“Rain falls from the sky but I never understood wind”
- Thread starter TRS
- Start date
Its a fact that every wind generator on the planet is energy negative, that is, it takes more energy to produce, operate and dispose of them than they ever generate.
Also, every wind generator requires coal or natural gas backup. When you see a large wind farm there is an equal capacity of coal/gas generation that had to be built to back it up so wind can never be clean or economic.
Solar is not quite as energy negative but is 8 times more toxic than any other means of power generation. Solar is fine for remote or off-grid applications but nothing is as efficient or reliable as conventional power generation/transmission.
Solar in the United States is strictly "grid-tied" meaning that you cannot operate your home from your solar panels during a power outage as many in California discovered during the recent PG&E outages. You will be without power just like your neighbors.
Also, every wind generator requires coal or natural gas backup. When you see a large wind farm there is an equal capacity of coal/gas generation that had to be built to back it up so wind can never be clean or economic.
Solar is not quite as energy negative but is 8 times more toxic than any other means of power generation. Solar is fine for remote or off-grid applications but nothing is as efficient or reliable as conventional power generation/transmission.
Solar in the United States is strictly "grid-tied" meaning that you cannot operate your home from your solar panels during a power outage as many in California discovered during the recent PG&E outages. You will be without power just like your neighbors.
No, you're wrong, and very wrong at that. A theoretical maximum efficiency of 59% is pretty incredible. But that would've required you to take a university physics course to appreciate. Efficiency is the fraction of power output to the power consumed. According to the paper, a more accurate number is 36.2%, rivaling current methods of power generation that are less environmentally friendly.
Also more coal lobby non-sense. Windmills achieve the above efficiency ratings without coal power, and additional power stations are used to handle gaps in wind because it's generally not a constant. These could be replaced with solar or nuclear and be better than our current situation environmentally.
This is due to coal lobby regulation and power monopolies, and not through any fault of the power source. Locally, up until a few years ago you used to be able to sell power back to the power company - but they decided solar rigs for houses were eating too much into their bottom line and spent millions lobbying to force people to pay solar premiums for the privilege of off grid power.
Just about every power engineering major taking 2 years of their undergrad can disprove your nonsense. It took me 10 seconds to find multiple pages of peer reviewed articles refuting everything you said. Trump may benefit from listening to power engineers. The only reason we don't have better, or more efficient (in the case of nuclear) power is strictly due to multi-billion dollar companies lobbying to prevent it. Period. Stop consuming their propaganda.
Last edited:
Every single word I typed in is true. Every single wind generator in existence is energy negative. You mentioned university physics. I suppose my graduate degree in electrophysics qualifies me to converse on the subject. I also designed solar systems for space vehicles that are orbiting over your head, much like this subject.
What is your qualification to discuss renewable energy sir? Nothing? Then why are you spouting nonsense? Fucking propagandist.
The fact I found 10 pages of peer reviewed articles on JSTOR on the efficiency of windmills. Maybe you should use your "graduate" degree to take a trip to your alma matter library and wake up.
If you had a "graduate" degree, you'd recognize the utility of peer reviewed papers written by experts in a field you don't know about - which assuming your degree is even real you know about as much as I do.
It is certainly strange hearing an "electrophysicist" calling someone proposing clean energy a propagandist. But hey, instead of attacking the paper or presenting papers that show the opposite of the paper I linked, you'd prefer to insult me. Real graduate level work there, chief.
I got a really hearty chuckle out of "designing solar systems" though.
Hey, nice job at trying to run defence for the boss. You should apply for a job if you’re not already on the payroll.
You come across as a coherent lucid sort of guy. You know, the exact opposite of Trump.
So what do you think happened with Trump there?
Racked up too thick a line of adderall? Possible manic episode? Early onset dementia? Or was he just exhibiting a total unpreparedness and lack of knowledge of the topic on which he was presenting?
Looking forward to your opinion.
Whatever, definitely one of the great orators in modern history.
Trump is a bottom-line sort of guy. He likely has been briefed on wind and saw that it takes more energy to make the steel tower than the generator produces over its lifetime. Not to mention the environmental catastrophe of disposal and replacement. Wind generators in Spain alone kill approximately 1 million birds per year.
Me, I don't care what folks do. I just move somewhere sensible. Areas that adopted wind generation on a large scale are in deep deep trouble like California and Australia.
Funny how the mentally challenged statements are simply overlooked by Trump...like any debate on wind power will negate the fucktardary that came out of his mouth...
@Snarkhund, yes bird kill is a problem, I agree.
I hope Trump hasn’t been briefed that wind generators do not recoup the energy expenditure required in their manufacture. This is not true. They do. A group called The Secret Society of Anti-AGW-ACC Cultism, an organization that claims climate change is a hoax cherry picked and misrepresented a quotation from Earth Scientist David Hughes in Homer-Dixon’s 2009 bookCarbon Shift: How Peak Oil and the Climate Crisis Will Change Canada (and Our Lives)
Wind power has a place in the mix along with other renewables.
People have to understand that the necessity of this move towards “ green “ energy is so that we can squeeze as many of us on this blue planet and survive for as long as possible. I understand the move can’t happen overnight due to the upheaval it would create economically and socially, but it has to happen. Teaching the mouth breathers to use contraceptives would also be useful. But someone has to drive demand for widgets I guess, and so on it goes.....
I hope Trump hasn’t been briefed that wind generators do not recoup the energy expenditure required in their manufacture. This is not true. They do. A group called The Secret Society of Anti-AGW-ACC Cultism, an organization that claims climate change is a hoax cherry picked and misrepresented a quotation from Earth Scientist David Hughes in Homer-Dixon’s 2009 bookCarbon Shift: How Peak Oil and the Climate Crisis Will Change Canada (and Our Lives)
Wind power has a place in the mix along with other renewables.
People have to understand that the necessity of this move towards “ green “ energy is so that we can squeeze as many of us on this blue planet and survive for as long as possible. I understand the move can’t happen overnight due to the upheaval it would create economically and socially, but it has to happen. Teaching the mouth breathers to use contraceptives would also be useful. But someone has to drive demand for widgets I guess, and so on it goes.....