"Windfarms are Bollocks !"...........& he should know

[Mega]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...says-Duke.html

Bit of background on "Phil".....He head of the World wildlife fund...Strange for a man who loved killing Tigers & lions etc. "Funny" thing is every time a poor 3rd World nation tried to get money/help with a Hydro-eletric plant......"Phil's crew" would find some long lost animal or plant living near by.....& do EVERYTHING to stop the project.

The WWF is 24/7 on TV here in the UK bitch'in on about some montain lion that lives in the Rainforest in Brazil.......& how "We" must fight to protect it.....

Mike

[Starving Steve]

Re: "Windfarms are Bollocks !"...........& he should know

"Windfarms are useless," says Duke of Edinburgh. Speaking to Esbjorn Wilmar of Infinergy Corporation at a reception in London, the Duke said, "they were absolutely useless, completely reliant on subsidies, and an absolute disgrace." The Duke continued to tell the plain truth to those who were in dreamland: "They would never work because they need back-up capacity such as pump-storage schemes," where water is pumped upward into reservoirs to store potential energy for periods when the wind is calm or not blowing fast enough to meet power demand. Continuing to speak to Mr. Wilmar, a windmill supplier and advocate, "You don't believe in fairy tales do you?"

Go read this for yourselves. It's in The Telegraph, November 19th. Google: Windmills are useless, says Duke.

Starving Steve keeps telling the truth about windmills and solar panels, but no-one believes me. Well, maybe you all might believe the Duke of Edinburgh, and he made these blunt remarks at a reception in London.

(Too bad the Duke isn't working in Washington and telling the EPA and the Energy Department where to stick their green energy.)

[Techdread]

Re: "Windfarms are Bollocks !"...........& he should know

No-one really care's what the Duke of Edinburgh has to say.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...st-gaffes.html

And of course you need backup generator's for when the wind does not blow or the sun does not shine, but not having to fire fossil fuel generators all the time will give the UK more energy security.

[cmalbatros]

Re: "Windfarms are Bollocks !"...........& he should know

"And of course you need backup generator's for when the wind does not blow or the sun does not shine, but not having to fire fossil fuel generators all the time will give the UK more energy security. " at what cost? Thorium is the answer - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8vywZ84mixs

P.S. check out one of the dukes illegitimate children - http://www.guenther.co.uk/

[Techdread]

Re: "Windfarms are Bollocks !"...........& he should know

I'm for multiple solutions to the energy problem and then let the best dominate, but the worst solution is to stand there and do nothing.
The alternatives are expensive but at least they will provide a lot of jobs many of them highly skilled.

[Starving Steve]

Re: "Windfarms are Bollocks !"...........& he should know

Four facts that BBC failed to underscore, and I only watch a few minutes of this documentary:

a,) Fukishima was NOT a nuclear accident. It was the result of a power plant being struck by the largest earthquake ever recorded in modern history, and it was the result of being flooded by the largest tsunami ever observed on this planet in modern history. The fact that nothing much happened at Fukishima after the melt-downs speaks very well for the safety of atomic power plants. No-one died or got sick.

b.) The LONGER the half-life of a radio-nuclide, the LESS radioactive it is. So, very long half-life radio-nuclides can be eaten or injected internally into the human body. Go visit your local hospital to see for yourself.

c.) The pool that the fission occurs inside atomic power plants is safe enough to swim in. They have life-rings hanging on the walls housing these pools should someone fall into them.

d.) The background music played in this documentary needlessly scares the public. It makes atomic energy appear to be un-natural and dangerous, which it most certainly is not.... The documentary fails to tell the public that fission ( and possibly fusion ) is taking place beneath our feet inside the Earth. The documentary fails to tell the public that the heat of the Earth's interior ( geo-thermal heat ) is due mostly to fission and possibly fusion reactions. The documentary also fails to tell the public that elements beyond uranium on the periodic table are NATURAL elements, not synthetic elements, and they are found in trace amounts inside the Earth.

About five minutes of watching this documentary, 2 mins at the beginning and 3 mins at the end, and I became so upset that I just refused to watch anymore of it. I expect much more of a BBC documentary than this.

In five minutes of viewing, about the only fact that the documentary was correct on was that thorium fuel (thorium element 90 on the periodic table ) may well be the future fuel for atomic power plants. There are two advantages of thorium: a.) it is potentially more plentiful and cheaper than uranium fuel; b.) terrorists can not make an atomic bomb ( fission bomb ) with thorium.

Starving Steve

[c1ue]

Re: "Windfarms are Bollocks !"...........& he should know

I'm for multiple solutions to the energy problem and then let the best dominate, but the worst solution is to stand there and do nothing.
The alternatives are expensive but at least they will provide a lot of jobs many of them highly skilled.

Frankly the assertion that expensive alternative energy creates jobs - has been completely crushed by reality.

Reality is that more expensive energy destroys jobs.

And while there can be and is a role for wind energy, this role is nowhere near what role it is being touted for: residential electricity production. To spend billions of dollars/pounds/euros on subsidies for wind electricity installations for general public electricity use is frankly ludicrous.

If, for example, industry subsidies were targeted at specific electricity dependent industry, this makes a lot more sense.

Some examples:

1) Creation of ammonia
Input: air, and electricity
This is a very good industry for wind: if the wind isn't blowing, then the ammonia process doesn't run. It can run day or night. It can be adjusted to handle different levels of electricity. Storage of electricity isn't an issue. etc etc. Ammonia is a key ingredient for all kinds of things including fertilizer.

2) Aluminum smelting
Input: bauxite and electricity
Another example where since the output is aluminum, there are no issues with storage. And while a wind powered aluminum smelting plant isn't the most efficient compared to a cheap coal electricity powered plant, plus is more expensive, well, that's exactly what subsidies are for.

Trying to force wind electricity, or solar PV, or any number of ridonkulous pie-in-the-sky 'carbon free' alternative electricity production methods into the very specific residential electricity generation role would be considered pure insanity were it not for the millions of dollars of lobbying accompanying this - both on the secular humanist/environmental NGO side and on the GE/semiconductor/government subsidy farmer industry side.

[Starving Steve]

Re: "Windfarms are Bollocks !"...........& he should know

The only redeeming thing about wind, solar, and tidal energy is that they can SOMETIMES add to the total electrical energy supply (output), especially when output is needed most, i.e. during peak demand hours. This would save some uranium, coal, natural-gas, water in reservoirs, or fuel-oil, SOMETIMES. The problem with green solutions is that SOMETIMES is not good enough. The wind doesn't always blow. The sun doesn't always shine. The tidal flow in the sea is not always flowing.

As far as job creation is concerned, it is always best to go with ( labour toward ) WINNING solutions, not "maybe" solutions. And winning solutions allow you to duplicate the winning solutions over and over again, thus creating real jobs that count, because the solutions work and add the most value to the economy.

The best use for SOMETIMES solutions (green energy solutions) is as Clue posted above, to use the SOMETIMES energy for uses that need to work SOMETIMES. And as Clue posted, aluminum smelting and ammonia production are energy uses that can just as well occur SOMETIMES, whenever it is convenient.

[Techdread]

Re: "Windfarms are Bollocks !"...........& he should know

Frankly the assertion that expensive alternative energy creates jobs - has been completely crushed by reality.
Reality is that more expensive energy destroys jobs.

More expensive in the short/Medium term, though onshore wind farms are already comparable with their fossil fuel equivalents.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/ene...ectricity.html

And while there can be and is a role for wind energy, this role is nowhere near what role it is being touted for: residential electricity production. To spend billions of dollars/pounds/euros on subsidies for wind electricity installations for general public electricity use is frankly ludicrous.

To spend Trillions on fighting wars to secure our fossil fuels which in the long run are going to be increasingly more expensive to extract is a little more ludicrous.

If, for example, industry subsidies were targeted at specific electricity dependent industry, this makes a lot more sense.

Yeah a windmill in every back garden.

Trying to force wind electricity, or solar PV, or any number of ridiculous pie-in-the-sky 'carbon free' alternative electricity production methods into the very specific residential electricity generation role would be considered pure insanity were it not for the millions of dollars of lobbying accompanying this - both on the secular humanist/environmental NGO side and on the GE/semiconductor/government subsidy farmer industry side.

The fact is we are going to have to invent pie in the sky solutions to solve our energy problems, and it going to take government subsides to do it.

[Starving Steve]

Re: "Windfarms are Bollocks !"...........& he should know

Dear Techdread above:

I don't advocate foreign adventures to secure fossil fuels. We have plenty of fossil fuels in our own backyard in North America.
If the ecology bunch would move out of the way and let us drill, dam, upgrade tar sands, explore, frack shale, use coal, use natural-gas, build pipelines, and use atomic energy, we would be prosperous. We would not be in this mess now. We would not have to import oil from the Middle-East. It is you guys, your eco-bunch and your hungry lawyers, that have destroyed our entire economy and made us into the paupers of the world.

Techno-dread, if you dread technology so much, why don't you get your own windmill and solar panels, go off of the grid, and see how well you can do.

Starving Steve
LEAN FORWARD.

[Techdread]

Re: "Windfarms are Bollocks !"...........& he should know

The only redeeming thing about wind, solar, and tidal energy is that they can SOMETIMES add to the total electrical energy supply (output), especially when output is needed most, i.e. during peak demand hours. This would save some uranium, coal, natural-gas, water in reservoirs, or fuel-oil, SOMETIMES. The problem with green solutions is that SOMETIMES is not good enough. The wind doesn't always blow. The sun doesn't always shine.

That's why you have back up generation and invest in smarter grids.
While the Universities work on better transmission technology so electricity flows to were its needed.

Its the reduction of fossil fuels that are needed over a period of time not the always on generation that we need to think about.
I can envisage a time when Houses/Cars have back up batteries to store excess energy in non peak times & output it at Peak times.

The tidal flow in the sea is not always flowing.

Yeah because the moon does not always go around the Earth.

As far as job creation is concerned, it is always best to go with ( labour toward ) WINNING solutions, not "maybe" solutions. And winning solutions allow you to duplicate the winning solutions over and over again, thus creating real jobs that count, because the solutions work and add the most value to the economy.

The best use for SOMETIMES solutions (green energy solutions) is as Clue posted above, to use the SOMETIMES energy for uses that need to work SOMETIMES. And as Clue posted, aluminum smelting and ammonia production are energy uses that can just as well occur SOMETIMES, whenever it is convenient.

May be so but the winning solution's are not going to happen without seeing what solutions work best, that will take hard data.

[Starving Steve]

Re: "Windfarms are Bollocks !"...........& he should know

Back-up battery systems are very expensive, for what little energy your solar panels and windmills produce. Not only that, battery back-up systems require maintenance.

Your car has just ONE battery, and it is a head-ache to maintain: it needs distilled water; it needs to be charged continually or the battery pre-maturely ages; the terminals of the battery need to be cleaned so not even one tiny bit of corrosion blocks current; the terminal connexions have to be tight at all times; a record of the battery's age has to be kept because batteries die of old age; out-put of the battery has to be monitored; and vapour from the battery is caustic and toxic.......... ONE battery! And you are talking about maintaining a warehouse full of expensive batteries to be your back-up system for your windmills or whatever?

Then there is the issue of converting DC power to AC power at 60 cycles per second so that the power can be used on the grid. That takes an inverter; not cheap and not cheap to check and maintain. You may need to convert AC from your windmills to DC for battery storage, too. All this is a head-ache and not cheap.......... You may need an electrical engineer to wire this battery back-up system and maintain it properly. You will need meters to monitor current flow, just like in a car.

One of the major problems you are going to have with your battery back-up system is a loss of energy due to changing electricity from one form to another, and back again, plus the traveling of current through wires, etc. This loss is going to be in conversion of electricity to heat. Since you don't have very much electricity to waste, losing electricity to heat is going to be an important loss, maybe a fatal loss, for your system.

The Duke of Edinburgh hit the nail on the head at the wind power reception last week in London when he asked the windmill CEO, "Do you still believe in fairy tales?".

I like a man like the Duke of Edinburgh. He is honest and blunt. He doesn't beat-around-the-bush, and he doesn't piss-around with political correctness nor concerns about hurt feelings.

[Techdread]

Re: "Windfarms are Bollocks !"...........& he should know

Dear Techdread above:
I don't advocate foreign adventures to secure fossil fuels. We have plenty of fossil fuels in our own backyard in North America.

Short to medium term maybe long term your again out of luck, even the fossil fuels that you think you have carry risks:-

Shale gas has been shown to cause mini earthquakes & can pollute ground water.
Coal needs investment in carbon sequestration technologies to limit CO2 emissions.
Tar sands are very energy intensive & US would have to import from Canada.
Atomic Energy which I have always been in favour of needs huge upfront capital investments, carries risk with the securing & disposal of radioactive materials (which also push up the true cost).

If the ecology bunch would move out of the way and let us drill, dam, upgrade tar sands, explore, frack shale, use coal, use natural-gas, build pipelines, and use atomic energy, we would be prosperous. We would not be in this mess now. We would not have to import oil from the Middle-East. It is you guys, your eco-bunch and your hungry lawyers, that have destroyed our entire economy and made us into the paupers of the world.

I'm no Eco nut & i'm British not North American we have enough Wind around our island to power the electric grid 3 times, we just got to learn how to harness it efficiently.

Techno-dread, if you dread technology so much, why don't you get your own windmill and solar panels, go off of the grid, and see how well you can do.

Yeah I earn my crust in the technology industry so why would I be afraid of it.

Your not being ambitious enough we need to invest in better Tech than fossil fuels which no matter how you slice & dice it will become prohibitively expensive ....

That drill baby mantra you expouse is foolish in the extreme.

[c1ue]

Re: "Windfarms are Bollocks !"...........& he should know

More expensive in the short/Medium term, though onshore wind farms are already comparable with their fossil fuel equivalents.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/ene...ectricity.html

This linked report references another report for its on-shore wind numbers.

Unfortunately this other report is based on other reports, and none of the other reports actually use the unsubsidized capital nor unsubsidized output payments (i.e. remove feed in tariffs), nor do these other reports take into account the 100% backup capacity needed.

The reality, once you add in the 50% or more subsidies for construction plus 25% to 50% feed in tariff payments, is that wind energy is damned expensive and will always remain so.

Note also that while some progress will be made regarding wind turbine efficiency, it is extremely unlikely to increase significantly. Wind turbines at the end of the day are just generators, and generators are very well understood.

To spend Trillions on fighting wars to secure our fossil fuels which in the long run are going to be increasingly more expensive to extract is a little more ludicrous.

I'm am unclear on what foreign adventures have to do with fossil fuels. China doesn't fight wars in the Middle East, yet they consume all sorts of fossil fuels.

You're confusing an American geopolitical and economic choice with a technological and economic question.

Yeah a windmill in every back garden.

This is just as idiotic as solar PV on every roof. The technology doesn't make any sort of cost or other sense, and overall the vast majority of fossil fuel use isn't in the back yard, or the kitchen, or the living room TV and lights.

It is in the factories, the trucks driving goods to market, the farms, and so forth.

Of course if you're willing instead to just have electricity when the wind blows and/or the sun shines, that also is fine.

It is merely one step above what not having electricity is like - and is a huge step backwards in development. But if going backwards in development is fine, then we should just skip the massive cost and institute rationing instead.

The fact is we are going to have to invent pie in the sky solutions to solve our energy problems, and it going to take government subsides to do it.

I've no problem with invention; what I keep pointing out is that wind energy and solar PV simply don't make any type of economic or technological sense.

What exactly is the point of pouring hundreds of billions of dollars on crappy technology that doesn't even fix the problem?

[Starving Steve]

Re: "Windfarms are Bollocks !"...........& he should know

When I mentioned that tidal flow does not always flow and that tidal power is a SOMETIMES source of energy, you replied sarcastically that the Moon doesn't always orbit the Earth. But the fact is that everywhere on Earth there are two slack periods for tidal flow each day, i.e. when the tidal flow changes from in-bound to out-bound and when the tidal flow changes from out-bound back to in-bound. These slack periods (called "slack tides") are 12 hours apart.

Also, there are odd days at any coastal location on Earth when tidal flow is low, both in-bound and out-bound during the day. I don't know exactly why that is, but being an observer of the sea, I noticed days like this. There are also days when tidal flow is above normal.... But the fact is that tidal flow is a SOMETIMES power source; sometimes far better ( energy richer ) than wind or solar, and sometimes just as bad ( energy deficient ) as wind or solar.