JoNova

A science presenter, writer, speaker & former TV host; author of The Skeptic's Handbook (over 200,000 copies distributed & available in 15 languages).


Handbooks

The Skeptics Handbook

Think it has been debunked? See here.

The Skeptics Handbook II

Climate Money Paper


Advertising

micropace


GoldNerds

The nerds have the numbers on precious metals investments on the ASX



Archives

Smile, there is one less wind farm in the world

A small win for determined citizens?

Dailymail.co.uk: “After blighting the Yorkshire Dales for more than two decades, four giant turbines have been removed from the stunning landscape – the first ever windfarm in Britain to be scrapped.

To the delight of residents and walkers there are once again unspoilt views across the rolling hills and deep blue waters of Chelker Reservoir, near Ilkley.

The eyesores were put up in 1992 by Yorkshire Water to power the reservoir’s pumping stations in the face of fierce local opposition.

He added: ‘It’s been a hell of a fight but we have proved it is possible to stop wind farms.

‘In recent years the turbines have hardly ever worked – they have turned the area into an industrial graveyard…”

Another campaigner, Catherine Leigh said: ‘It is fantastic news – we all know that for three quarters of the time they have been here the turbines have not been working.’ Craven District Council, the local planning authority, turned down a scheme for two bigger turbines to replace the demolished wind farm, after hearing listed buildings would be adversely affected by the ‘intrusive’ machines.

Read more: dailymail.co.uk/

So plans for newer bigger towers were scuttled apparently, by the threat of “Heritage” listing — or rather by the thought of all that red-tape.

In the end, if you are an old building in Craven District the Council will look out for you. If you are a human, not so much.

This says all you need to know about Big-Government Intelligence.

h/t Waxing Gibberish.

Photo: Lynne Kirton Wikimedia.

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 9.5/10 (86 votes cast)
Smile, there is one less wind farm in the world, 9.5 out of 10 based on 86 ratings

Tiny Url for this post: http://tinyurl.com/n2bsnuf

150 comments to Smile, there is one less wind farm in the world

  • #

    Congrats to the people of the Yorkshire Dales and to all those who visit there.

    341

    • #
      Albert

      A new safe bird passage

      60

    • #
      Annie

      I live in the north of North Yorkshire and around here, in the Northern Yorkshire Dales, we can see a horrible rash of the blighted bird munchers over towards Middlesborough. I’m glad for the people at Chelker but there is a long way to go.

      30

  • #
    Andrew McRae

     
     ╭─╳ :(
    ~~~~~~
    Don’t worry, Miss Milne, it’s all very Green, the turbine parts will be recycled.   :)

    190

    • #
      Owen Morgan

      Presumably, all of these turbines are set in copious amounts of concrete, which will not be removed.

      170

      • #
        scaper...

        Owen, the preferred method that Scaper’s Wind Turbine Removal Service is to treat the footing in the same way as when filling in concrete swimming pools.

        Just a matter of scabbling the concrete and cutting off the reinforcement, anchor system to 600mm below ground level and backfilling with soil.

        Could plant a tree on top and it would have no problem reaching maturity as most root systems grow to a depth of 400mm.

        70

    • #
      Winston

      I think that these turbines should remain as a permanent monument to the stupidity and hubris of warmists. Each turbine should be fitted with a large plaque to permanently enshrine the main protagonists in this enormous folly.

      So we can have the memorial turbines for Gore, Hansen, Mann, Schmidt, Foster, Trenberth, Jones, Briffa, Alley, Nuccitelli, Cook, Lewandowsky, Monbiot, Davey, Karoly, Flannery, Lovelock, Garnaut, Steffen, Schneider, Sligo, McKibben, Williams, Attenborough, Kruszelnicki, Holdren, Ehrlich, Pachauri, Nurse, Houghton, Oreskes, Connolley, etc, etc.

      A “Hall of Shame” of monumental proportions for those most deserving of acrimony and public humiliation.

      321

      • #
        handjive

        And here is the OFFICIAL list of all the “scientific consensus” societies, academies, US government agencies and inter-governmental bodies who should also be enshrined in these monuments to stupidity.

        120

        • #
          Winston

          The plaques should read:

          “This rusting monstrosity was brought to you by the arrogance and stupidity of Tim Flannery”

          or “This blot on a pristine landscape was brought to you by the Malthusian fantasies of Paul Ehrlich”

          or “This erectile dysfunction was brought to you by the malfeasance of Michael Mann” or similar.

          Then under each plaque should be a list of all those people (gilt edged of course) who profited by the installation and operation of said wind turbine, with precise monetary amounts that were given as financial inducements or subsidies to various landholders, manufacturers, multinational corporations and other interested parties.

          God forgives, I don’t.

          190

        • #
          Geoff Sherrington

          handjive,
          In that vein, here is a list of 600+ things said to be caused by global warming, all hyperlinked to the source.
          http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/globalwarming2.html

          10

      • #
        Reinder van Til

        You forgot Jacques Cousteau, he who would have loved to see the population of the Earth go down to a billion.

        50

      • #
        Owen Morgan

        A few years ago, I drove past Tantallon Castle in Scotland, towards the south. That road faces a range of hills, possibly the Lammermuir Hills (“Lammermoor”, for Donizetti fans). I counted at least fifty wind turbines; since some were evidently on the south side of the hills, it’s possible that there were quite a few more that weren’t visible from the north.

        An awful lot of landscape-altering concrete went into planting those turbines. The visible turbine destroys the view, along with all the pylons, of course, but it’s the foundations that wreck the landscape in the long term.

        40

      • #
        Gbees

        I prefer strapping Mann et al to the turbine blades. Kind of like a crucifixion. “Gaia forgive them for they know not what they do”. Oh yes we do Mann et al!

        40

      • #
        Belfast

        Winston, your idea is not half bad. A memorial is needed to remember those who blighted discourse for two decades, prostituted science to an extent never dreamed of, ruined or impeded business, increased acrimony…
        It is altogether fitting.
        Just one thing.
        I can provide politicians names myself but can you throw in some more, eg the idiots who gave the Nobel Peace Prize?

        40

        • #
          MemoryVault

          Sorry not good enough.

          These bastards have already been responsible for untold suffering and death, and the REAL damage is yet to start.
          If there’s going to be large metal plaques involved, I want them firmly bolted directly to these murderers’ chests.

          .
          No anesthetic involved in the procedure.

          40

      • #

        I disagree. We should conserve some parts of our heritage, because it is of value to us and future generations. This will only become of value when there are nearly none left, like nineteenth century slum tenements.
        What is more, if it is a reminder of error and folly, then redundant turbines should be erected on every university campus and outside the British and Australian Parliaments.

        40

  • #
    Fox from Melbourne

    “In the end, if you are an old building in Craven District the Council will look out for you. If you are a human, not so much.

    This says all you need to know about Big-Government Intelligence.”

    That’s Government Intelligence for you. Appointed by the people to not give a dam about what the people actually want them to do for them. And to do the absolute opposite of what they want and to waste as much of the public’s money doing so. What a wonderful day it will be when they come up with a curer for Politics and cure us of the plague of governments inflected with this type of of Intelligence. We live in hope. I hope you do to my friends.

    90

  • #
    Roy Hogue

    1 down and far too many to go. :-(

    Here in California some of the early wind farms are rotting away (visibly), sitting there not running. Yet plans are being made to add more of these blights across the landscape.

    Better to build a few new steam turbines that can get the job done without the noise, the visual blight and the zero output when the wind isn’t strong enough. We have the natural gas to do it. But alas, it’s not in the cards in California. The Golden State is no longer so golden. And our own legislature has done this to us. Grrrr… :evil:

    270

    • #
      King Geo

      I believe California’s debt is ~ double that of Australia – I have heard the figure is about US$450 billion. And we know that the overall USA debt is US$17 trillion and rising. If I was Obama I would be encouraging sunny California to use a cheaper form of energy than it’s obsession with Renewables – there is a large “shale gas resource” ready to be exploited and save the day. This obsession with Renewables was in full swing during Arnie’s tenure as Governor – he really was the “Terminator”, that is of the Californian Economy. “Terminator Model RE” has really made an impact.

      110

      • #
        AndyG55

        They should be made to install the new ones where the old ones were.

        10

        • #
          Robin Pittwood

          Nooooo…

          20

          • #
            AndyG55

            Badly worded.. I was trying to imply that they should have to take the old ones down before they can build any more. The ONLY place they are allowed to build are where old ones already exist that aren’t being used..

            20

            • #
              Annie

              Andy, some of those were built where they should never have been built in the first place, so they should definitely not be replaced.

              10

              • #
                Roy Hogue

                Annie,

                The ones I mentioned were built in two of the most scenic desert spots in Southern California, Tehacapi Pass and San Gorgonio Pass. None of them should have been built.

                Those two spots carry heavy rail and highway traffic and are literally fantastic examples of desert beauty. No, they shouldn’t have been put there. I might say otherwise if they had proven to be beneficial. But they aren’t. Of course none of this bothers those who hope to make money from building these monstrosities or the politicians who hope to make points with their supporters come next election. :-(

                10

      • #
        Roy Hogue

        If I was Obama I would be encouraging sunny California to use a cheaper form of energy than it’s obsession with Renewables

        If I was Obama I’d put a paper bag over my head when I went out in public so no one would recognize me. Or better yet, strap some heavy weights to my waist and jump off one of the Potomac River bridges. But he has no sense of shame whatsoever so it will be business as usual until enough people hurt enough to get mad enough to stop him.

        10

  • #
    DayHay

    Here in Oregon the state legislature forced the local power companies to offer a certain percentage of “green” power. The only was to do this was for the said local companies to purchase the broken, expensive, wind farms that were totally subsidized to construct, but not to run. Now we get to pay for them AGAIN through our local energy bills! This would be illegal outside of govt.

    200

    • #
      KinkyKeith

      DayHay

      That is a Brilliant expose of the stupidity of the CO2 snorters.

      KK

      60

    • #
      Tim

      It seems taxpayers in the US pay for dismantling old turbines. The companies make their profit, take the subsidies and leave the junk behind. Corporates above people yet again.

      http://www.renewablesinternational.net/no-money-to-dismantle-wind-turbines/150/505/29316/

      50

    • #
      Roy Hogue

      DayHay,

      I don’t know what your electric bill looks like but mine from Southern California Edison is a nightmare of added charges and subsidies, not to mention the tiered pricing structure that increases the price/kWH as you use more electricity each month.

      And then, just a couple of months ago they committed the worst sin of all — they stopped putting the prior and current meter readings on the bill and just show the number of kWH we use. So now it’s much harder to audit the bill against the meter, which I can easily read since it’s on the back wall of the house in plain sight and reads out directly in kWH on a half inch high LCD display. How much easier can it get? And it’s a smart meter so I know they can read out the current total kWh on it any time they want to without even needing to enter the back yard.

      When anyone does something like this I always suspect — and with good reason — that they intend to hide something. Energy policy and the utilities are in bed with each other in my (maybe not so) humble opinion.

      10

      • #
        Roy Hogue

        And I should add this — they can also read out our peak usage at various times during the day and then charge more for usage at peak demand hours. This is coming, probably to you as well and ought to cause public outrage that would make the regulators back off. But no one is watching what they’re doing so it will catch everyone by surprise. And the sheeple will meekly submit when it happens.

        10

        • #
          Steve

          yet more reasons to run a house almost entirely on solar.

          ironically, their greed and control-freak tendency will backfire big time in Oz as more peopel tell the utilities to basically take a leap.

          00

  • #
    Richard111

    There are four monstrous lumps of steel reinforced concrete under the ground that allowed those things to stay upright in a strong wind. I wonder what will happen to those.

    80

    • #
      Mark D.

      I fear some new subsidies will be found and they would make a very good foundation for a “new and better” wind farm.

      30

    • #

      Foundations for boutique coffee shoppes perhaps. After a walk on the moors a nice hot mocha would do it for me. No latte however. The sippers might dream another disaster.

      10

    • #
      Dave

      Richard111

      World wide it is estimated there are 250,000 windmills, with about 50,000 extra being added per year. By 2020 we should see about 600,000 of these monsters.

      1. At approx 1,000 tonnes of concrete & steel for each, that’ll be 600 million tonnes in total embedded in the earth.
      2. Currently 600,000 birds killed per year. By 2020 this will reach 1.3 million per year.
      3. Currently 800,000 bats killed per year. Bu 2020 this will reach 1.7 million per year.
      4. Windmill life span of 10 years, will see nearly 300,000 of these killers useless in 2020.
      5. By 2020 the British Royal Family will earn 1/4 billion Pounds from windmills alone.
      6. By 2020, another 100 million tonnes of steel will have been wasted.
      7. At approximately 100 acres per windmill, 60 million hectares of land will be wasted by 2020.

      These Greenies sure know how the stuff up the planet earth.

      140

      • #

        Thanks Dave, and while all of these things you mention are important in their own way, here’s another important fact to add.

        That current total is for towers of all sizes when it comes to actual power generation.

        All up now, there is around 300,000 MW of Nameplate Capacity for Wind Power across the World.

        For some perspective, that equates to the same Nameplate Capacity as for 150 large scale coal fired power plants, and here, large scale is 2000MW on average.

        150 of them

        Some more recent ones are averaging a Capacity Factor of close to 30%, but when taken on a Worldwide basis for ALL Wind Power, then that CF is in fact down at 17%, which means that over a full year, they will supply 17% of their rated Capacity, so then, extrapolating that down to an average daily time frame, this means that while they may supply differing levels of power across a full day, they will supply their full rated power for 17% of that day, or around 4 hours a day.

        So then, the actual power delivered for consumption from all of those wind towers comes in at the same as being delivered from 30 of those 150 large scale coal fired power plants, and that’s using the average CF for large scale coal fired power in full operation.

        30 of them

        Pretend for one minute a new Wind Plant is a new Commodore (or any new car) in the show room, oh, and the salesman has taken some truth serum.

        “This is our new Commodore. Wonderful car. It starts starts first time every time, but there’s only a chance that you’ll reach any of your destinations one time in five. Beautiful plumage!”

        Tony.

        60

        • #
          Dave

          Thanks Tony,

          That’s assuming they all work as well. Plus in 10 to 20 years these monsters are finished, while the coal power stations keeping on pumping out electricity for another 40 or 50 years.

          The other thing is the massive impact that the land windmills have on seed dispersal, insect habitats (bees & other pollinators) etc that will drastically change the plant life around each tower for kilometers. Look at this photo of a group of windmills, and see the turbulence effect that is downwind of them.

          The Greenies have a lot to answer for with these shocking things.

          30

          • #
            Mark D.

            Interesting photo Dave, it shows the energy removed from the wind has dropped the temperature to the dew point (fog point if you rather) or perhaps has lowered the ambient air pressure.

            10

          • #
            Roy Hogue

            What you’re seeing in that photo is condensation in the wake left by the blade tips, which after all, are airfoils just like the wings of an airplane. In that wake the pressure has dropped and the air has cooled and under the right circumstances you get the visible condensation (clouds) trailing behind the blade tips shown so vividly in the picture. Under the right circumstances you can see a similar thing in the wake of a big jet when it’s slow as during landing or right after takeoff.

            It has a certain beauty, almost fascination, notwithstanding the ugly, problematic source.

            00

  • #
    Peter Miller

    May they all rust in peace.

    230

  • #
    diogenese2

    Don’t crow too soon. These were put up long before the “Climate change act” allowed for FITs and subsidies.
    They “have not worked for years”, because , of course, without FIT they are completely uneconomical. Had they been paid for NOT generating, as is often the case, they would be there yet.

    111

  • #
    diogenese2

    Further: On observing the huge sums being paid to windfarmers for not producing, I thought “you cannot make it up”. I then remembered chapter 9 of “catch 22″ on the family wealth of “Major Major”. The EU common agricultural policy (and that of the US) provided the blueprint. You can make it up after all. H/T to Joseph Heller.

    70

  • #
    john robertson

    Shame the owners of the defunct wind farm at the southern most tip of Hawaii cannot do the same.
    The rust cascading down the white nacelles is rather beautiful, in a post apocalyptic way, seems they were abandoned as soon as the subsidy ran out.

    90

  • #
    undertallen

    Great news! One down, X to go.

    In particular in Umeå in Sweden, there existed a movement of vegans who burnt milk trucks and other farm equipment to “protect cows against exploitation”. Of course, not understanding that the milk cow would be rooted out if it didn’t provide milk. For some reason, such people do not get equally worked up about the slaughter of bats and eagles by wind farms.

    Around Greenham common, there were protest camps for decades.

    It is sort of a a pity (but one should not condone terrorism or being loopy) that those who oppose wind farms also believe in reason, science in logical arguments. Also, we are obviously too few, too sensible or too lazy to chain ourselves to things.

    For those who read Swedish, General Patton’s grand daughter is running a centre for rehabilitating people with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) in my old home town, Sollefteå. She is now fighting against wind farms. “It is pure lunacy…”
    allehanda.se/start/solleftea/1.6390382–det-ar-rena-darskapen-

    70

  • #
    Backslider

    At least they pulled them down. In the USA there are literally thousands still standing, slowly decaying…..

    40

  • #
    Steve

    Perhaps Chris would understand it better if an analogy was used.

    Chris, let’s say you invest with a firm that predicts a 5% return on your investment every year based on their investment model. For 20 – 30 years, you indeed get 5%, giving the model some credence. Then, for the next 15 years, you earn nothing. You complain to the firm that you are not making what they predicted. Their reply, “But look, you have more money than you have ever had before!” Would you, Chris, accept such an explanation and believe their investment model was valid, hmmm?

    30

  • #
    Manfred

    This says all you need to know about Big-Government Intelligence.

    At face value in context, a fine example of an oxymoron.
    Robert Heinlein once wrote: ‘the intelligence of a committee is inversely proportional to its number’, an outstanding vignette that testifies to the collective wisdom of ‘the consensus’. The Ministry-of-We-Know-Best is terrifying precisely because it is an ideologically driven idiot savant. Windmills, amongst other things, testify to this toxic bureaucracy though in time, they will become the epitaph.

    80

  • #
    PeterS

    It appears so many are left standing all over the world only to rust away. So what happens when they start to fall apart and drop large bits of metal and concrete? Will the governments still do nothing and let the companies off? No, they should force the companies to remove the horrible things at their cost, or be fined heavily. This Green madness has to stop. We have plenty of water, oil, coal and gas to supply the world’s energy needs for centuries.

    60

  • #
    Eddie Sharpe

    Wait a minute. They were over 30 years old, and hadn’t been in use in recent years. That’s way beyond the lifetime of current new ones.

    An application for 2 larger New ones was rejected. While I appreciate the strong symbolism, this is hardly a significant turn against wind turbines in general.

    40

  • #

    Only prob is, they’re actually okay for pumping up water. We still have a few ancient old windmills clanking away along the Macleay River. Mind you, I’d hate to live near the scraping and squeaking noises they make.

    How is it possible to install technology when everyone knows in advance it won’t work? (I know, I know…religious hope and juicy temple offerings.)

    I once had dinner in France with a retired geothermal electrician. When I asked him about geothermal he said it was old tech, good for heating and cooling purposes in the right locales. Probed further about its use as a mainstream power source he snorted. That’s all. He snorted rudely. And he wasn’t the rudely snorting type of Frenchman.

    40

  • #
    Richard of NZ

    But how can it be that these windmills have rarely operated? Ilkley is famed for it’s strong and continuous winds, why there is even a song about how dangerous they are. Perhaps the council that permitted these eyesores was doing more than courting Mary Jane.

    40

    • #
      Peter C

      Yes, you are right.
      Verse three: Then ye will catch your dearth of Cowld,
      On Illey Moor Baht Art.

      I haven’t heard the song for years. It must be so Cowld because it is so windy. I hadn’t thought of that. Have not been there either.

      30

      • #
        Mattb

        Then we shall have to bury thee…
        on ilkley moor bar t’at

        then worms shall come and eat up thee…
        on ilkley moor bar t’at

        Then ducks shall come and eat up worms….

        Then we shall come and eat up ducks…

        Then we shall all have eaten thee….

        24

  • #
    ROM

    The UK Government like the Germans and the Danes who have one of the largest wind generator construction companies in Vesta, have been offering huge inducements to wind farm operators to go offshore with their turbines.
    To sidetrack; The Danes are now backing out of wind energy as it is destroying their economy and they can no longer afford to literally give away power to Sweden when they have too much during high wind periods but still have to pay the wind operators for the power produced.
    And then buy back power from the major Swedish power producers, the Swedish hydro system when the wind stops blowing.
    The big Danish and biggest globally wind generator producer, Vesta has just laid off some thousand odd jobs as the wind power industry begins it’s collapse globally as government imposed subsidies begin to dry up or reduce with the aim of being phased out as the world wide financial strictures on governments finally start to come into play .
    So the orders for new wind generators are now also drying up even in China and other major wind generator production centres.
    Industry propaganda will claim otherwise until you read the fine print in the back page statistics

    What is occurring in the relatively shallow waters around the UK and around Denmark and in the Baltic off north Germany as the off shore wind farms are being built up to 30 kilometres or more off shore, is becoming a very serious concern for the major shipping industries as the wind farms increasingly intrude with government backing, more and more upon the ages old shipping routes that course right through this intensively travelled and high density industrial region.

    The shipping lines claim that it is inevitable due to the narrowing and constricting of the shipping routes in shallow waters by the off shore wind farm operators continuing intrusions into the shipping routes that there will be a major shipping disaster when the inevitable collision between a large ship and a wind generator / generators inevitably finally occurs.
    And the first such collision may only be the beginning of a major problem for those countries with an extensive ocean coastline and who rely upon sea borne trade for their economic existence and who have or are building an extensive system of off shore wind farms.

    80

    • #

      With respect to Offshore Wind Power, it has been hyped for a while now. It’s just as bad as wind plants on land, in every respect, only more expensive, hence the Companies wanting to hype it.

      Four and a half years back now, Ken Salazar, the U.S. Secretary Of The Interior, (the same as an Australian Government Minister) mentioned that all U.S. coal fired power could be replaced by Offshore wind along the Atlantic coast line. He went on to say that this could provide one million megawatts of power. (Seriously, he actually said exactly that)

      It actually even sounds feasible, until you actually understand what that entailed.

      I wrote a Post for it at my site, but just a quick hit on what Salazar’s claim meant.

      That coastline is 2069 miles long.

      So, using an average offshore tower with an average sized nacelle housing the generator, which means that stacking them side by side with a small gap from swept area of one to the swept area of the next, you can fit 30,000 of them along the whole length of the Atlantic coast line.

      So now, to generate Salazar’s one million MW, you need not just this one row of 30,000 of these things tip to tip along the whole coast line, but ….. 38 rows deep of them.

      That’s not taking into account the ramping up of construction, the time frame for construction, where to build all the equipment needed, the infrastructure to get all that power back to shore, and then across the whole Country, and on and on and on.

      The link to the whole post is as follows for the whole ridiculous sorry saga.

      Salazar’s Wind Power: First Open Mouth, Then Change Feet

      Tony.

      110

      • #

        Let me clarify where I mention this:

        …..the infrastructure to get all that power back to shore, and then across the whole Country…..

        The idea that electrical power generated off the Atlantic Coast can actually power the whole U.S. is impossible. You cannot transmit the power from one side of the Country to the other.

        Electrical power needs to be generated (relatively) close to where it is actually being consumed, so power generated Offshore in the Atlantic Ocean, supplying, well, anything West of the Mississippi River (or even that far) is impossible.

        Tony.

        50

        • #
          mc

          TonyfromOz @ 19.1
          30,000 wind generators placed side by side and 38 rows deep! My impression is that the vast majority of people have absolutely no idea of the truly monstrous scale of infrastructure required and the horrendous blight it would impose on ocean and landscape to bring such an energy production plan to fruition, and that’s putting aside the fact that as you say, it may not be technically possible anyway. What we need Tony is an artist’s impression of what a wind farm on that scale might look like. Get pictures like that into the minds of the general public and watch their eyes bug out!

          40

          • #
            Dave

            mc,

            Here’s a picture of about 50 ocean turbines. Print this out 22,800 times to give an idea of the scale.

            3,300 plus kilometers long by nearly 3 kilometers wide, this is mind blowing madness even if it is a Green dream.

            30

      • #
        Backslider

        38 rows deep of them

        The thing is that once you start putting them behind each other the already very poor efficiency drops off dramatically, get worse with each row back. See it for yourself.

        50

        • #
          mc

          Thanks Dave and Backslider for the links.
          I do have some idea of the scales and the inefficiencies involved, especially in light of the fact that I have been reading Tonyfromoz posts since he turned up on this site, but I have a particular kind of audience in mind who I would like to get this sort of information to, for instance, people like my mother, my sister, most of my aunties and uncles, the ordinary and sometimes not so ordinary people I meet and deal with everyday. People who receive their knowledge of the world through main stream media, who more or less accept the official orthodoxy without question. People who have no time or energy or even any inclination to do any investigating on websites like this one.
          How about a small book by the likes of Tonyfromoz, with graphic illustrations of what a shire, a state and a nation might conceivably look like (even if not technically feasible, which would be indicated) under various high intensity renewable energy scenarios. Pictures would have the power to grab people’s attention very quickly.
          It could have a title something like;
          The Renewable Energies Handbook.
          Subtitled,
          A horror story for humanity AND the environment.
          Sorry Tony, feel free to decline the offer.

          30

          • #
            MemoryVault

            under various high intensity renewable energy scenarios

            There is no such thing as “high intensity renewable energy”.

            There is “high intensity energy” (fossil fuels, nuclear, hydro in places etc), and there’s “renewable” energy. Here are some pictures of places that rely on “renewable” energy.

            20

            • #
              mc

              Point taken MV. Let me clarify. I did not mean high energy output per generating unit, I was referring to a hypothetical situation ( one imagined by many environmentalists) where a very large proportion, or better, all, for the purpose of visual demonstration, of a given community’s electricity needs are meet by wind generators. I am not saying this can be done, I am saying that if people like Ken Salazar, Secretary of the Interior in the USA want to promote ideas like generating all of the electricity needs of the US with wind generators off the east coast then the people of that country should be given a look at what such a mad scheme would do to their coastline. Yes I know it can’t be feasibly done, the point is that far too many people think it can be and should be done.
              Apologies for the bad wording on my part.
              If we want true high energy density power production then we need to put back in place the research funding that has been ripped out of fusion technology.

              20

  • #
    Ross

    This is off topic but worth reading.

    It looks like the Russians are not the only ones taking on the Greenies’ front on.
    Chevron decided to fight back against it’s loss in the Ecuadorean courts to a Greenie group. They discovered a barrel load of dirty and illegal tricks. Well done Chevron !! ( I hope they crush them when it goes bak to court)

    http://nypost.com/2013/10/14/chevrons-landmark-lawsuit-exposes-greenmail/

    h/t Bishop Hill

    91

  • #
    Mattb

    Where has thee been without thy hat
    On lkley moor bar t’at
    Oh where has thee been without thy hat
    On Ikley moor bar t’at

    On ilkley moor bar t’at
    On ilkley moor bar t’at
    On ilkley moor bar t’at

    Thy’s goin’ to catch thy death of cold….

    etc

    32

  • #
    pat

    two lengthy pieces for TonyfromOz & others to critique:

    12 Oct: Economist: How to lose half a trillion euros
    Europe’s electricity providers face an existential threat
    ON JUNE 16th something very peculiar happened in Germany’s electricity market. The wholesale price of electricity fell to minus €100 per megawatt hour (MWh). That is, generating companies were having to pay the managers of the grid to take their electricity…
    At the peak, total generation was over 51GW; so prices went negative to encourage cutbacks and protect the grid from overloading.
    The trouble is that power plants using nuclear fuel or brown coal are designed to run full blast and cannot easily reduce production, whereas the extra energy from solar and wind power is free. So the burden of adjustment fell on gas-fired and hard-coal power plants, whose output plummeted to only about 10% of capacity.
    These events were a microcosm of the changes affecting all places where renewable sources of energy are becoming more important—Europe as a whole and Germany in particular. To environmentalists these changes are a story of triumph…
    The decline of Europe’s utilities has certainly been startling. At their peak in 2008, the top 20 energy utilities were worth roughly €1 trillion ($1.3 trillion). Now they are worth less than half that (see chart 1). Since September 2008, utilities have been the worst-performing sector in the Morgan Stanley index of global share prices. In 2008 the top ten European utilities all had credit ratings of A or better. Now only five do.
    The rot has gone furthest in Germany, where electricity from renewable sources has grown fastest…
    http://www.economist.com/news/briefing/21587782-europes-electricity-providers-face-existential-threat-how-lose-half-trillion-euros

    17 Oct: Bloomberg: EBay, Ellison Embrace Microgrids
    in Threat to Utilities
    by Ken Wells & Mark Chediak
    Microgrids also may be a solution for thousands of the world’s remote villages that subsist without electricity. The Washington-based nonprofit EarthSpark International has built a microgrid that runs off a diesel generator, bringing power for the first time to 54 inhabitants of the village of Les Anglais. It will soon add solar and backup storage to serve
    others in the village center.
    Similar groups are at work in Africa, India and Latin America, deploying microgrids that mix fossil-fuel generators with solar and wind power. In most cases they’re replacing sooty kerosene or wood stoves, bringing cheaper and cleaner energy to the poor…
    One holdup in wider adoption is the high cost of battery storage for home microgrids that makes the final step to grid independence unattractive if not unaffordable to most consumers.
    Research may change that. The Joint Center for Energy Storage Research, a project within Chicago-based Argonne National Laboratory, is using a $120 million federal grant for a five-year plan to improve battery efficiency by an order of five…
    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-10-17/ebay-to-ellison-embrace-microgrids-in-threat-to-utilities.html

    10

    • #
      ROM

      Pat, the idea of microgrids is terrific and has been tried in other places before to bring power, even small amounts of power which make a huge difference to these poorest of poor.
      Problem;
      Once the mechanical savvy individuals, usually westerners or of western education and culture who set these mixed technolology systems up and then get operating, once they leave then there might be some maintenance for a period by the partly trained locals but sooner or later the maintenance begins to fall off and the village / small town is left with another increasingly derelict western promoted good idea at the time.
      Or somebody decides he can sell the wiring [ a real problem in even some parts of South America and in some of the former Soviet republics for the metals or whatever parts of the system they can get their grubby hands on.

      Surprisingly "culture" or the lack of a mechanical oriented culture and a culture of only doing something that directly benefits, first your family, then your relationships and then your tribal group ranks a lot higher than a committment to all those other groupings found in any society.

      Western culture has reached a point where belong to and being totally committed to an immediate family or tribal group has faded. In it's place is a culture that there are some things we don't do because we all now understand that it is very deleterious to both other groups as well as to our immediate family and the western version of our tribal group
      Which is why you don't see westerners wrecking or at least not very often, major community infrastructure just to get a small profit. We all know that if we all did that our civilisation would just collapse as the water, sewerage. energy and etc and etc failed due to destruction and theft.

      As urbanisation accelerates in the less developed world, this family/ relationship / tribal culture will fade but it will remain a long term problem in the more remote regions just where these western created ideas are being suggested and implemented.
      There will be a few of these systems that will work long term due almost entirely and every time to often having just one individual or a very small group/ family or a very closely interrelated community who realise that it is to their great benefit for them to keep such energy generation systems operating and they will go to great lengths to do so.
      And from those examples we can hope that the cultural change required to be able to run and maintain such mixed technology energy systems will spread.

      Perhaps I can ask how many reading this have the capabilities of both operating and maintaining at least three distinct technologies, Diesel,. wind turbines and battery systems. and do this probably without proper readable instruction books that are written in a way that you can understand and not in a technical lingo that you have never come across before. And do this maintenance and repairs with a probable lack of the appropiate tools and spare parts.
      And all this in a western culture where we take such skills and the availability of spare parts for granted.

      Then throw in a couple of days travel to get advice and spare parts if any are available and not many westerners could handle that let alone somebody from a culture whose grandfathers might have still used spears.

      Just a small item from about 20 years ago as an example.
      An immediate farming neighbour went on a missionary type sojourn of a couple of years to a mid Pacific island [ can't remember which island group! ] which we regard as being fairly up to date. He did mostly mechanical repairs to vehicles / power plants and etc across the island group.
      As one example he had to wait some 3 months for some standard off the shelf O rings which are used in so many and so wide a number of applications to come from Australia or NZ before he could repair the equipment.
      That was a guy who knew what he was doing, what he wanted, where to get it from and how to fix it.
      Put oneself in the back blocks of the Congo or the numerous remote islands and island groups with poorly trained and inexperienced individuals supposedly available to fix something on the diesel or the turbine or the batteries and they get it all wrong.
      [ Get those batteries wrong and you do have some serious grief; Personal experience and I reckoned I had a pretty good idea on what i was doing. Was just plain lucky that i got away with just a blownup, utterly destroyed battery and no personal damage.]

      At least now over the last decade the African economy is starting to take off and a lot more will become achievable along the lines of improving power supplies over the next couple of decades or perhaps in less time than that in the African continent and in other previously remote parts of the world.

      The thoughts behind the concept are to be thoroughly complimented.
      The actual practicality is very suspect indeed.

      30

  • #
    pat

    the fightback is well & truly on…

    18 Oct: UK Daily Mail: Matt Chorley: Feeling cold? Put on a jumper! Downing Street chaos over advice on ways to beat 10% surge in heating bills
    No.10 says PM would encourage public to ‘consider’ wearing a jumper
    Ed Miliband says Cameron has gone from ‘hug a hoodie’ to ‘wear a hoodie’
    Downing Street later backtracks and says PM would not give clothes tips
    British Gas electricity prices rise by 10.4%, while gas goes up 8.4%

    British Gas faced a furious backlash from customers after Ian Peters, head of residential energy, said the company ‘understand the frustration’ – but said the best way to keep bills down is to ‘use less’.
    Bosses were subjected to a Twitter tirade yesterday as they battled to justify the punishing 9.2 per cent price rise that will add £123 a year to the average dual-fuel energy bill.
    Customer services director Bert Pijls was on the wrong end of an hour of non-stop abuse during a question and answer session that some described as a ‘car crash’…
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2465840/Feeling-cold-Put-jumper-Downing-Street-chaos-advice-ways-beat-10-surge-heating-bills.html

    50

  • #
    edwina

    In northern NSW near the border town of Tenterfield which the New England Hwy passes through a 70 windmill farm is being proposed right near a farm where I spent most of my childhood holidays. Tenterfield is 29′S latitude. This sort of latitude is often named the “horse latitudes” from sailors eating horse flesh while becalmed for long periods. Sure, there are days when stiff south west winds blow but on the whole, like Brisbane (27′S), there would be insufficient days of enough wind to turn the turbines. Places about 10′ north like Cairns (17′S) or 10′ south like Melbourne (38′S) are much more suited for wind farms IF we must have them.

    61

  • #
    Mark D.

    removed from the stunning landscape

    It’s not bad but “stunning”? How about pastoral.

    60

    • #
      Rereke Whakaaro

      Mark,

      They are talking about the UK … epithets get a little skewed, because of the number of people, and the lack of space.

      20

      • #
        Annie

        I’d agree that part near Ilkley is pastoral and attractive but maybe not stunning. I think the Northern Dales are better. Try Swaledale and Wensleydale. The road between the two, over the Buttertubs Pass, is stunning; also the view around Gunnerside in Swaledale. Further north we have the Northumberland coast…that is definitely stunning, with relatively few people around, Rereke Whakaaro!

        10

  • #
    AndyG55

    What I don’t get is why those who built, owned and operated the wind turbines are responsible for decommissioning them.

    Happens in any other form of industry, especially the power/coal industry.

    But the Psuedo-environMENTALists just don’t seem to care.

    Its total lunacy !!

    71

    • #
      Rereke Whakaaro

      Why shouldn’t they be responsible for decommissioning them?

      10

      • #
        MemoryVault

        Technically I think they are.

        Trouble is, projects like these are invariably set up under a holding company which is just a $10.00 legal shell.
        As soon as the money stops flowing, the holding company is folded, leaving $10.00 in assets, and millions in liabilities.

        I think you’ll find the same company structure was used by the fly-by-nighters in the pink batts scam, the solar panels installation scam, and even the PV cell manufacture scam (think Solyndra).

        31

        • #
          Rereke Whakaaro

          Whoo, I jus’ gotta get me one of them thar shell company thingies, they sure do sound like a great idea.

          11

        • #

          Companies are only responsible for decommissioning, it seems, if that was written into the contract or laws governing the area. Some Wyoming counties have started to include this in regulations. One can require a bond to be posted for removal, much as reclamation bonds for coal and other mines. For years, there was no such requirement. This was one of my biggest concerns with wind turbines–who takes them down? People would complain about oil and coal and I would point out that at least these industries have to reclaim the land. Turbines are left to rot.

          20

  • #
    ursus augustus

    Good riddance to rubbish. These vile machines are pox on the landscape and on the public purse, They are a stupid waste of capital for the return and the negative side effects aesthetically alone discount their net worth int the red.

    60

  • #
    Brian G Valentine

    These are rather easily demolished.

    Wait a couple of years when a few off-shore wind projects rust catastrophically at the foundations and close a few harbours.

    Then the Government will blame the contractor, the contractor will blame the manufacturer, the manufacturer will claim they weren’t put in according to specifications and the mess will just sit there, the price tag for removal about double the initial cost

    30

  • #
    Chester

    That’s too funny – you neo-environmentalists are cheering the halting of progress towards a new sustainable energy source, citing concerns about environmental aesthetics.

    Look at what you have become.

    116

    • #
      Mark D.

      Whaaaat?

      41

    • #
      MemoryVault

      halting of progress towards a new sustainable energy source

      And pray tell which “new”, “sustainable”, “energy source” would that be?

      Windmill technology is over 2,000 year old. It reached its peak with the Southern Cross windmill pump.

      There is nothing “sustainable” about modern wind turbines – have a look at what’s involved in recovering the rare earths for the magnets. They last at anything above 50% efficiency for less than a decade, and they sit on a plug of reinforced concrete from 2,000 to 8,000 tonnes, that will be there FOREVER.

      Wind turbines don’t produce electrical energy usable by a modern power grid. All they do is make life difficult for the engineers.

      101

      • #
        ROM

        It reached its peak with the Southern Cross windmill pump.

        Bloody good quote and dead on the money

        30

      • #
        AndyG55

        Ah.. the old southern cross windmill.

        Designed for cattle and sheep in outback Australia.

        They actually did their job quite well, but you had to keep checking they were still working, or your stock got very parched. !

        And they had that same drawback.. if there was no wind for a few days…
        .
        ……….. there was no water !!!!!

        30

    • #
      Debbie

      Huh?
      What progress?

      40

    • #
      Dave

      Chester,

      “you neo-environmentalist” – that’s you.

      The results of biodiversity monitoring at Musselroe windmill area.

      1. The areas affected by wind farm construction showed lower plant diversity than un-impacted patches.
      2. Massive rise in weed species (now being controlled by herbicides).
      3. Rise in feral animal species scavenging dead birds and bats.
      4. Rise in insect population (due to reduction of bird population).
      5. Decrease in native small mammals.
      6. Soil erosion problems already starting flow into waterways.
      7. Rare plant species on verge of extinction.
      8. Failure of the company to release accurate botanical survey results.
      9. Failure of the company to release bird kill figures.

      Meanwhile the profits now go overseas from revenue.

      You are a member of the Green Parasitic Vandal party.

      70

      • #
        Dave

        Forgot to add,

        1. $7.14 million per MW actual or $2.38 million per MW generating capacity construction cost.
        2. 110 hectares per MW actual capacity

        Most expensive use of rural & national park land anywhere in Australia, and now is ruined forever.

        30

    • #
      Backslider

      cheering the halting of progress towards a new sustainable energy source

      Listen [Snip!]. The stupid things did not work!!! Absolute proof that they are totally useless.

      30

    • #
      Rereke Whakaaro

      And what’s this with the “Neo”-Environmentalist label? There is nothing new in my environment, sonny, except acres of solar panels and windmills as far as the eye can see.

      That is the neo-environment, and it is all of your making. I happened to like the old one, just fine. We called it “nature”, because it was “natural”.

      But I supposed you urban parasites wouldn’t get the irony, of that, would you. For you, meat comes from the delicatessen, and vegetables come from the freezer in the supermarket. I bet you have never even tasted grass-fed beef, or freshly picked peas. And yet you scoff at what we have become?

      You say it is funny? I think it is sad! And I think you are sad, and pitiful.

      70

    • #
      AndyG55

      Gees Chester.. you better go find a wind turbine to protect. !

      Quick, hurry.. Go HUG a wind turbine..

      DOLT !!!!!!!!

      31

    • #
      AndyG55

      Wind turbines.. the poster child of the modern Greenie !!

      And FAR preferable to them than trees, birds and real nature. etc etc..

      41

    • #
      Tim

      Sorry Chester, but your mind is being held as a prisoner. You should get out more and do some research for yourself. There’s a world of information out there.

      41

    • #

      Wind is neither renewable nor sustainable. It is “hunter/gatherer” energy–or more accurately, trapper energy. We put up these monstrous towers to trap the wind whenever possible, then convert it to energy. Pretty much the same as people set out traps for rabbits, etc, as food sources. We have no control over wind. It does whatever it wants. Renewable and sustainable imply that somehow we can get more and keep getting more of the power source as needed. Wind does not fit either description. We cannot make more wind if we need it. Wind is not sustainable, since we have NO control over it whatsoever. Wind is a random energy source of variable strength available only when nature says so.

      30

  • #
    Doug Perth Australia

    These ugly blights on the landscape made me feel extremely sad, when I was traveling through Yorkshire. Thankfully, it seems sanity has prevailed. Well done!

    60

  • #
    • #
      Eddie Sharpe

      A very heartening account Phil of the small community taking on uncaring and arrogant public servants and winning, but only after great expense of time, energy, life & suffering.

      These unassuming country folk have had to become radicalised to get anything done.
      That can only encourage more, communities to rise up against their local bureaucracies.

      It seems further north though, in Scotland now run by a Nationalist administration, that persuading the local authorities and even persuading the courts is not enough. An emerging autocratic style at the top of Government , where Scottish Ministers seem to assume away unto themselves may be a nasty foretaste of what is to come.
      Is the phrase ‘Scottish Ministers consider …’ set to become the new byword for administrative intransigence in the face popular protest & dissent ?

      70

  • #
    Carbon500

    Q: What do you call four turbines taken down in Yorkshire?
    A: A start.

    80

  • #
    ROM

    Not sure if this has been brought up on this thread so far although it might have been on previous and similar threads.

    The question is; Why has there been this huge promotion and the all out push for wind energy?

    The first and most ostentatious and generally only reason given is to save and replace fossil fue]s and therefore reduce CO2 emmissions which by doing so the promoters of wind turbine energy production assure everybody that they are “saving the planet”.

    The second and never discussed and even denied reason is that there is an enormous amount of money to be made via government mandated subsidies and government mandated taxes on energy consumers. And thats even when your turbines are not connected as is the case with a major German north sea farm some 30 kilometres off shore which will cost the german taxpayer and consumer a 100 million or so dollars to connect to the German grid and thats after the construction of the farm. The wind farm owners are getting paid for spurios energy produced which doesn’t actually exist or has been generated.

    So how much in the way of CO2 emmissions does the wind turbine energy industry actually save?

    There have been a number of analysis of this question done by various highly qualified researchers and I have the sites bookmarked for a few years past. I started and had a thread running on the now closed and deleted Weatherzone forum site titled the “Alternative energy scam” which dealt with the great scam that wind energy and how the wind industry is so utterly corrupt in reality and in it’s claims and in it’s public pronouncements along with some anecdotal evidence of brown paper bags changing hands at various fancy restruants and etc.
    The Weatherzone Climate forum is now closed and the entire many years worth of discussion and debate and the incredible number of hours work put into finding and dissecting climate matters, nearly all from the skeptic viewpoint has been closed and is now deleted in the last month or so.
    Which just goes to prove how bigoted and utterly biased Fairfax and the principles of weatherzone must be to first close and then almost criminally delete a forum site with a vast amount of information collected over a decade or more where the skeptics had a excellent outlet to dare to question the consensus.

    No doubt all done under very considerable pressure from the rabid warmists and greens which the original closure was a target of some very post event boasting from the rabid warmists and greens involved. Many on this site would have a fair idea as to who to look for in certain universities and etc for that sort of sordid type of zealot bigotry. ]

    Anyway back to the questions;
    One of my sites has just such a quite extensive and complex analysis of the savings of CO2 emmissions over that of running a fossil fueled power station for the same power output.
    The site is the National Wind Watch

    The article; Facts About the Savings of Fossil Fuel by Wind Turbines in the Netherlands

    The headline quote [ I don't like the hard to read blue "quote" characters and lettering on this site as I find them very hard to read so ;]

    [quote>>>>Abstract.
    Electricity production in The Netherlands using renewables, especially wind, has grown to a size that makes it visible in the national statistics of electricity generation. Its influence on fossil fuel consumption can be determined. Based on these ‘official figures’ we show the actual contribution of fuel reduction to be equivalent to about 4,1% of the installed – ‘nameplate’ – capacity. The actual data also provide some insight into the mechanism that causes wind electricity to have such a dramatically small influence on primary fuel consumption.
    <<<<<<

    &
    Conclusion and outlook
    Adding it all up, one must conclude that under the present conditions in the Netherlands a 100 MW (Megawatt) ‘name plate’ capacity wind development produces on average 23 MW because of the capacity factor. 4,6 MW (20%) of this has to be subtracted from the final net result because of initial energy investments.
    From the actual Statline production figures we know that 38% of this 23 MW = 8,74 MW represents the actual fossil fuel and CO2 savings.
    But from this figure we need to subtract the amount of energy invested in the construction works: 4,6 MW.
    8,74 – 4,6 = 4,14 MW on average over the year. That is ~4% of the installed capacity. It makes wind developments a Mega money pit with virtually no merit in terms of the intended goal of CO2 emission reduction or fossil fuel saving.

    End quote; >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

    Repeat; In this Netherlands analysis The net total of fuel saving electricity provided by our windturbines therefore is ______ ~4% of the installed capacity.
    It makes wind developments a Mega money pit with virtually no merit in terms of the intended goal of CO2 emission reduction or fossil fuel saving.

    For that we spend hundreds of billions of dollars world wide yearly.
    We as a society in a show of complete disregard and a complete lack of compassion as a society allow tens of thousands of unnecessary lonely deaths to occur mostly to the old and weak and lonely from cold and sometimes hunger as they can no longer afford to heat and eat due to the imposts of the renewable energy industry.
    And yes no longer being able to heat or eat already exists in Australia too as the figures tell us.

    For that we have a renewable energy system that supplies the power needed about one fifth of the time it is really needed and does so in a way that is totally unpredictable in quantity, time and location.

    For this we have a system described by one expert as the quickest way he knew of transferring wealth from the poor to the rich.

    And those are the wind and solar energy systems that are going to “save the planet”, all with a saving of just 4% of CO2 emmissions over that from a conventional energy coal. gas energy production system that has power when needed, as needed, 24/7/year in, year out for decades.

    50

  • #
    blackadderthe4th

    ‘The four turbines near Addingham’, just a fact, Addingham is not in The Yorkshire Dales National Park!

    21

  • #
    Brian G Valentine

    Thus far there is but one “Chester” for a blog article, usually there are 3 or more

    Where are the others, attempting to defend the indefensible?

    41

  • #
    Jeff

    “To the delight of residents and walkers there are once again unspoilt views across the rolling hills and deep blue waters of Chelker Reservoir, near Ilkley.”

    Funny how all these right wing journalists (and bloggers) suddenly be acutely aware of the beauty and spiritual benefit of a bit of moorland somewhere they never been and will probably never go to.

    Enviros campaigning to preserver another bit of wilderness will derided as a PITA but today we’re all greenies.

    Sorry four turbines is NOT a wind farm. If they don’t work take them out, fine. But less of the hypocritical concern for the country side.

    I grew up in that area and on the few days of the year the weather was not too crap, we use to go out on the moors at the weekend.

    The main thing I can remember is the ear-ache from the freezing blasting winds up there and the noise from the wind on the VHT power lines and pylons that straddle the moors. This is not a pristine wilderness.

    If you don’t like wind turbines because they’re expensive or ‘hippy’ shit. Just say so and remain with the facts.

    Quit the false concern for the environment that you don’t have.

    We all get screwed by power providers, whether is nuclear, gas pricing or whatever. Nothing new about over priced wind power.

    15

    • #

      Only left wingers can have genuine concern for the environment then Jeff, is that how it works? Their policies raze forests in the third world but they “care” and we don’t?

      61

      • #
        Brian G Valentine

        The West gives them incentive to do it. In fact Europe prohibits any other viable economic activity for them.

        UN, World Bank will not finance fossil fuel electricity for them, but European appetite for palm bio-diesel is big enough for Indonesia, etc to demolish their forests as if the land was infinite in area. Neo-colonialism at its finest, all in the name of saving the Planet

        40

      • #
        Jeff

        No Jo, the current environmental stance broadly adopted by the “left” is a dogma driven disaster that will do more harm than good for the environment and destroy the enviro movement.

        Having started well in the 60s and 70s and managing to clean up a lot industrial pollution (stuff that most sane people could bet behind, irrespective of political bent) they’ve totally over play their hand.

        Soon they will have no credibility, even when they are right, and we will all be worse off.

        What I object to here is politically motivated “Hurrah!” every time one turbine out hundreds of thousands installed blows over.

        If these turbines were indeed not working 3/4 of the time (witness one “local resident”) someone should get sued and made to replace the defective units.

        Pretending they were an monstrous blight on pristine natural wilderness is misinformed, bias confirmation leading to a lack of scepticism from those claiming to be sceptics.

        Everyone has quietly ignored my pointing out that this area is straddles with high tension power lines already.

        I applaud your efforts on this site Jo, and I’m very happy Aus is being freed of it carbon tax, but I object to this sort jingoist turbine bashing.

        The real reason people don’t link them is not because they are suddenly concerned about birds or they want to preserve the Yorkshire moors.

        If there is a legitimate objection to wind powered generation, put it forward, don’t latch on to convenient side issues.

        Best wishes for the blog, you’re doing a great job.

        11

        • #
          Mark D.

          If there is a legitimate objection to wind powered generation, put it forward,

          Jeff, why can’t it be all the reasons? Wind power doesn’t work very well for the purpose they are “sold” to us, they are an economic boondoggle, they aren’t attractive, they are reported to cause the premature deaths of some animals, they create noise. Any one of these is a good argument for a “hurrah” when one is removed.

          What do you think is so good about them?

          00

          • #

            Jeff, you say here:

            If there is a legitimate objection to wind powered generation, put it forward, don’t latch on to convenient side issues.

            There is a legitimate objection, and in fact quite a substantial objection, which is one in fact that no one (quite literally) is willing to accept.

            Earlier on in your same question you hit upon it, but in fact, you seemed to show disdain (almost disbelief in fact) for what was said when you quoted this: (and I added the brackets at the end of what you wrote, and this is my Bolding)

            If these turbines were indeed not working 3/4 of the time (witness one “local resident”) someone should get sued and made to replace the defective units.(effectively meaning that these turbines are not running for 75% of the time)

            Here in Australia, the CF, the Capacity Factor (in other words, the average running time) for all the wind plants is currently just a tick under 30%, meaning that all of those turbines are NOT RUNNING for 70% of the time.

            In the U.S. the whole wind plant fleet (60,000MW Nameplate Capacity) has a CF of 26%, meaning that all of those turbines are NOT RUNNING for almost 75% of the time.

            Across the whole of Planet Earth, there is currently around 300,000MW of Nameplate Capacity for wind power. They are currently averaging a CF of 17%, which means that they are NOT RUNNING for 83% of the time.

            The only way I can place the important part in Bold is to also put it in block quotes.

            Jeff, that actually IS a LEGITIMATE OBJECTION to wind power.

            I cannot imagine anything else with such a poor delivery rate for operation being approved by any authority of any sort, anywhere.

            Design something and put it up for approval and tell those people who are going to approve it that it doesn’t actually work for two thirds to three quarters of the time, and just see how far you get.

            And yet, wind plants get the tick of approval every time.

            Tony.

            00

            • #

              I know this is now an expired Thread, and virtually no one is coming back to it, but it highlights one thing for me.

              Sometimes, we see Comments like that from Jeff here, who (subliminally) scoffs at what one witness says, that ‘these things don’t work for three quarters of the time’, in other words ….. anecdotal, and probably from someone with a separate agenda, and therefore, this can be discounted as not being the truth.

              However, as soon as you point to data that not only proves that, (and in fact that three quarters in some cases is actually an understatement) pfft, they vanish into thin air.

              This is in fact a new and probably better way to explain Capacity Factor. (CF)

              The generator is only generating electricity when the huge fan is actually turning.

              The current average (and here I’ll use that Australian CF of 30%) means that the plant, as a whole, in other words every tower, every generator in each nacelle, is generating 30% of it’s maximum rated power, (the total Nameplate Capacity)

              That is the same as saying that the huge fans are only in operation for 30% of the time, because they only produce power while that fan turns.

              So, in fact, those huge fans are not operating for 70% of the time, and that’s 74% of the time in the U.S. and for 83% of the time on a Worldwide basis.

              Now, while there may be some days when the operation is larger than that, there are days in fact when there is also very little power output from these towers, and that expression of CF is across a whole year ….. not just my saying that, but the Industry Standard.

              Wind supporters scoff when you say these things are useless, but as soon as you point them at real data, there are excuses galore, and even though it’s black and white, they go away still believing what they did before the truth was pointed out to them.

              Here at blog sites, they just vanish into the ether, never to be heard from again.

              Tony.

              20

              • #

                Tony–Yes, I do come back to expire threads!

                My understanding is turbines can be turning, especially in high wind, and producing virtually no power. The curve flattens off as wind speed increases until the turbine stops spinning. I don’t know if some continue to spin in high wind, using braking to control the speed, or not. I would also note that the “fan” turning just means SOME power is being produced. We routinely say while driving past the turbines on a 7 mph wind day that enough energy is being generated to recharge your IPod. :)

                I believe the problem with Jeff and others like him is they come here to make people believe the “truth” and are angry when everyone does just go “WOW. I never thought of that.” I have noted that on my blog–warminsts come and present what they believe to be totally convincing arguments that should be accepted without question. If you question, or want to discuss the idea, after a short period, they leave. They are looking to “win” in the argument, not discuss science. I suppose it’s fortunate that most are not scientists, as they would have abandoned the search for a cure for cancer in the first year because it was too hard and no one would listen to them. True scientists will explain and examine and try to understand different viewpoints while researching for years. That’s not warmists and wind advocates.

                00

    • #
      Debbie

      False concern for the environment?
      That’s priceless!
      I live and work in the environment and battle the elements 24/7/365.
      I have developed little to no respect/concern for ENVIRONMENTAL POLITICS. . . repeat. . . POLITICS!!!! which has just about ZERO to do with the environment.
      You are sprouting supercilious and sneering nonsense Jeff.

      21

    • #
      Eddie Sharpe

      The moral high ground need no longer be littered with wind towers, it seems.

      21

    • #
      Michael P

      Actually Jeff calling them a “farm” as such seems untrue to say the least when you look at what goes into them,as I never knew that farms used rare earths,among other things. They should be called large scale industrial developments.

      20

      • #

        I use the term “wind plant”–if it’s “power” plant, then wind plant fits. It was actually very clever to use the term “farm” and liken them to windmills of the past. People get all warm and fuzzy–unless of course they are living next to the turbines. Large scale wind plant drives home the difference even more. These things require permitting. As far as I know, most actual farmers, at least in the US, don’t need approval and a permit to farm.

        00

    • #
      Debbie

      Dunno Jeff,
      It presents more like a lecture than any interest in a practical outcome.
      People who live and work in the ‘real’ environment. . . . actually have an enormous respect for it.
      :-)

      10

  • #
    AndyG55

    Here’s a marketing ploy for one of the resident trolls to try.

    Bring a range of fruit and vege onto the market that are grown in special sheds that are restricted to less than 280ppm CO2.

    Big advertising blitz on “CO2 lite” fruit and vege..

    What could possibly go wrong.. you have 97% of climate sciences who would obviously buy the product.

    70

  • #
    mc

    If you don’t like wind turbines because they’re expensive or ‘hippy’ shit. Just say so and remain with the facts.

    I don’t like wind turbines because they’re expensive hippy shit!

    Now remaining with the facts,i have my whole life had a deep appreciation for and love of the natural environment, and that is precisely why i do not like expensive, useless, environmentally ruinous, dark ages hippy shit.
    When you really do master your so far failed attempts to divine the emotional and intellectual content of people’s minds you have never met, set yourself up as a professional mind reader, you could make a killing.

    10

    • #
      Jeff

      “I don’t like wind turbines because they’re expensive hippy shit!”

      So there we find the real reason you and most other turbine bashers are really complaining. Not because of concern for the West Yorkshire bat population.

      Seems like my mind reading skills are getting better each day, I’ll consider your idea of trying to make money out of pointing out other peoples hypocrisy but my experience so far is that it’s not something many people are willing to pay for.

      11

      • #
        Backslider

        I’ll consider your idea of trying to make money out of pointing out other peoples hypocrisy

        The only hypocrisy around here Jeff is your own. You make blanket statements about what YOU think people think, but in truth you have absolutely no idea.

        I’ll remember that one next time…. throw out a little bait by saying something like “expensive hippy shit” and then when somebody repeats it then nail them for it while ignoring what they actually said…. [snip]

        20

      • #
        mc

        A rubbish attempt at mind reading jeff, and a rubbish attempt at reading words on a page.

        00

    • #
      Roy Hogue

      Just for the record, I don’t like wind turbines because they’re incapable of doing a useful job. Even if they were not so expensive and even if they were not problematical for other reasons, they simply can’t live up to their billing.

      That is sufficient reason for disliking them. I don’t care about anything else when I know they don’t live up to the claims made for them. Keep arguing anything else and it’s certainly [snip], hippie, bull or otherwise.

      10

  • #
    pat

    ROM -

    thanx for the response on microgrids.

    re the theft of metal – it’s pretty universal:

    the latest trend in my region of SE Qld is stealing taps, including all the taps at one of the local schools last week.
    lots of water getting wasted in the process.

    watch this to see the magnitude of the problem in Britain:

    45 mins: Youtube: The Hunt for Britain’s Metal Thieves BBC full documentary movie 2013 .
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QJ1y19xJK-M

    10

  • #
    Safetyguy66

    AFR Friday October 4th 2013. Paul Comrie-Thomson does a piece called “gone with the windfarm”, well worth a read and basically summarises what I was saying for the whole 6 years I was in the Wind industry with 2 of the world’s biggest producers and installers, that is; “building windfarms is a complete waste of time and money”.

    And this one from more recently

    http://www.afr.com/p/australia2-0/wind_farms_win_few_fans_MgiQPow3P2ol0ASGxRQNeJ

    00

  • #

    If there is a reservoir couldn’t they use hydro power?

    00

  • #
    JohnB

    Can I just say that many of these towers are in rather nice places. Perhaps the concrete bases could be left intact with a shelter and picnic tables installed on them?

    Since they are often set on high places the views would be lovely.

    00

    • #

      That’s a great idea! We could put up a sign saying “Area reclaimed from the environmental movement on _____________________(date)”.

      00