Less Than a Day to show Hansen is an idiot

 

1. I just drove into Dallas from New Mexico today. There are hundreds, if not thousands of wind turbines along I-20 for about 70 miles around Sweetwater, Texas. They are putting them up as fast as they can. Sweetwater is also in the middle of the oil patch and they are drilling or opening up capped wells as fast as possible. T Boone Pickens has recently bought 2 billion dollars worth of wind turbines from GE. He is going to build his own transmission line from the Panhandle of Texas to DFW to transport the electricity.

   There are ways to fix this energy crisis, and we are doing it in Texas.

   There is no landscape which dosen’t look a little better with a wellhead or wind turbine on it.

   Posted by Yellow Dog       06/24/2008  at  10:14 PM  



2. A better link.

   Posted by Yellow Dog       06/24/2008  at  10:27 PM  



3. I am still dubious about the cost benefit of wind turbines. Their output is comparatively puny and they only work when it’s windy. The Danish have invested heavily on wind turbines. The problem is when it’s too windy they have to export the extra juice, and when the wind doesn’t blow they have to import it. Building nuclear power stations is the answer but the envirowackos keep blocking this. Here in the UK the government is facing a crisis and typically has it’s head up it’s own arse. They have placed wind farms all around the coast but they will never produce the amounts of power needed. The nuke stations which were built in the 60’s are on their last legs and should be decommissioned. It takes ten years to build new ones, but no one will make the commitment. The EU thanks to Kyoto won’t allow us to build coal fired plants and the gas we used to have in the North Sea has all been pissed away by that scumbag Blair in the “dash for gas.” Another con trick designed to meet Kyoto. They built lots of power stations using natural gas because the emissions are lower, now all the gas has been used up and we have to import it from piss pot countries like Russia and Algeria. Mark my words in a few years time there will be power cuts in Britain when the grid can’t supply enough juice. It has happened already and the situation will only get worse.

   Posted by LyndonB       06/25/2008  at  02:49 AM  



4. From the UK Daily Mail

   An alternative take on wind farms

   Posted by LyndonB       06/25/2008  at  02:54 AM  



5. Yeah, the wind farm between Midland and Abilene, TX is huge. I’ve seen it from the air. And to be honest, I have no foggiest clue whether it’s economically practical. However, if it is, it’s solely due to 2 factors: 1)It’s out in the middle of freakin NOWHERE. With the exception of Midland/Odessa area itself, there’s hundreds of miles of *very* low population density. Virtually useless land that few live on, few even drive through. Therefore you can have something that uses that large a footprint without having anyone bitch you out over it. 2) I’m under the impression (from an ex-girlfriend who lives in Midland) that the wind in the Permian Basin blows pretty much ALL THE TIME.
   Really though, I can’t help feeling that John McCain is dead right on this one. We have many and various energy *sources*, of varying degrees of efficiency, creating various waste issues. The biggest problem is that we have no efficient means of storing energy once it has been produced. As pointed out in the example of the Danes, overage gets exported instead of stored, so they have to import when there is a shortfall instead of using their reserve.

   In terms of energy, the thing I’ve wondered about for decades is “flare towers” in petrochemical plants. You know, those tall towers with the huge flame on the end, flaring off “waste gases”? I have no idea what those waste gases are, nor why they feel like they MUST be burned. I’m not a petroleum engineer by any stretch, so I’ll accept the engineers’ word that it is necessary. But it occurs to me that if it burns, which it obviously does, why isn’t it being used as a fuel for anything? If all else fails, you should be at least able to heat water to steam and spin a turbine with it. Enough gas to feed a flare 20 or more feet tall, burning 24/7 for years at a stretch and visible for many miles, seems like a waste to me. No matter how poor the efficiency is, I have trouble imagining it as LESS efficient than simply flaring it off and accomplishing *nothing* with that flame. You should be able to at least generate enough electricity to cut down the power needs of the plant itself.

   Posted by GrumpyOldFart       06/25/2008  at  10:22 AM  



6. T. Boone Pickens isn’t spending 2 Billion because he is a tree hugger. He intends to make a profit. The economics didn’t work out when oil was $50 per barrel, but now…

   Posted by Yellow Dog       06/25/2008  at  11:50 AM  



7. yellow Dog you may well be right that the companies don’t do it for nothing. If they did they wouldn’t be in business for long. However in the UK the companies are doing it because the government is subsidising it. They (or rather we) are taking the risk out of the equation. I can see the sense in having wind farms but I see more sense in building nuclear power stations. I would be happier subsidising this than wind turbines which I feel in the long term will be shown to be butthole technology and our ancestors will laugh at what chumps we are.

   Posted by LyndonB       06/26/2008  at  10:26 AM  



8. The only worry I have with offshore wind turbines is the possibility of tsunami damage.

   Does anyone know if the engineering has allowed for the effects of a tsunami?

   Other than that I think they look like $$$$, $imilar to oil derrick$ in action, pumping black gold from the earth.

   Posted by Randy in Arizona       06/27/2008  at  10:23 AM  

Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.