Too bad those turbines kill the wind (a finite resource) and cause global warming!
And killing all your birds!
Never realized the environmental issues involved.
After a long legal battle, the residents of a community near me has lost their fight against big business:
GREENWICH —The Ohio Supreme Court has refused to hear the appeal for a group of local landowners opposing a planned wind farm.
The judicial decision was announced Wednesday morning.
The project was stopped nearly two years ago after adjacent property owners were concerned about the amount of noise the turbines would produce.
A little background:
Overview
The Greenwich Windpark is a small wind energy project located 65 miles southwest of Cleveland, Ohio in Huron County. It is owned by Windlab Systems, an Australian owned renewable energy company. It is expected that the Greenwich Windpark will have up to 25 wind turbines converting wind energy into electricity for use by households and industry. The project received the Opinion, Order and Certificate from the Ohio Power Siting Board (OPSB) in August 2014.
The website for the windfarm has given answers to the important questions:
Recent FAQ's
How safe are wind energy turbines?
How does the wind generate electricity?
Does the wind turbine disrupt agriculture?
Are farm livestock affect by wind energy turbines?
What the economic benefits to the community?
Do wind turbines affect individuals who have epileptic seizures?
Do wind turbines affect property values?
What is shadow flicker?
Does low-frequency noise from wind turbines pose any health concerns?
What type of noise is generated by wind energy turbines?
Are wind energy turbines supported by any environmental groups?
Are environmental studies conducted prior to construction beginning?
Do wind turbines kill bats?
Do wind turbines kill birds?
What other environmental effects does wind energy minimize?
How does wind energy affect our water?
How does wind energy affect air pollution?
What are the environmental benefits of wind energy?
Yes, yes, everything is finite. The universe may well frizzle out in heat death as it maximizes it's entropy.
If we take such rigorous definitions from physics and maths then the common term "renewable energy source" is nonsense. Solar, wind, tidal, whatever "renewable" sources are driven by the sun, which will fizzle out itself eventually and is definitely not renewable.
On the other hand the term "renewable" is reasonable in the context of that gallon of oil, etc, that we can burn today and will be gone forever vs that stream of energy coming from the sun everyday.
Here we have someone using laymans usage of the words to argue that oil and gas etc are preferable to renewable energy sources. It's nuts.
My take on it is that oil, gas, etc will run out at some point, we had better learn how to make use of renewable energy in the mean time. Not to mention learning how to live whilst consuming less energy anyway.
There is some merit in the wind being a limited resource as far as I can tell. So the real question becomes, how many wind turbines to effect the wind?
Might a wind farm near where cyclones develop prevent or lower the cyclone intensity.
Same argument can be said for solar panels. The photons gobbled up by the panels must have some effect. But again it's the overall percentage. Then, what do the panels replace? If a house roof, the photons would mostly be reflected into the atmosphere. If grass/collage, then some would be use for photosynthesis. Oops, better stop building houses because the effect the environment.
Everything is relative. It's just a matter of how much.
Everything is relative. It's just a matter of how much.
There is a village about 5 miles south of me, and more times than not it is in the path of thunderstorms. Same way with 20 NW. The storms seem to take a path, following heat islands, which keep them going. If you increase temperature by turning roofs into black solar panels. And on top of that, slow the breeze down that cools a community off, sounds like a viable problem.
Everything is relative. It's just a matter of how much.
There is a village about 5 miles south of me, and more times than not it is in the path of thunderstorms. Same way with 20 NW. The storms seem to take a path, following heat islands, which keep them going. If you increase temperature by turning roofs into black solar panels. And on top of that, slow the breeze down that cools a community off, sounds like a viable problem.
I don't understand how the atmosphere actually works.
To me, having a white roof which reflects heat, means the atmosphere above should be hotter, being heated on the way down, and on the way back, because white reflects heat.
Conversely, a black solar panel, which will be hotter, means the atmosphere has lost heat to the panel.
Same applies to wind farms. Surely, given enough of them in an area, then won't they slow the wind down to some degree? How much, and what effect will this have?
I have a simple solution to global warming...
1. Drop a bomb into an active volcano - the debris will coat the earths atmosphere, resulting in a drop in temperatures.
2. Redirect a close comet/asteroid to hit the earth. Best be careful we don't wipe us all out though!
Isn't it that an offshore windfarm makes a country greater?
I don't know, but this country is already suffering from weather related federal size natural disasters. We don't need to mess things up, more than they already are. Here in OH, USA they said fracking has no negative problems. We seem to have more earthquakes now, epicentered in places never recording such activity before now.
Not to mention the water table:
The Environmental Health Project (EHP) is a nonprofit public health organization that assists and supports residents of Southwestern Pennsylvania and beyond who believe their health has been, or could be, impacted by unconventional oil and gas development (UOGD, commonly known as “fracking”). Our team of medical professionals, community service professionals, and public health scientists is here to help!
MikeDYur
Posts: 2,176
Comments
http://www.snopes.com/politics/soapbox/bartonwind.asp
And killing all your birds!
http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/290093-trump-wind-power-kills-all-your-birds
Never realized the environmental issues involved.
After a long legal battle, the residents of a community near me has lost their fight against big business:
A little background:
The website for the windfarm has given answers to the important questions:
http://www.greenwichwindpark.com/
Still, don't take my word for it. Do you homework.
If we take such rigorous definitions from physics and maths then the common term "renewable energy source" is nonsense. Solar, wind, tidal, whatever "renewable" sources are driven by the sun, which will fizzle out itself eventually and is definitely not renewable.
On the other hand the term "renewable" is reasonable in the context of that gallon of oil, etc, that we can burn today and will be gone forever vs that stream of energy coming from the sun everyday.
Here we have someone using laymans usage of the words to argue that oil and gas etc are preferable to renewable energy sources. It's nuts.
My take on it is that oil, gas, etc will run out at some point, we had better learn how to make use of renewable energy in the mean time. Not to mention learning how to live whilst consuming less energy anyway.
Might a wind farm near where cyclones develop prevent or lower the cyclone intensity.
Same argument can be said for solar panels. The photons gobbled up by the panels must have some effect. But again it's the overall percentage. Then, what do the panels replace? If a house roof, the photons would mostly be reflected into the atmosphere. If grass/collage, then some would be use for photosynthesis. Oops, better stop building houses because the effect the environment.
Everything is relative. It's just a matter of how much.
There is a village about 5 miles south of me, and more times than not it is in the path of thunderstorms. Same way with 20 NW. The storms seem to take a path, following heat islands, which keep them going. If you increase temperature by turning roofs into black solar panels. And on top of that, slow the breeze down that cools a community off, sounds like a viable problem.
To me, having a white roof which reflects heat, means the atmosphere above should be hotter, being heated on the way down, and on the way back, because white reflects heat.
Conversely, a black solar panel, which will be hotter, means the atmosphere has lost heat to the panel.
Same applies to wind farms. Surely, given enough of them in an area, then won't they slow the wind down to some degree? How much, and what effect will this have?
I have a simple solution to global warming...
1. Drop a bomb into an active volcano - the debris will coat the earths atmosphere, resulting in a drop in temperatures.
2. Redirect a close comet/asteroid to hit the earth. Best be careful we don't wipe us all out though!
you got all of this wrong. As a owner of a boat using sails you need to understand that.
Them Wind-farms are supposed to CREATE wind, for people like you, and for tourism.
Not sure about the amount of Energy needed to run them.
Enjoy!
Mike
I don't know, but this country is already suffering from weather related federal size natural disasters. We don't need to mess things up, more than they already are. Here in OH, USA they said fracking has no negative problems. We seem to have more earthquakes now, epicentered in places never recording such activity before now.
Not to mention the water table:
http://environmentalhealthproject.org/?gclid=Cj0KEQjwx6TJBRCWtsiXpI7bhOYBEiQA1en3F9XWaIM7M4w7OR3wRUeCgFw2lRQx0Mmkm9MKVszaNKMaAqUY8P8HAQ