the small amount in the USA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I have also been very vocal about the amount of coal that it takes to make a wind turbine. Right now I will just address the concrete base.

340,000 turbines x 1500t concrete = 410,000,000t of concrete (using conservative numbers)

There is 350lbs of cement per ton of concrete, which can not be added to the concretes weight I am using, it is already included. Why do I care how much cement is used in a ton of concrete, it is because cement requires coal or coke, to create the heat that produces the chemical reaction that makes cement.


410,000,000t of concrete x 350lbs of cement equals 71,750,000
A very conservative 600lbs of coal is used to make a ton of cement. 21,525,000 tons of coal

170,000,000t wind turbine
410,000,000t concrete base
21,525,000t coal per base

The base will use at least, 100 tons of rebar
34,000,000t of rebar
28,900,000t of coal

HVAC, high voltage alternating current cables, 117,500 tons
58,000 tons of coal

The towers 71 tons each, minimum
20,518,000t of coal to make the steel

684,943,000 tons of raw material I have calculated thus far.

Synthetic oil? 7 lbs per gallon, 80 gallons per turbine, changed at least twice in the life of a wind turbine. 285,000 tons

117,500 HVAC cables
58,000 tons of coal to make the cables
285,000 tons of synthetic oil (made from natural gas)
896,000 tons offshore wind turbine substation
1,356,500 tons I need to add

686,299,500 tons of material, at the very least has been used to manufacture the existing wind turbines in the world

I used the materials that weighed the most and used the most coal. These materials do not include the tons of fuel required to make fiberglass and copper. This does not include the raw materials, the chemicals, the energy required. So this is very much a low ball figure.

My figures are based on the amount of wind turbines in 2016! Since then, our wind turbine power has more than doubled. Does that mean more than double the turbines? Most likely not, they have gotten bigger, hence more power per turbine, but bigger also means a larger concrete and rebar base, where the most weight is.

I also low-balled my wind turbine, using a medium-small sized onshore wind turbine. If I took the time to separate out the offshore wind turbines, my numbers increase dramatically. For example, the weight of the base increase from 1500 tons to at least 3600 tons!

If I increase my numbers to reflect 2023 instead of 2016, I hit an easy billion tons of materials. Separate offshore and onshore, an easy billion. Include improved roads, which all wind turbine farms demand, than I am well over a billion tons. Can I include all the first and second generation wind turbines that are no longer functioning? Can I include the future? I did not include mining and transporting any materials to include the turbines themselves.

 

[elektra]

Links, are you going to demand the damn links to try and discredit my hours of hard work, I got them saved, but dont ask, because you will not enjoy seeing all the links.

 

[elektra]

I've reread your linked article in the OP. As others have noted STT is about as reliable as that guy at the corner on the soapbox.

How Much CO2 Gets Emitted to Build a Wind Turbine?

The ONLY justification for wind power – the massive subsidies upon which it entirely depends (see our post here); spiralling power prices (see our post here); and the suffering caused to nei…

stopthesethings.com

In the article, there are two references given, let us look

Metal emission stats from page 25 from the 2006 IPCC Chapter 4 Metal Industry Emissions report.

Crick? Stop These Things, is using the IPCC, as a reference!! Have you ever used the IPCC as reference Crick!!

Hell fucking yes, Crick is now dismissing the IPCC, "about as reliable as that guy at the corner...", unwittingly.

Crick, tell me, who is being honest, me or you. Crick, tell me, who is linking to reputable sources, me or you?
I dont think I need to say much more about Crick's abhorrent behavior.

And the second link, who really cares, the first link can not be discredited by Crick because Crick uses that organization all the time. It is pretty disgusting though, when I use the same sources as Crick, I am called a crack pot by crick.

 

[elektra]

So, to save all the CO2 created during its manufacture, a 3MW wind turbine would have to operate at capacity for a touch less than 5 days. Got that? 5 days. Now take your obsession for a long walk off a short pier.

A 3mw wind turbine in 2016, pretty rare, if any, don't you think crick

I just proved, you don't know you ass from a hole in the ground, many times over, and at that I am not done with your singular post. I got more that makes you look like an ignorant fool, even when the facts are staring you right in the face.

The fact is crick, you have posted way more than I have, the consensus of scientist bullshit, all the stupid colored graphs you think represent the real world, the 100's of times you linked to articles proclaiming them fact, and you dare call me, or anyone obsessed, and to walk off a pier.

And that is right, a fact, billions of tons of natural resources, raw materials to manufacture the solution to global warming. I have barely addressed wind turbines, add solar panels, electric cars, and now the building sized super duper real stupid batteries, and it is very easily, billions of tons.

 

[Crick]

A 3mw wind turbine in 2016, pretty rare, if any, don't you think crick

That does absolutely nothing re my point. The CO2 emitted in the manufacture of a wind turbine is absolutely trivial compared to the amount of fuel it will prevent being burned. Don you think?

I just proved, you don't know you ass from a hole in the ground, many times over

You haven't proven shit! Your idea of valid, supporting sources is an unidentified photograph of a refinery.

and at that I am not done with your singular post.

Which of the several of my posts clearly demonstrating your ridiculous errors is the singular one?

I got more that makes you look like an ignorant fool, even when the facts are staring you right in the face.

Do tell. What facts would those be? The trivial amount of CO2 produced manufacturing wind turbines? The absurdly small amount produced manufacturing their lubricants? Your whole obsession about "heavy industry"? Which?

The fact is crick, you have posted way more than I have, the consensus of scientist bullshit, all the stupid colored graphs you think represent the real world, the 100's of times you linked to articles proclaiming them fact, and you dare call me, or anyone obsessed, and to walk off a pier.

Yes I do.

And that is right, a fact, billions of tons of natural resources, raw materials to manufacture the solution to global warming.

You repeat another error. We are not using billions of tons of natural resources.

I have barely addressed wind turbines, add solar panels, electric cars, and now the building sized super duper real stupid batteries, and it is very easily, billions of tons.

If you like. I will simply continue to repeat the facts that show you to be extraordinarily wrong and a liar.

 

[elektra]

If you like. I will simply continue to repeat the facts that show you to be extraordinarily wrong and a liar.

Yet, when I posted dozens of facts, you ignore the post?

You have never ever posted a fact, you link to websites.

 

[elektra]

That does absolutely nothing re my point. The CO2 emitted in the manufacture of a wind turbine is absolutely trivial compared to the amount of fuel it will prevent being burned. Don you think?

I think you are a coward, I posted facts, in the manufacturing of Wind Turbines, and you are not addressing that post.

 

[elektra]

That does absolutely nothing re my point. The CO2 emitted in the manufacture of a wind turbine is absolutely trivial compared to the amount of fuel it will prevent being burned. Don you think?

The amount of concrete, at the minimum in the 340,000 wind turbines installed across the world

410,000,000t concrete base
21,525,000t coal per base

http://www.ptt-er.com/user_upload/file/HowIsCoalUsed.pdf

Kilns usually burn coal in the form of powder and consume around 450g of coal for about 900g of cement produced. Coal is likely to remain an important input for the global cement industry for many years to come.

Coal - U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA)

www.eia.gov

Complete combustion of 1 short ton (2,000 pounds) of this coal will generate about 5,720 pounds (2.86 short tons) of carbon dioxide.

61,561,500t of CO2 just for the concrete base! is that amount trivial, it stays in the atmosphere.

Either way, if you think that is a little or a lot, Wind Turbines also destroy trees and crops. Further, Wind Turbines are a wasteful use of our natural resources. No different than giving every single person a school bus to drive to work instead of a Prius

Wind Turbine are dependent on increasing the consumption of fossil fuels. At that, they do not replace coal power, because they are too weak and do not work when we want.

 

[Crick]

Yet, when I posted dozens of facts, you ignore the post?

What thread, what post of yours contains "dozens of facts"?

 

[Crick]

I think you are a coward, I posted facts, in the manufacturing of Wind Turbines, and you are not addressing that post.

I think you're a stupid asshole. Would a coward say that?