Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Fox News)   Massive blowhard fears wind farm   (foxnews.com) divider line 108
    More: Ironic  
•       •       •

7316 clicks; posted to Main » on 16 May 2013 at 4:27 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



108 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2013-05-16 04:03:23 PM  
Ted Kennedy? John Kerry? You mean those blowhards?
 
2013-05-16 04:06:31 PM  
Nae wind, nae golf
 
2013-05-16 04:21:50 PM  

WhoopAssWayne: Ted Kennedy? John Kerry? You mean those blowhards?


Yeah, them too. What of it?

I don't understand why people have a problem with having wind turbines in their field of view. As far as I'm concerned, every new turbine is a set of twirling middle fingers aimed at the Saudis, and I would be proud to seeg them every damn day.

The real question is-- few Massachusetts douchebags aside-- why are so many conservatives afraid of alternative energy sources? Why do they hate America's attempts at energy independence?

If we poured some real effort in to this stuff, we could be supplying our country's energy needs (which will include domestic oil) and telling the Middle East to go kill each other without our involvement. That's supporting the troops right there is what that is.

So what's the goddamn problem, boys?
 
2013-05-16 04:29:44 PM  

MaudlinMutantMollusk: Nae wind, nae golf


Nae quin, nae king, nae lard, nae master. We willna' be fooled agin!

/Crivens
 
2013-05-16 04:30:25 PM  

Calmamity: If we poured some real effort in to this stuff, we could be supplying our country's energy needs (which will include domestic oil) and telling the Middle East to go kill each other without our involvement. That's supporting the troops right there is what that is.

So what's the goddamn problem, boys?


Because it's percieved as being something liberals like.

Ergo they must hate it.

They are like Evil Jim in that respect.

sharetv.org
 
2013-05-16 04:30:51 PM  

Calmamity: So what's the goddamn problem, boys?


They don't have a 6% stock position in "Some Hippy Granola Eco Windfarm Bullshiat Corp." like they do in Exxon and BP. Damn hippies probably don't even know what an IPO is.
 
2013-05-16 04:31:05 PM  
They would spoil the view for golfers?

GOOD!
 
2013-05-16 04:32:55 PM  
Is he afraid it will blow off his hairpiece?
 
2013-05-16 04:33:04 PM  
Maybe he's just afraid the windmills will mess up his hair?
 
2013-05-16 04:33:44 PM  

groppet: Is he afraid it will blow off his hairpiece?


That's what I get for hitting Preview like a sucker...
 
2013-05-16 04:34:16 PM  
Tobias?
 
2013-05-16 04:34:29 PM  
It's like the only reason he's doing a project in Scotland is to oppose a wind farm.
 
2013-05-16 04:35:13 PM  

Calmamity: WhoopAssWayne: Ted Kennedy? John Kerry? You mean those blowhards?

Yeah, them too. What of it?

I don't understand why people have a problem with having wind turbines in their field of view. As far as I'm concerned, every new turbine is a set of twirling middle fingers aimed at the Saudis, and I would be proud to seeg them every damn day.

The real question is-- few Massachusetts douchebags aside-- why are so many conservatives afraid of alternative energy sources? Why do they hate America's attempts at energy independence?


Yes, it's just evil conservatives who oppose these things in their neighborhoods.  Sure thing.
 
2013-05-16 04:35:29 PM  

fluffy2097: They would spoil the view for golfers?

GOOD!


Also an excellent point.
 
2013-05-16 04:35:36 PM  

groppet: Is he afraid it will blow off his hairpiece?


A hairpiece would look more natural.  I don't know what the fark that thing on his head is.
 
2013-05-16 04:35:42 PM  
I don't have a problem with them blocking the view. I do have a problem with the amount of wildlife that is killed by those turbines (birds, bats, etc). When they solve that issue, I'll endorse them way more.
 
2013-05-16 04:35:43 PM  

DeadGeek: MaudlinMutantMollusk: Nae wind, nae golf

Nae quin, nae king, nae lard, nae master. We willna' be fooled agin!

/Crivens


Are ye Wee-DeadGeak, or Bigger-than-Wee-DeadGeek-but-not-as-big-as-Big-DeadGeek?
 
2013-05-16 04:36:32 PM  
Hey Donald. The red squirrel called. He wants his pelt back.
 
2013-05-16 04:36:55 PM  
Trump is concerned the turbines will spoil sea views for golfers at his sprawling resort.

Man, fark you. If you're seriously upset with a windmill - providing clean, renewable power - "spoiling" your view, then just stick a 9 iron up your butt and start hopping.
 
2013-05-16 04:37:06 PM  
Oh, so Trump's upset?

i.imgur.com

i.imgur.com
 
2013-05-16 04:37:07 PM  

WhoopAssWayne: Ted Kennedy? John Kerry? You mean those blowhards?


Yeah, fark Teddy Kennedy and his viewshed. I hope they put a bronze plaque with his name on the first turbine that Cape Wind erects.
 
2013-05-16 04:37:08 PM  
Everywhere I play golf usually has a windmill.  Doesn't ruin my view.
 
2013-05-16 04:37:09 PM  
I guess the wind farm would ruin the golfing views of the Short Fingered Vulgarian and Judge Smails.
 
2013-05-16 04:38:21 PM  

DeadGeek: MaudlinMutantMollusk: Nae wind, nae golf

Nae quin, nae king, nae lard, nae master. We willna' be fooled agin!

/Crivens


Waily waily waily!

/My hypothetical future children are SO getting all his books read to them.
//I just have to figure out the voices.
 
2013-05-16 04:38:33 PM  
A Republican lawmaker in Wisconsin is looking to allow people to sue for damages incurred by 500ft wind turbines, but he won't do the same for busy roads with proven negative health impacts and negative impacts to the value of a home.

http://watchdog.org/79996/wi-lawmakers-bill-allows-property-owners-ri g ht-to-sue-wind-turbine-operators/

"
Sen. Frank Lasee, R-De Pere, says his bill would enable anyone who is harmed by 500-foot industrial wind turbines the ability to sue the wind tower owner as well as the owner of the land on which the tower is located. Plaintiffs would be able to seek damages for the loss of property value, cost of moving, medical expenses, pain and suffering, attorney fees, and any other loss as a result of the industrial wind turbine that is "too close to their home or property," the senator noted in a statement.

The legislation would apply whether or not the wind tower was legally sited, Lasee said.
 "
 
2013-05-16 04:39:19 PM  
Ted Kennedy lobbied against a wind farm because it would lower his property values; Kerry did the same, and both are multi--millionaires.

Kerry divorced a woman with $400 mill to marry one with $600 mill.

\\\ That took balls.
 
2013-05-16 04:39:21 PM  

groppet: Is he afraid it will blow off his hairpiece?




24.media.tumblr.com
WINDMILLS DO NOT WORK THAT WAY!



/ God it's satisfying to use that image so, so appropriately.
 
2013-05-16 04:39:45 PM  
Imagine the energy production potential there would be if someone invented a mobile wind farm that could harness the hot air that is constantly coming out of Trump's mouth.
 
2013-05-16 04:39:47 PM  

FrancoFile: DeadGeek: MaudlinMutantMollusk: Nae wind, nae golf

Nae quin, nae king, nae lard, nae master. We willna' be fooled agin!

/Crivens

Are ye Wee-DeadGeak, or Bigger-than-Wee-DeadGeek-but-not-as-big-as-Big-DeadGeek?


I be Bigger-than-wee-Deadgeek-Deadgeek-but-no'-as-big-as-medium-Deakgeek-De adgeek
 
2013-05-16 04:39:47 PM  

Sgt Otter: groppet: Is he afraid it will blow off his hairpiece?

A hairpiece would look more natural.  I don't know what the fark that thing on his head is.


I think it's a reverse mullet.

i.imgur.com
 
2013-05-16 04:39:52 PM  

fluffy2097: They would spoil the view for golfers?

GOOD!


It's not just the view.  Those things are a real obstacle to play:
www.roadsidenut.com
 
2013-05-16 04:40:32 PM  

Calmamity: The real question is-- few Massachusetts douchebags aside-- why are so many conservatives afraid of alternative energy sources? Why do they hate America's attempts at energy independence?


It's really annoying, if you ask me. There's absolutely no reason to ransom our energy independence to foreign nations and yet if you talk about re-engineering our grid and energy mix to fully utilize North American energy sources people start calling you an unAmerican tree-hugging commie bastard or some damn thing. We got new reserves of natural gas, we can generate our own rare earths to crank out windmills by the hundreds, we can tap the Yellowstone Hotspot, and Arizona is just begging to be paved with molten-salt solar installations.
 
2013-05-16 04:41:43 PM  

Felgraf: DeadGeek: MaudlinMutantMollusk: Nae wind, nae golf

Nae quin, nae king, nae lard, nae master. We willna' be fooled agin!

/Crivens

Waily waily waily!

/My hypothetical future children are SO getting all his books read to them.
//I just have to figure out the voices.


I'm Norweigian, so had a bit of difficulty with the accent when reading them to my kids. Trying to read a scottish accent while sounding like the swedish chef is a bizarre experience.

/Finally nailed it though
//took a LOT of scotch
 
2013-05-16 04:42:05 PM  
Why does the GOP hate wind energy?  Because most of their funding comes from fossil fuel barons like the Koch brothers.  That's why oil is subsidized 6x more that alternative energy in the US.
 
2013-05-16 04:43:32 PM  

Sgt Otter: groppet: Is he afraid it will blow off his hairpiece?

A hairpiece would look more natural.  I don't know what the fark that thing on his head is.


It's the fabled triple combover.
 
2013-05-16 04:44:17 PM  
I just went and parked near a windfarm for the view so i'm getting a kick...
 
2013-05-16 04:44:22 PM  

groppet: Is he afraid it will blow off his hairpiece?


I give you my hairpiece.
 
2013-05-16 04:47:17 PM  
Aye, but Scots are well known for neigh bin blinded wit blads of property. They may well scaud him that proved sae unbritherly.
 
2013-05-16 04:47:20 PM  

Calmamity: fluffy2097: They would spoil the view for golfers?

GOOD!

Also an excellent point.


If they are golfers, they will have their heads down, not be staring out to sea.  Duh!
 
2013-05-16 04:47:34 PM  
This is beauty
image.shutterstock.com
This is ugliness
assets.inhabitat.com
Discuss
 
2013-05-16 04:48:29 PM  
Blowhard?


images4.wikia.nocookie.net
 
2013-05-16 04:49:25 PM  

MaudlinMutantMollusk: Nae wind, nae golf


Nae sex, nae drugs, nae wine, nae women
Nae fun, nae sin, nae you, nae wonder it's dark
 
2013-05-16 04:52:53 PM  

rhondajeremy: I don't have a problem with them blocking the view. I do have a problem with the amount of wildlife that is killed by those turbines (birds, bats, etc). When they solve that issue, I'll endorse them way more.


It's good to minimize the impact on the local environment -- wildlife included -- when generating electricity. I am right with you there.

That said, does anybody have any numbers regarding wildlife deaths related to coal-burning power plants? This includes "clean" coal, by the way. The byproducts have to go somewhere, even that somewhere isn't the atmosphere. Include extraction in this, too.

How about wildlife deaths related natural gas? Or even nuclear? They have to extract that fuel somehow, too, even if the emissions aren't as bad...

I am seriously curious about the statistics, if anyone happens to have a link handy...
 
2013-05-16 04:55:39 PM  

drb9: Everywhere I play golf usually has a windmill.  Doesn't ruin my view.


you owe me a new Kobo Arc screen, Dr. Pepper all over it.
 
2013-05-16 04:58:41 PM  
Ok, geo-brainiacs, splain' something to me that I have sometimes wondered about, but have been too lazy to Wiki.

If the Earf is spinning counter-clockwise if viewed from above the north pole, why are the prevailing winds in the northern hemisphere also counter-clockwise as seen from above the north pole?  Doesn't this mean that the general speed of the air above the planet is rotating faster than the rest of the planet?

Now, If we were to build forests of windmils to collect this energy, and it is all in the same direction, would'nt that result in a net positive moment force?  Could this concievably increase the planetary rotational speed over extreme time periods?
 
2013-05-16 04:58:50 PM  

rhondajeremy: I don't have a problem with them blocking the view. I do have a problem with the amount of wildlife that is killed by those turbines (birds, bats, etc). When they solve that issue, I'll endorse them way more.


Now what particular species of bird, or bat is threatened or endangered by these turbines? Assuming that most endangered birds or bats are in areas where there are not vast horizontal plains that wind inhabits more so than any flora or fauna, I think your rationale is a bit hyperbolic and somewhat obtuse. If you want to contribute, then suggest a solution to the avian holocaust, don't just complain that everyone should go without one possible solution to our oil dependency because a random number of living things gets Darwin'ed by turbines. Animals are renewable too, ya know... they also adapt.

I've only had one bird strike on my car - should I just park it until I can invent a bird catcher so it doesn't become one with my grill? ...seriously...
 
2013-05-16 04:59:44 PM  
media.avclub.com

This is ripe for parody. This is ripe!
 
2013-05-16 05:01:44 PM  

jonasborg: A Republican lawmaker in Wisconsin is looking to allow people to sue for damages incurred by 500ft wind turbines, but he won't do the same for busy roads with proven negative health impacts and negative impacts to the value of a home.

http://watchdog.org/79996/wi-lawmakers-bill-allows-property-owners-ri g ht-to-sue-wind-turbine-operators/

"
Sen. Frank Lasee, R-De Pere, says his bill would enable anyone who is harmed by 500-foot industrial wind turbines the ability to sue the wind tower owner as well as the owner of the land on which the tower is located. Plaintiffs would be able to seek damages for the loss of property value, cost of moving, medical expenses, pain and suffering, attorney fees, and any other loss as a result of the industrial wind turbine that is "too close to their home or property," the senator noted in a statement.

The legislation would apply whether or not the wind tower was legally sited, Lasee said.
 "


Yeah, he's a "small government as long as its something I oppose" Rapeublican.
 
2013-05-16 05:02:02 PM  
Aren't the golfers supposed to keep their eyes on the ball?
If so, what's the problem?
 
2013-05-16 05:03:23 PM  

rhondajeremy: I don't have a problem with them blocking the view. I do have a problem with the amount of wildlife that is killed by those turbines (birds, bats, etc). When they solve that issue, I'll endorse them way more.


Don't believe the propaganda. How many birds did you kill on the way to work with your car? Trust me...bats aren't threatened.

I love how every time I attend a development meeting for a wind farm and there is always the obligitory yokel...with the obligitory statement....

"DOZE BIG FANS....DEY KILL ALL DER BIRDS....DOZE BIG FANS GAVE MY COUSIN CROSSED EYES"

People....read up...learn...ask questions...then, and only then can you share your unintelligence.
 
2013-05-16 05:03:59 PM  

rhondajeremy: I don't have a problem with them blocking the view. I do have a problem with the amount of wildlife that is killed by those turbines (birds, bats, etc).


It's estimated over 57 million birds are killed each year by automobiles. If saving the birds is really such a concern why has that been ignored?
 
2013-05-16 05:05:31 PM  

jonasborg: A Republican lawmaker in Wisconsin is looking to allow people to sue for damages incurred by 500ft wind turbines, but he won't do the same for busy roads with proven negative health impacts and negative impacts to the value of a home.

http://watchdog.org/79996/wi-lawmakers-bill-allows-property-owners-ri g ht-to-sue-wind-turbine-operators/

"
Sen. Frank Lasee, R-De Pere, says his bill would enable anyone who is harmed by 500-foot industrial wind turbines the ability to sue the wind tower owner as well as the owner of the land on which the tower is located. Plaintiffs would be able to seek damages for the loss of property value, cost of moving, medical expenses, pain and suffering, attorney fees, and any other loss as a result of the industrial wind turbine that is "too close to their home or property," the senator noted in a statement.

The legislation would apply whether or not the wind tower was legally sited, Lasee said.
 "


Another wingnut flip-flopping on tort reform?  How surprising.
 
2013-05-16 05:07:45 PM  
They've got about 200 of those things 30 miles north of my home, and there are two things I cannot learn:

1. How much does it cost to erect each windmill?

2. How much electricity does each windmill make in a typical year?

Suspicious?
 
2013-05-16 05:08:33 PM  

drb9: Everywhere I play golf usually has a windmill.  Doesn't ruin my view.


That's the difference between a wannabe and the rich.
 
2013-05-16 05:12:49 PM  
The issue a lot of conservatives have with alternative energy has nothing to do with the "green" aspect of it but rather to do with the government subsidies that it receives. I find that it's one of the biggest misunderstandings between average people on the left and and right. When politicians announce more spending on green energy, liberals are happy because they applaud the environmental aspect but conservatives see more government spending at the expense of established industries. Conservatives aren't against alternative energy, they're against more spending even at the expense of the environment. I've never met a Republican who thought windmills were a bad thing, they just didn't want to pay to build them.

And then you have rich assholes who think windmills will spoil their view.
 
2013-05-16 05:13:13 PM  
In Scotland, if you just painted then grey, you'd never see them.
 
2013-05-16 05:14:08 PM  

mbillips: This is beauty
[image.shutterstock.com image 450x358]
This is ugliness
[assets.inhabitat.com image 537x356]
Discuss


I guess it is just preference...but I like both. Whenever I see them across the plains of Kansas I think they look great. I guess it looks smart and futuristic to me.
 
2013-05-16 05:15:37 PM  

To The Escape Zeppelin!: The issue a lot of conservatives have with alternative energy has nothing to do with the "green" aspect of it but rather to do with the government subsidies that it receives. I find that it's one of the biggest misunderstandings between average people on the left and and right. When politicians announce more spending on green energy, liberals are happy because they applaud the environmental aspect but conservatives see more government spending at the expense of established industries. Conservatives aren't against alternative energy, they're against more spending even at the expense of the environment. I've never met a Republican who thought windmills were a bad thing, they just didn't want to pay to build them.

And then you have rich assholes who think windmills will spoil their view.


that theory might work if only big oil didn't still receive subsidies.
from what i gather, Conservatives reject alternative fuel research/implementation due to the simple fact that that their opposition favors it.
 
2013-05-16 05:15:38 PM  

To The Escape Zeppelin!: The issue a lot of conservatives have with alternative energy has nothing to do with the "green" aspect of it but rather to do with the government subsidies that it receives. I find that it's one of the biggest misunderstandings between average people on the left and and right. When politicians announce more spending on green energy, liberals are happy because they applaud the environmental aspect but conservatives see more government spending at the expense of established industries. Conservatives aren't against alternative energy, they're against more spending even at the expense of the environment. I've never met a Republican who thought windmills were a bad thing, they just didn't want to pay to build them.


Why are they fine with literally trillions of dollars in subsidies going to oil companies who are already extremely rich and established, then?
 
2013-05-16 05:17:10 PM  
artandhistory.files.wordpress.com
 
2013-05-16 05:17:32 PM  

Tricky Chicken: Ok, geo-brainiacs, splain' something to me that I have sometimes wondered about, but have been too lazy to Wiki.

If the Earf is spinning counter-clockwise if viewed from above the north pole, why are the prevailing winds in the northern hemisphere also counter-clockwise as seen from above the north pole?  Doesn't this mean that the general speed of the air above the planet is rotating faster than the rest of the planet?

Now, If we were to build forests of windmils to collect this energy, and it is all in the same direction, would'nt that result in a net positive moment force?  Could this concievably increase the planetary rotational speed over extreme time periods?



Did you not see the 50s-era educational films in elementary school that went over this?

There is no such thing as one set of "prevailing winds in the Northern Hemisphere".  Different latitude bands = different prevailing winds.
 
2013-05-16 05:17:46 PM  

olddinosaur: They've got about 200 of those things 30 miles north of my home, and there are two things I cannot learn:

1. How much does it cost to erect each windmill?

2. How much electricity does each windmill make in a typical year?

Suspicious?


Of your claim that your questions cannot be answered?

Darn tootin'.

I got ten bucks that says I can find out before I leave work today.  And I work on the East Coast.

What windfarm, where?
 
2013-05-16 05:19:59 PM  

WhoopAssWayne: Ted Kennedy? John Kerry? You mean those blowhards?


Yeah, this isn't right-vs-left.  This is spoiled billionaires of all stripes, Kennedy, Kerry, Trump, thinking that their pristine playgrounds must remain utterly perfect.  While they put through deals to frack the rest of us and let us drink poisoned water.

I say send in some F16s and lay down a few layers of napalm and Agent Orange on Trump's resort.
 
2013-05-16 05:20:45 PM  
I've been reading about this for a while in the European newspapers. Everybody over there hates him too.
 
2013-05-16 05:24:40 PM  
Article on Energy Return on Investment for Wind Turbines.

http://www.eoearth.org/article/Energy_return_on_investment_(EROI)_fo r_ wind_energy

Seems that wind has the highest return on investment for any electrical generation other than Hydropower.

Still "suspicious"?
 
2013-05-16 05:25:02 PM  

olddinosaur: They've got about 200 of those things 30 miles north of my home, and there are two things I cannot learn:

1. How much does it cost to erect each windmill?

2. How much electricity does each windmill make in a typical year?

Suspicious?


You can find that information if you're willing to search for it.  The closest wind farm to me has a capacity of 200 MW and cost $350 million.

According to the DoE, wind actually has one of the lowest costs for producing power, behind only hyrdro and some forms of natural gas, but ahead of coal, nuclear, and solar.  This is mostly due to the fact that, while turbines have a high capital cost, the marginal cost for energy production is essentially nil, since there is no cost for fuel.
 
2013-05-16 05:28:55 PM  
Of course he does.

i28.photobucket.com
i28.photobucket.com
 
2013-05-16 05:30:33 PM  

mbillips: Discuss


They both look nice.
 
2013-05-16 05:31:08 PM  

olddinosaur: Suspicious?


You sound... concerned.
 
2013-05-16 05:31:26 PM  

busy chillin': mbillips: This is beauty
[image.shutterstock.com image 450x358]
This is ugliness
[assets.inhabitat.com image 537x356]
Discuss

I guess it is just preference...but I like both. Whenever I see them across the plains of Kansas I think they look great. I guess it looks smart and futuristic to me.


I like them too. I don't get the rage.
 
2013-05-16 05:32:40 PM  

To The Escape Zeppelin!: I've never met a Republican who thought windmills

oil subsidies were a bad thing...

Tightened that up a bit.
 
2013-05-16 05:33:10 PM  

mbillips: This is beauty
[image.shutterstock.com image 450x358]
This is ugliness
[assets.inhabitat.com image 537x356]
Discuss


The first image is a photograph of windmills among lush greenery along the banks of a pristine and picturesque river.

The second image is a photograph of windmills on an endless-looking plain of short, green vegetation. In Texas.

Is this really a fair comparison?
 
2013-05-16 05:36:35 PM  

cc_rider: Of course he does.

[i28.photobucket.com image 460x288]
[i28.photobucket.com image 382x508]


2.bp.blogspot.com

It's easy, once you know The Secret!
 
2013-05-16 05:38:32 PM  
He thinks he's Don Quixote.
 
2013-05-16 05:39:24 PM  
Fine cancel the windmills and then send him the property tax bill for all that land and out to the sea/ocean where the wind mills were to be located. He apparently thinks that he owns it so he might was well pay for it. Pretty sure that location was valuable due to its inherent energy production value..  loss of govt revenue etc.
 
2013-05-16 05:39:49 PM  

olddinosaur: They've got about 200 of those things 30 miles north of my home, and there are two things I cannot learn:

1. How much does it cost to erect each windmill?

2. How much electricity does each windmill make in a typical year?

Suspicious?


Here you go.
 
2013-05-16 05:51:19 PM  
rhondajeremy: I don't have a problem with them blocking the view. I do have a problem with the amount of wildlife that is killed by those turbines (birds, bats, etc).

It's estimated over 57 million birds are killed each year by automobiles. If saving the birds is really such a concern why has that been ignored?



Came to say this. Over 1 billion birds are killed each year in the US alone by flying into glass windows. Alternatively, the highest estimates out there for windmill mortality are around 20 thousand. Add in the numbers killed by automobiles and by cats (another 1-3 billion), and the number killed by windmills is a drop in the bucket that has turned into anti-windfarm propaganda. If saving birds is your goal, then stop driving, kill your cats, and start working for a demolition crew.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960148112000857
 
2013-05-16 05:54:31 PM  

FrancoFile: Tricky Chicken: Ok, geo-brainiacs, splain' something to me that I have sometimes wondered about, but have been too lazy to Wiki.

If the Earf is spinning counter-clockwise if viewed from above the north pole, why are the prevailing winds in the northern hemisphere also counter-clockwise as seen from above the north pole?  Doesn't this mean that the general speed of the air above the planet is rotating faster than the rest of the planet?

Now, If we were to build forests of windmils to collect this energy, and it is all in the same direction, would'nt that result in a net positive moment force?  Could this concievably increase the planetary rotational speed over extreme time periods?


Did you not see the 50s-era educational films in elementary school that went over this?

There is no such thing as one set of "prevailing winds in the Northern Hemisphere".  Different latitude bands = different prevailing winds.


I was thinking he'd seen the Popeye cartoon where our hero sits in a sailboat and sails it home using his own lung power.
 
2013-05-16 06:09:12 PM  

rhondajeremy: I don't have a problem with them blocking the view. I do have a problem with the amount of wildlife that is killed by those turbines (birds, bats, etc). When they solve that issue, I'll endorse them way more.


Do you have any study more recent than the Altamont Pass wind farm, where they put the turbines in a major migratory path through the mountains?  Lots has been learned since then.  Poles rather than lattice towers, to eliminate nesting sites on the turbines was big, and not putting them right where an entire continent of birds fly through is also, oddly enough, a big game changer in that regard.

If there's more recent and relevant studies about birdstrike and similar, I'd be interested in a link to it.
 
2013-05-16 06:16:37 PM  

FLMountainMan: Calmamity: WhoopAssWayne: Ted Kennedy? John Kerry? You mean those blowhards?

Yeah, them too. What of it?

I don't understand why people have a problem with having wind turbines in their field of view. As far as I'm concerned, every new turbine is a set of twirling middle fingers aimed at the Saudis, and I would be proud to seeg them every damn day.

The real question is-- few Massachusetts douchebags aside-- why are so many conservatives afraid of alternative energy sources? Why do they hate America's attempts at energy independence?

Yes, it's just evil conservatives who oppose these things in their neighborhoods.  Sure thing.


Way to fail at reading comprehension.
 
2013-05-16 06:16:52 PM  

Uzzah: Calmamity: So what's the goddamn problem, boys?

They don't have a 6% stock position in "Some Hippy Granola Eco Windfarm Bullshiat Corp." like they do in Exxon and BP. Damn hippies probably don't even know what an IPO is.


Interdimensional Patchouli Officer?
 
2013-05-16 06:18:30 PM  

olddinosaur: They've got about 200 of those things 30 miles north of my home, and there are two things I cannot learn:

1. How much does it cost to erect each windmill?

2. How much electricity does each windmill make in a typical year?

Suspicious?


Every month I get a credit on my bill from the region's excess wind power.

Suspicious?
 
2013-05-16 06:22:21 PM  
No, not all conservatives are against wind energy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wind_power_in_Texas

The republican controlled state senate mandated the expansion of wind power in Texas in 1999 and then expanded it again in 2005.  Now Texas produces more wind power than any other state.
 
2013-05-16 06:22:38 PM  

Canton: rhondajeremy: I don't have a problem with them blocking the view. I do have a problem with the amount of wildlife that is killed by those turbines (birds, bats, etc). When they solve that issue, I'll endorse them way more.

It's good to minimize the impact on the local environment -- wildlife included -- when generating electricity. I am right with you there.

That said, does anybody have any numbers regarding wildlife deaths related to coal-burning power plants? This includes "clean" coal, by the way. The byproducts have to go somewhere, even that somewhere isn't the atmosphere. Include extraction in this, too.

How about wildlife deaths related natural gas? Or even nuclear? They have to extract that fuel somehow, too, even if the emissions aren't as bad...

I am seriously curious about the statistics, if anyone happens to have a link handy...


Will this do? Link
 
2013-05-16 06:31:25 PM  
Well, olddinosaur has not commented on any of the links regarding wind power costs, and he's waited me out.

What a surprise.
 
2013-05-16 06:34:23 PM  
Calmamity
The real question is-- few Massachusetts douchebags aside-- why are so many conservatives afraid of alternative energy sources?

Translation: Ignoring when "our guys" do it, how dare those evil "conservatives" do things we're ignoring we do! Harumpfh!


Wow that one pegged the hypocrite meter and I just had it recalibrate to FARK tolerances.
 
2013-05-16 06:39:48 PM  

groppet: Is he afraid it will blow off his hairpiece?


Felgraf: Calmamity: If we poured some real effort in to this stuff, we could be supplying our country's energy needs (which will include domestic oil) and telling the Middle East to go kill each other without our involvement. That's supporting the troops right there is what that is.

So what's the goddamn problem, boys?

Because it's percieved as being something liberals like.

Ergo they must hate it.

They are like Evil Jim in that respect.

[sharetv.org image 350x285]


Honestly thats the only reasonable explanation i can come up with. Ok, not a reasonable explanation, but plausible at least.
 
2013-05-16 06:45:11 PM  

UrukHaiGuyz: Uzzah: Calmamity: So what's the goddamn problem, boys?

They don't have a 6% stock position in "Some Hippy Granola Eco Windfarm Bullshiat Corp." like they do in Exxon and BP. Damn hippies probably don't even know what an IPO is.

Interdimensional Patchouli Officer?

    <-- fantastic band name
 
2013-05-16 06:52:59 PM  

special20: bats


http://www.fort.usgs.gov/BatsWindmills/

Seriously.. It is happening .. and it is a problem. Not a show stopper, but definitely a problem.
 
2013-05-16 06:54:30 PM  

Archstanton: Don't believe the propaganda. How many birds did you kill on the way to work with your car? Trust me...bats aren't threatened.


They dont hit the blades... Its the low pressure just behind the blades

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2008/08/080825-bat-bends.htm l
 
2013-05-16 07:03:35 PM  
I'd much rather look at a field of wind generators than one of solar panels.
 
2013-05-16 07:13:55 PM  

SomeoneDumb: I'd much rather look at a field of wind generators than one of solar panels.


I'd rather maintain an array of solar panels...no moving parts, keep the dust and bird shiat rinsed off and you're good.  Depends on weather - do you get more wind, or more sun?  Do you have a dedicated crew of guys to go around and maintain the moving parts (like a utility company does), or do you want something that you just monitor and react to?
 
2013-05-16 07:16:47 PM  

djh0101010: I'd rather maintain an array of solar panels...no moving parts


Don't most of them (at least the big fields, which is what I'm assuming we're talking about here) track the sun?
 
2013-05-16 07:21:02 PM  

SomeoneDumb: I'd much rather look at a field of wind generators than one of solar panels.


What "fields" of solar panels should look like:
insideclimatenews.org

www.rechargenews.com

api.ning.com

media.treehugger.com
 
2013-05-16 07:26:01 PM  

Felgraf: I just have to figure out the voices.


The audiobook versions are among the best-produced audiobooks I have ever heard.  The guy who does the voices is clearly a talented voice actor AND well-prepared for the task AND a fan.
 
2013-05-16 07:27:47 PM  

Noticeably F.A.T.: djh0101010: I'd rather maintain an array of solar panels...no moving parts

Don't most of them (at least the big fields, which is what I'm assuming we're talking about here) track the sun?


When panels were more expensive, that made sense.  Thing is, a tracker only adds ~28% to the output of the panel's net output (a square wave vs. a sine wave that fits inside it, area under the curve, etc).  When solar panels were $10/watt, then investing in the mechanical system to point it the best direction all the time, made sense.  Now that panels are down around $2.50/watt retail, lower in bulk, you can take the money that would have been spent on the tracking mechanism, add 28% more panels, and come out significantly ahead.  Also, with trackers, you have to leave a LOT more room between them to avoid shadowing from one array to another, so your land costs are higher for a given output.  Plus moving parts need more attention than a solid mount.
 
2013-05-16 07:28:30 PM  

MrSteve007: SomeoneDumb: I'd much rather look at a field of wind generators than one of solar panels.

What "fields" of solar panels should look like:
[insideclimatenews.org image 340x265]

[www.rechargenews.com image 646x350]

[api.ning.com image 830x633]

[media.treehugger.com image 662x488]


Seriously.  Even if we ramp up the pace dramatically, it will be a long, long time before we run out of rooftops and parking lots and have to start putting them in fields.  Of course, some companies put them in fields anyway-- but there's no reason for us to be using new land for solar until we run out of already-developed spaces to hang them on.  We've got decades and decades before that's a concern.
 
2013-05-16 07:34:17 PM  

Shadow Blasko: Archstanton: Don't believe the propaganda. How many birds did you kill on the way to work with your car? Trust me...bats aren't threatened.

They dont hit the blades... Its the low pressure just behind the blades

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2008/08/080825-bat-bends.htm l


I was speaking to what I had heard from locals reporting about wind turbines in their area. I never said I didn't like them. I never said coal was better. I never said birds & bats don't die other ways. But hey, thanks FARKers for putting words in my mouth that I never said, hinted at or implied. Oh wait, this is FARK, that is the norm here. All I was getting at was I don't like it being touted as being this great source of energy with no consequences. It is a great source of energy, but there are consequences. Just like there are consequences to action man takes when it comes to the environment. I am glad there is more science regarding wind turbines and I will be watching them in interest & hope

Good day
 
2013-05-16 07:37:28 PM  

theorellior: Arizona is just begging to be paved with molten-salt solar installations.


Arizona is begging to be paved with solar, but photovoltaics have been cheaper than molten salt systems for a couple of years now.  Planned thermal systems are rapidly being cancelled and replaced with PV.

Lots of folks were looking to thermal as the big solution to the "solar doesn't work at night" problem, but that's not actually that big of a problem for two reasons.  The first is that our average nighttime load is roughly half our daytime load, so until we're making closer to half our power with the sun, storage is totally unneeded.  The second is that pumped-hydro storage works pretty well, assuming you already have a big reservoir and a dam full of generators... and there happen to be some really big examples of exactly that in Arizona already.  If we end up making an excess of daytime solar power someday, we can just pump water back over the dam, and then let it back out to run the turbines at night.
 
2013-05-16 07:41:07 PM  
www.inquisitr.com

Hey, what do I give a sh*t about all this hippie peak oil sh*t?
Everybody at my resort will be able to afford gas when it's 700.00 a gal.

 
2013-05-16 09:06:15 PM  
We all know that windmills have propellers, and propellers move things - if we build too many of them, we might blow the entire planet out of its precise orbit, and we would either freeze or burn up.

True story.
 
2013-05-16 10:14:01 PM  

To The Escape Zeppelin!: The issue a lot of conservatives have with alternative energy has nothing to do with the "green" aspect of it but rather to do with the government subsidies that it receives.


Problem is, it's DAMNED hard to find those 'conservatives' when it comes time defund agriculture subsidies, or oil subsidies, or coal subsidies, etc, etc, etc.

I guess they all hide in the men's room during those votes...
 
2013-05-16 11:10:35 PM  

Shadow Blasko: special20: bats

http://www.fort.usgs.gov/BatsWindmills/

Seriously.. It is happening .. and it is a problem. Not a show stopper, but definitely a problem.


Let's count them!
4.bp.blogspot.com
 
2013-05-16 11:28:19 PM  
 
2013-05-17 12:45:46 AM  

djh0101010: SomeoneDumb: I'd much rather look at a field of wind generators than one of solar panels.

I'd rather maintain an array of solar panels...no moving parts, keep the dust and bird shiat rinsed off and you're good.  Depends on weather - do you get more wind, or more sun?  Do you have a dedicated crew of guys to go around and maintain the moving parts (like a utility company does), or do you want something that you just monitor and react to?


I was just speaking aesthetically, about how they both look.

I live in Calif high desert, near the  San Gorgonio wind farm and there's (always) lots of talk up here about developing or halting the development of more wind and solar. I'm all for solar but mostly if it's placed on roofs. A solar farm of even 100 acres just looks like crap. If it's on top of things, like the pics, I'm fine with solar. I just don't like seeing all the land covered up.
But wind generators don't bother me at all. It's even sorta zenlike watching them turn.
 
2013-05-17 02:26:39 AM  

groppet: Is he afraid it will blow off his hairpiece?


i560.photobucket.com
 
2013-05-17 09:08:39 AM  

groppet: Is he afraid it will blow off his hairpiece?


pastorkius: Maybe he's just afraid the windmills will mess up his hair?


Hahaha....looks like you two got this one covered!  And within a minute of each other.
 
2013-05-17 04:35:34 PM  

ArcadianRefugee: Canton: rhondajeremy: I don't have a problem with them blocking the view. I do have a problem with the amount of wildlife that is killed by those turbines (birds, bats, etc). When they solve that issue, I'll endorse them way more.

It's good to minimize the impact on the local environment -- wildlife included -- when generating electricity. I am right with you there.

That said, does anybody have any numbers regarding wildlife deaths related to coal-burning power plants? This includes "clean" coal, by the way. The byproducts have to go somewhere, even that somewhere isn't the atmosphere. Include extraction in this, too.

How about wildlife deaths related natural gas? Or even nuclear? They have to extract that fuel somehow, too, even if the emissions aren't as bad...

I am seriously curious about the statistics, if anyone happens to have a link handy...

Will this do? Link


Eh, that'll do. I was wondering about the comparative wildlife mortality rates (direct and indirect) by energy source. But that's a great comparative table, too. Thanks!
 
Displayed 108 of 108 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report