M
mapleoak
Guest
Wait! You didn’t mention anything about the poor seagulls, condors, pelicans, and buzzards that would get pulverized in the vanes of the windmills!
- Status
A
a_burger
Guest
One thing I do fear is the brain dead minimizing the wrath in the end days. Jesus promised us weather like no man has ever seen. It is in the book of Matthew. No person who calls themselves a Christian should be involved in this scam. We are ambassadors of Jesus Christ. What’s happens when this scam is totally exposed. Even the president of the EU was in NY City addressing the hoax. Are they going to believe you about Jesus or are they going to say those Catholics were involved in the global warming scam?
What to do? Martin Luther died saying the rosary. We need every one who calls themselves an apostolic Christian to pray the rosary. Remember the Jesuit priests who were eight blocks away from ground zero in Hiroshima. Not one of them were injured. Get your mind out of the Al Gore gutter and raise your mind to Christ.
For those of you who care Newt Gingrich has converted to Catholicism. If you’re NOT get HOT for Jesus. Don’t get spit out of his moth.
What to do? Martin Luther died saying the rosary. We need every one who calls themselves an apostolic Christian to pray the rosary. Remember the Jesuit priests who were eight blocks away from ground zero in Hiroshima. Not one of them were injured. Get your mind out of the Al Gore gutter and raise your mind to Christ.
For those of you who care Newt Gingrich has converted to Catholicism. If you’re NOT get HOT for Jesus. Don’t get spit out of his moth.
H
Highwayhound
Guest
What melted the ice after the last ice age?
V
Valke2
Guest
First, I did not mean to indicated that we would ever rely soley on wind and solar power, as that is not what is needed to be independent from foriegn oil.
Yes, windmills generate less power than nuclear plants. They also generate less theremal discharge. In fact, they don’t generate any.
We also have the ability – right now-- to mass produce wind turbines. How long does it take to build a nuclear reactor? I believe at least 20 years in the US.
In relation to the amount of energy wind turbines generate, the material and energy requirements for their manufacture are very low. A well-designed wind machines are placed at good wind sites, electricity can be generated for as little as 10 cents per kilowatt hour.
And these facts were true in 1985. Even more so today.
Yes, windmills generate less power than nuclear plants. They also generate less theremal discharge. In fact, they don’t generate any.
We also have the ability – right now-- to mass produce wind turbines. How long does it take to build a nuclear reactor? I believe at least 20 years in the US.
In relation to the amount of energy wind turbines generate, the material and energy requirements for their manufacture are very low. A well-designed wind machines are placed at good wind sites, electricity can be generated for as little as 10 cents per kilowatt hour.
And these facts were true in 1985. Even more so today.
V
Valke2
Guest
Nuclear power has also received billions in subsidies from the gov’t. And there’s still no good answer to storing and disposing of the nuclear waste. Add to that the fact that a nuclear reactor requires massive amounts of water each day to operate.
Increasing reactors at a time when water demand is becoming a greater concern doesn’t seem smart.
While wind power doesn’t produce as much electricty, it is far easier to build wind machiens than nuclear reactors and easier to produce the same amount of electricty. And cheaper.
Increasing reactors at a time when water demand is becoming a greater concern doesn’t seem smart.
While wind power doesn’t produce as much electricty, it is far easier to build wind machiens than nuclear reactors and easier to produce the same amount of electricty. And cheaper.
S
Squishy
Guest
The wind turbines near to where i live have to be turned off quite frequently. The reason for this. ‘The wind is too strong’
However despite them being hidiously innefficiant, they do pay for themselves eventually. At which point the energy is free. If acarage is not an issue they are definatly worth looking into.
O
Oscarthecat
Guest
Domestic oil is all that is necessary to become independent from foreign oil.
That’s right, because they’re generate power differently. Not sure of your point here.
It takes 20 years because of all the red tape.
The actual construction of a nuclear plant doesn’t take that much time at all.
“very low” material and energy requirements per windmill, yes- but you’re talking about 146,696 windmills…
For crying out loud- just consider the number of trucks necessary to haul all those windmill parts.
Right, if you take into account the government subsidies…but that’s not real money, that’s legislated money.
The real cost is much higher, as was already demonstrated in that article I posted.
So true…
V
Valke2
Guest
California farmers lost more than $300 million in 2008 and economic losses may accelerate to 10 times that this year as 95,000 people lose their jobs. Farmers will get zero water from the main federal supplier.Are you saying Australia had a drought equal to or worse than this 100 years ago?
V
Valke2
Guest
Addressing the previous post, when it comes to nuclear power plants, I don’t think I want to see the “red tape” reduced in order to speed construction.
Regarding my point on thermal heat, is that nuclear power plants heat up the local water supply, use a huge amount of water to operate. Contributing to warmer waters and warmer atmosphere may not effect the issue of energy independence, but it is still something many would like to see avoided.
Regarding my point on thermal heat, is that nuclear power plants heat up the local water supply, use a huge amount of water to operate. Contributing to warmer waters and warmer atmosphere may not effect the issue of energy independence, but it is still something many would like to see avoided.
In locations where there is a constant supply of wind, this makes for part of a solution.
But bear in mind the size of the wind farm necessary to produce the same power as a nuclear power plant is enormous.
And many areas in the US could not be served by these as the wind is to inconsistant.
V
Valke2
Guest
“For the last few years, the driest states, Arizona, Utah, and Nevada, have been the fastest growing. And you know that can’t be sustained,” he said.
California, the world’s eighth-largest economy, already uses a staggering amount of water – roughly enough to cover the nearby state of Washington with a foot (30 cms) of it.
(same article).
Regarding vz1, I agree that wind power is only part of the solution and that it requries more real estate than nuclear power plants. Nuclear power plants also come with their own location issues, both political and geographical. I have been a cautious supporter of increased nuclear power until recently. Now I just don’t believe we are capable of ensuring their security against a variety of threats, including terrorists.
California, the world’s eighth-largest economy, already uses a staggering amount of water – roughly enough to cover the nearby state of Washington with a foot (30 cms) of it.
(same article).
Regarding vz1, I agree that wind power is only part of the solution and that it requries more real estate than nuclear power plants. Nuclear power plants also come with their own location issues, both political and geographical. I have been a cautious supporter of increased nuclear power until recently. Now I just don’t believe we are capable of ensuring their security against a variety of threats, including terrorists.
T
trinitybeliever
Guest
Once again you failed to answer my direct question.
I will however attempt to engage you on your statement.
The system of dams and California Aqueduct and canal system was developed originally to route water for irrigation to agriculture. Now that the major metro areas have grown the water has been usurped away from the central valley farmers to the large and ever larger metro areas primarily LA and the bay area. Many people do not understand that California is for the most part an ultra arid region. The only way agriculture has been able to grow and thrive is form a well developed system of canals and wells for irrigation. The majority of water comes in the form precipitation as snow in the Sierras. Since the more populated metro areas have the votes, they have successfully, through public policy, taken the water away form the northern areas and central valley. This has been a hard fought political battle in the state for nearly three decades. Unfortunately, the farmers are losing. The politicians in Ca do not have the spine to stand up for what is right.(big surprise!) Instead, they continue to work on behalf of the masses, all the while undermining their economy. I don’t suppose the Global warming or climate change nuts will bother to explain this to you. Time to learn history.
Do actually believe that the federal government “supplies” water?
Following that logic I guess they supply air and sunlight as well.
God Bless
M
mapleoak
Guest
nationalwind.org/publications/wildlife/wildlife_factsheet.pdf
Just imagine what kind of impact 150,000+ windmills would have!
Just imagine what kind of impact 150,000+ windmills would have!
V
Valke2
Guest
I look forward to the day when I don’t have to imagine it.
I wonder if the insect populations would be brought down as well.
M
mapleoak
Guest
I’ll be happy if it cuts down on the flies and mosquitoes.
O
Oscarthecat
Guest
Didn’t someone post an article not too long ago detailing the damage global warming is causing to a variety of bird species?
Sounds a bit hypocritical that you’re so concerned about avian tragedies when it suits your purposes…
…but you don’t seem to care much about them at all when they are being hurt by something you support.
Typical green politics…tragedy caused by “global warming” is unacceptable, but tragedy caused by your “handling” of global warming is perfectly fine.
V
Valke2
Guest
I must have missed something. Are you saying that wind engines will destroy bird populations?
M
mapleoak
Guest
See link in my post above.
What kind of destruction to the Earth’s natural animal balance and eco-system are we willing to put up with in the name of jumping on the bandwagon of impulse to curb an imagined global warming effect.
O
Oscarthecat
Guest
You’re absolutely right- if only these climate change fanatics just cared about the earth and the environment, even a little bit, then I wouldn’t live in fear of the potential damage they’re going to do with all those bird killing machines they call “windmills.” As it is, I’m constantly ducking my head for fear that a rogue windmill blade might fly off of my neighbor’s decorative windmill fountain- what am I going to do when there is a 500 foot tall windmill in my backyard because some bureaucrat decided to put it there?
Speaking of the massive damage “green” progressivism is unleashing on the environment, I think I should point out that hybrid cars stand to be the next big environmental catastrophe. Here’s an excerpt from a “green” website about how bad these things are…
“The battery pollution is substantial because the creation of the batteries requires destructive mining to produce the batteries and the caustic substances that power the batteries must later be disposed of. The caustic substances that power the batteries are very poisonous and when released into the environment leech into the waterways and poison groundwater.”
source: ocf.berkeley.edu/~coreyp/hybridenvimp.html
But you don’t hear about that from the greenies in their mainstream talking points- you only hear how evil the rest of us are for driving regular cars.
While I’m at it, I’d like to add a few more things to the list of environmental damage caused by environmentalism…
The fires in California, which have been widely reported to be the indirect result of “green” policies that restricted land owners from much needed seasonal land clearing, which led to a massive buildup in what essentially amounts to kindling wood all throughout the califonian forests. Incidentally, the same is being said of the Australian fires.
sources:
news.ninemsn.com.au/national/752563/green-policies-to-blame-for-vic-fires/?rss=yes
smh.com.au/environment/green-ideas-must-take-blame-for-deaths-20090211-84mk.html
- Status