'Wind farms cure cancer, save kittens, create world peace' says new wind industry report
Wind energy is great says a new report commissioned by the Labour think tank Institute For Public Policy Research.
Among the report's findings are that large scale industrial wind farms can:
• Boost GDP growth by up to 3,000 per cent
• Cure all known forms of cancer
• Rescue drowning kittens from sacks in canals and lead them to secure, happy homes where they are well cared for in handcrafted wicker baskets with lovely, snuggly faux-sheepskin blankets for them to purr on and little saucers of organic Jersey cream designed by Cath Kidston.
• Treble the beauty of the landscape.
• Engender social justice.
• Bring about lasting world peace.
• Mean that if you're an ordinary, struggling working class landowner like Earl Spencer, the Duke of Gloucester, Lord Gisborough, the Earl of Moray or the Duke of Roxburghe – not forgetting our old friend Sir Reginald Sheffield Bt – you won't after all be forced to sell your third-favourite Raphael cartoon in order to make ends meet, you just stick up a ruddy great wind farm instead and Bob's your uncle: problem solved!
But wait. Before we rush to beautify even more of our countryside with these miraculous, bat-chomping eco-crucifixes, perhaps we ought to have a quick glance at the bona fides of the people responsible for this report.
He notes that two out of the report's three authors are senior employees of a wind company called GL Garrad Hassan. (And the third is an environmental activist – or "green tech cheerleader" as he trendsomely bills himself on Twitter).
As Upton Sinclair once said: "It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his job depends on not understanding it."
Add comment
Before posting a comment, please read the Terms of Service (click here). Long links are shortened but still work.
PLEASE report all spam/inappropriate comments using the 'Report to administrator' link. If you find your post gone, it's because you violated the TOS.
Comments
Take Dellingpoe's ahmmm article above. As is my want, i went to the source and discovered there is not one mention in the paper about:
kittens
canals
world peace
GDP or
social justice
What the paper does say is that wind power is a stable and inexpensive form of new technology which has practically zero carbon emissions.
No wonder sCeptics and the fossil fuel industry are upset.
Try this on for size...
blackwinterenergy.blogspot.ca/p/our-perspective-on-alternative-energy.html
Done with off-the-shelf parts, and for a LOT less $$ than those monsters, and requires a LOT less maintenance also.
Wind just happens to be the cheapest form of NEW energy available worldwide and has the added benefits of having very low operating costs and no respiratory pollution. Wind farms are becoming more efficient and are PART OF THE PACKAGE in combination with solar PV, solar thermal, geo-thermal, tidal, etc.
So keep your insults to yourself.
Wind power is not efficient nor in comparison to the same nameplate capacity of a fuel powered rig is it productive. The fuel powered rig PRODUCES the same output 24/7 the wind does not.
Modern solar farms are still set up the same way they were back then, same for those eyesore windmills.
Normally wind and solar are ONLY feasible--to abuse that word--if FIT or Feed-In Tarriffs are brought in, and then you're looking at anywhere from 50 to 80 Cents/Kw.
Versus Coal/Gas at 5 Cents/Kw, Retail.
Husband wanted to close that gap, and he, and a now deceased friend of ours, spent years working this system up.
Name of the game was to get as much energy-harvesting/capture capability into as small a footprint as possible.
I'll be adding to the offsite blog, as trying to see this and write at the same time is tough, there's no contrast, and light grey letters against a white background--well, i might be 28, but my eyesight sucks and always has.
The system you are working on needs to be:
1 - A complete "off the shelf" install.
2 - Complete with warranties and guaranties.
3 - As much as possible "idiot proof."
4 - Maintained and serviced for the owner rather than by the owner.
4 - Readily available on the open market to anyone interested.
Working 50-60 hours a week plus taking classes I don't have the time or the interest in having to screw around with keeping my power functioning. If I can't simply enter a room and flip the switch and know the light will come on then it isn't a solution IMO. Granted 90% of the time, as an off the cuff figure for purposes of discussion, the light will come on but as long as there is some percentage where it may or will not come on then I don't want it.
These things will be true for many people, especially item 4. I don't mind working on things, many do. I don't have time to work on keeping my power system functioning, I spend the bulk of my week testing and fixing power generation equipment for others so they don't have to have those concerns either. When I come home my power better just be there and working.
This is the expectation most if not all will have. At present the "alternative" sources don't meet the criteria.
My reply is lengthy, so I'm posting in on my blog as it won't fit here in one 'go', and I doubt folks here want me posting it broken-up in multiple postings.
So, I'll err (hopefully) on the side of courtesy and post on my blog.
You and Husband think MUCH alike!!
blackwinterenergy.blogspot.ca/2012/09/reply-to-robert.html
Robert, you accusing someone else of being dense is the very definition of ironic.
Thank-You for the defense Drewski.
I commend you on putting together a combination of batteries, wind, and track-able solar with back up motors. (I take it that these motors are powered by the batteries.)
Another interesting development is solar thermal using graphite. Graphite has incredible heat storage capacity. In the next 10 years we will begin to see a mix of these technologies integrated into a smarter grid.
Re: batteries, check out what one of the Coors sons (from the beer empire) is doing.
I know how you must feel. This system was in place a good while before I moved in after we married, and the first time he showed it to me...felt like my head had been turned inside-out because 'it's not possible'.
Then he told me how, and my head hurt and I felt so stupid. :-D
I'm fairly dying to say, but it'd really torque hubby off if I did.
This is part of his way of screening out 'investors' that are nothing more than tire-kickers and con-men. We've dealt with enough of them for our liking.
The motors are indeed driven off the batteries, yes, allowing Constant Baseload capacity rain, sun, night, storm or whatever.
One is charging while one's being used and a 3rd is 'standby' in case of...whatever unexpected things happen.
They get rotated to equalize usage and 'conditioning'.
Husband built it, It's a bit beyond me.
What we;re hot for is the new quantum dot solar cells that convert t 50% and do with IR, Visible and UV.
I know about graphite and carbon--as hubby's Research Assistant I learn a lot of cool things.
Graphite,simple stuff...infinit uses!!
I'll have a look at the Coor's boy...shouldn't be hard to find, if so, I'll come back and ask for directions. :-D
Found it!! Yes that IS a really cool bit!! TY for mentioning it!!
My name is Marlene, it's not that hard to spell. Now, would you care to make a valid POINT, or are you just going to continue to drool hatred for no perceptible reason??
What's my twitter got to do with anything??
Better yet, let me tell you who you are...
You're one of those trolls who loves to cruise around and find targets of opportunity, like a hyena, and you picked up what's-his-face's slam against me, and being a good little trol, you've decided that you're going to jump in.
I'm guessing either you're insulting my intelligence, or you doubt that any proper woman would be away from the stove and *gasp* be on the Internet, let alone write!!
And therefore, my presence on the internet automatically means I CAN'T possibly be a genuine woman!!
OR, you're a hateful and shrewish misogynist, flat-out who feels threatened by me in some way even though I have NEVER done anything to you to deserve being attacked by you.
Explain yourself or be reported--your call.
I DO NOT give 2nd chances.
But it was enjoyable to read, nonetheless.
I'm just sorry it was a misunderstnding, and I hope Anne can see her way clear to accepting my apology.
I get attacked often online for my beliefs, views,opinions and such...I can relate Drewski.
So, I reacted from a learned-response unfortunately.
That we buried a friend within the past week doesn't help much either.
I feel bad about blowing up at her.
The security code thingie is kinda time-sensitive it seems...
If your reasoning wasn't so tragic, it would be funny.
BTW, is anyone else having to put the code in multiple times before you are allowed to post? Maybe its a "conspiracy?"
In other words drewski just verified that his entire line of reasoning is based on "belief" not fact.
Once again he establishes that he cannot grasp the concept that argument by means of authority does not constitute proof.
But it does mean he doesn't have to think about it, he just has to "believe" what he is told.
The team are reluctant to discus archeological evidence found in Greenland. They also exaggerate sea temperature increases by a factor of 6.
They are embarrassed that although CO2 content increases, the temperatures remain static.
This fact alone would alert any true scientist that the CO2/temperature link has been falsified.
Drewski's team needs to return to the drawing board
Meanwhile un-experts parade around telling us about how their grandma's pipes froze last winter in the little town of Nowhere Oklahoma and that proves that global warming is a hoax.
Anyone else have to punch in the 3 separate codes before the post is allowed?
"Climate predictions are consistently wrong, so the hypothesis is wrong and the computer models built on it are wrong and produce meaingless results."
The oceans are not acidic they are alkaline.
The rising temperature of the ocean is man made "Adjustments" to the Data by the Rent Seeking, Serial Data fiddlers. You know the usual suspects.
Your issue with codes is your inability to read and comprehend there Mr. "Always Right".
Corals have been around for more than 500 million years.
During that time sea temperatures were for the large part 15C higher than current temperatures. Also atmospheric CO2 reached as high as 4000+ parts per million for many millions of years.
By what mechanism did the coral survive that is absent today?
Your scaremongering re ocean acidification (and your sea temperature rise exaggeration) is just that, scaremongering.
Apologies in kind, I get attacked quite often, in similar manner to what you said, so it's a conditioned-reflex.
I DO apologize sincerely--I don't wish to make enemies, but it's very difficult at times to tell if someone is joking.
Our view is that ENERGY is required, we can all agree on that.
It's just better, on a strictly efficiency-minded level if it's sustainable and doing involve the one-way direction of burning things.
Global Warming...our take on that is based off Geological core sample data showing clearly that the world undergoes natural warming periods like this one we're seeing now. It's not Man's fault, it's a Normal and natural cycle.
The energy system we use and promote isn't meant as finger-shaking thing at Humanity, but as one that will allow more folks to have more power, with less expense, and as it's extremely scaleable, it fits into portability on varying levels all the way down to Personal very nicely--convenience is the big thing there.
In any case, my apologies again for the misunderstanding.
As for man-made CO2...if we got the world's Politicians to shut-up for a week, things would probably come back to normal. LOL
Drewsi, I've been having trouble with the codes also, as they're so faint they're hard to see, and also seem to be time-sensitive.