Research: Possibility that Wind Turbine Farms, Solar Panel farms, and Large Green Projects to Genera

a reply to: jrod

Is that energy needs or energy wants? Seems to me most young folks are almost totally sold out. They have given in to the relentless advertising showing a crazy dependence on energy for a lifestyle that is not in their interests.

a reply to: Kester

We have plenty of energy available to live a luxurious life. Currently we have a fundamental problem of how we generate it.

There has to be a better, cleaner way.

a reply to: jrod

Luxury makes weak and selfish people.

Look up Robert Bryce the author from the op, you think he is funded by the koch brothers?



Questioning him = a attack

See the propaganda for what it is!

originally posted by: Kester
a reply to: jrod

Luxury makes weak and selfish people.

Are you describing the entire western world? Are you in this category or somehow apart from it? Do you use heat, air conditioning, computers and internet, refrigerators?

a reply to: LDragonFire

Interesting. Doesn't in any way detract from the point that large turbines connected to the grid have all kinds of negative issues. We recently picked up a hitch-hiker, (in my wife's car, I'm a dedicated bicycle commuter). This hitch hiker was part of a co-operative building medium sized off grid turbines. He was totally against large turbines connected to the grid for many reasons.

There are many games going on. Many players who are not what they claim to be. Much funding for dirty tricks causing confusion. I think I've demonstrated my credentials here. I'm totally opposed to the fake green energy scams being perpetrated on a massive scale.

Learn to swim, and carry one of these for those who can't. www.orionn49.com...

a reply to: LDragonFire

Please don't be foolish.

a reply to: LDragonFire

Seriously? so pretty much all the research done by biologists, acoustic experts, and doctors that show the problems caused by wind farms are false because of your claims that one of the people in the OP "must be working for big oil"?...

Do you, or jrod ever tried to find any fallacies in the WORK PRESENTED instead of always proclaiming "such and such person must be working for the oil industry"?...

How about Mark Hayes, PhD, research associate in integrated biology at CU Denver, who published a study in which he estimates that about 600,000 bats are killed by wind turbines each year. He also states in his study that this is a conservative number...

Study shows wind turbines killed 600,000 bats last year

Bats pollinate crops, control insects
11/15/2013

DENVER - More than 600,000 bats were killed by wind energy turbines in 2012, a serious blow to creatures who pollinate crops and help control flying insects, according to a new study from the University of Colorado Denver.

“The development and expansion of wind energy facilities is a key threat to bat populations in North America,” said study author Mark Hayes, PhD, research associate in integrated biology at CU Denver. “Dead bats are being found underneath wind turbines across North America. The estimate of bat fatalities is probably conservative.”
...

www.ucdenver.edu...

He must also be "a shill working for big oil" right?... Is that your response to every study, or argument you don't like?

How about the American Bird Conservancy? Are they also being paid by "big oil"?...

Study Shows Newer Wind Turbines Still Killing Hundreds of Thousands of Birds
Potential for More than One Million Annual Bird Deaths with Full Wind Energy Build-out

MEDIA RELEASE
Robert Johns, mobile: 703-955-6622, office: 202-234-7181 ext.210, [email protected]

(Washington, DC, December 10, 2013) A new study shows that in spite of updated designs, U.S. wind turbines are killing hundreds of thousands of birds annually—a number that may balloon to about 1.4 million per year by 2030, when the ongoing industry expansion being encouraged by the federal government is expected to be fully implemented.

The findings were issued in a new study by scientists at the Smithsonian Institution Migratory Bird Center (SMBC), the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and Oklahoma State University (OSU), published in the December issue of the journal Biological Conservation and authored by Scott Loss (OSU), Tom Will (FWS), and Peter Marra (SMBC).
...

www.abcbirds.org...

And again, the above are not the worse problems caused by wind farms. The worst problems come from the low frequency sounds and infrasound produced by wind turbines which have been shown to disrupt the navigational abilities of not only birds, but many other species of animals, and insects. Not to mention the detrimental effects on health on the aforementioned animals, insects and even humans.

originally posted by: crazyewok


So what do you suggest we just burn more fossil fuels?

Obviously fossil fuels also have a lot of problems, and so does nuclear energy. Many times before I have stated the need for research on how to harvest the energy that the Earth itself generates as it moves within the solar system.

One way to harness this energy that is produced by the interaction of Earth's magnetic field and outer space, and the interaction of Earth's atmosphere with our oceans is by taping the energy produced by thunder storms.

In a single day there are about 4-5 million lightning strikes producing over 100 billion watts. One lightning bolt alone can produce 5 billion joules. Of course, there are many inherent problems in how to harvest this energy. But this source of energy should be researched.

Another way to harness energy could be found by, for example, taping into Earth's surface telluric currents. Yes, the telluric currents natural to the Earth's layers are low in current, but if harnessed in series by mean of Earth batteries they could prove very useful.

In fact back in the mid 1800s Earth batteries were used to power telegraph systems in the U.S.

Of course those two examples could be used in the future, since as far as I know there hasn't been any substantial research by governments or any major agency.

Even if it is energy with very low current levels they could still be used together with other sources of energy/power.

A more feasible approach which perhaps could be used in about 10-20 years would be using water from our oceans as energy. This approach would use the NRL's gas-to-liquid technology at least until a more viable source is found.

Anyways, I don't want to derail my own thread. The purpose of this thread is to show the fact that wind power is not a feasible solution. Solar power is "very expensive". I know some people will try to claim the contrary and they would say solar power could be harnessed cheaply. This is simply not true. A median sized family of 4 buying solar panel systems would have to spend around $20,000+ more or less. Most people do not have the money to produce $20,000 U.S.D.

But again, I don't want to derail the thread, as I know jrod and some others will try to continue doing.

Wind farms do cause more harm than good. Our cities are saturated on rf emissions which cause problems for migrating animals, and now we have been installing massive wind farms on rural areas saturating even more the Earth with low frequency sound/noise and infrasound, which cause disruptions on the navigational ability of migrating animals and insects that use electroreception and magnetoreception such as honey bees.

What other areas do these migrating animals have to use to be able to migrate north, or to their respective feeding or breeding areas when all urban and rural areas are being saturated with rf and acoustic pollution?... And again, that's not mentioning the other health problems caused by wind turbines and wind farms not only on animals, but on humans as well.

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Any guesstimate how many bats are being killed by the white nose fungus that has been going around???

Again, if the oil and fracking energies were given this much scrutiny I do not think the general population would blindly support those industries as they do.

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

It's important to remember the costs and efficiency of 'renewables' depends on the longevity of the equipment. My own experience is that some of these systems are sold as having a generous lifespan. Then when they break down the excuse is "We're getting better at it. The next lot will last as long as we predict". That gives me no faith in the claims made by 'renewables' salespeople. If they were drastically wrong first time round how can we expect them to be accurate with their next hopeful claims? Dishonesty, lack of longevity and very careless installation has made me suspicious of all on-grid 'renewable' projects.

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Linked this thread in the comments here. www.telegraph.co.uk...

a reply to: Kester

dishonesty, lack of longevity and very careless installation has made me suspicious of all on-grid 'renewable' projects.

So where exactly did you get that impression of dishonesty, lack of longevity and very careless installations of all on grid renewable projects? Did you go arround and interviewed owners / inspected the quality of the work? And what about off grid renewables? What makes them better?

There is so much ignorance and amateurish interpretation of so called "complex" EM fields an other scientific topics in all this over lengthy quotes I wasted my time, it get´s into the range of delusionalism here.
I really facepalmed several times reading all this. This is just sad.

a reply to: verschickter

You seem to have got a bit mixed up here. Read the quote carefully. Suspicious of all on grid 'renewable' projects as a result of personal experience of some. Not as you say, dishonesty, lack of longevity and careless installation of ALL on grid 'renewable' projects. The Delphi Technique teaches rephrasing as a way to fool the audience.

If you read my posts in this thread you'll see where I got my impression. Two ground source heat pumps. Both have failed after a fraction of the claimed lifespan. One caused major structural damage. One air source heat pump which is so noisy we decided to move after two days of living with it. One array of solar panels, which gives lots of power on sunny days but has damaged the integrity of the roof and comes complete with a smart meter which emits so much EMF/RF it can be felt even by those who don't believe this is a problem. My experience with smaller off grid systems goes back 35 years.

The solar system shuts off if there's a power outage. This is to safeguard grid maintenance workers from power fed back into the grid according to an ATS expert. An off grid solar system would carry on working during a grid outage. Kinda useful.

The dishonesty I've experienced from those making bucks from renewables I won't go into in detail. It makes me too angry. They smirk and they saunter off safe in the knowledge they're sucking swill from the 'renewables' trough.

The poor quality installation was commented on by a neighbour looking from 12 yards away. I just went and paced the distance for your benefit. I'm not just looking close up for cosmetic faults. Some of the installers have admitted they know it's all a fraud. When I question them I find they don't have the same equipment in their own homes. Biomass heaters and efficient wood stoves seem to be preferred by installers of heat pumps.

One of the solar installers told me he used to install panels flown in from China. Not green. He also told us the landlord had the solar systems installed so the tenants with ground source heat pumps wouldn't complain about the high electricity costs for running the heat pumps, which were supposed to be saving electricity. All the ground source heat pumps this landlord had installed have been replaced after a fraction of their advertised lifespan. Some with other ground source heat pumps which also have problems and some with air source heat pumps. Which also have problems.

This whole debacle is driven by greed for subsidies, some would prefer to say the 'renewables' trough.

I think I've done a fairly good job of explaining my experience for the readers throughout this thread. I want them to know where I'm coming from so they can make better informed decisions about what to invest in. Rocket mass heaters for example.

Is it possible for you to describe for the readers what your actual experience is? My suspicions about all on grid 'renewables' could possibly be mitigated by some personal success stories. Though of course the longevity issue will be a difficult one to prove without a time travel machine.

Not sure how I can make this a strictly on topic comment. I'll just have to leave it as more background information.

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

What happens when electricity is being conducted through a medium such as a cable? An electromagnetic field is formed.

Oh come on.

Electricity cables have been criss crossing this planet for ages and ages.

We all use electric cables throughout our homes, we use electric motors in many of our devices and all of our vehicles, we have TV, Radio and Data broadcasts pumping out using great amounts of energy and have done again for ages.

Suddenly, with the rise and generally positive uptake of clean and environmentally friendly electricity generation (non fossil iow) the birds and insects are somehow being affected?

But not affected by the electrical infrastructure that has been here for generations and used everywhere on Earth, built and using fossil fuels to generate the electricity, but the harmless and clean generation methods?

I know the oil corps are worried over the rise of non-fossil means of electrical generation, but this is ridiculous propaganda easily debunked by a small amount of intelligent critical thinking.

EM is EM, whether generated and transmitted using fossil fuels or green energy...if this is affecting bees and birds and other insects, why were they not affected for generations before now?

If anything is killing off the insects it is probably pesticides, herbicides and environmental contaminates and pollutants from all the crap we dump and spew into the air every day from our over use of fossil fuels.

I really have read everything now.

a reply to: MysterX

Beat me to it. It's not a new type of power being created, it's electricity... electricity is electricity and I'm not sure how anyone can discount the health problems, economic problems, environmental problems our previous/currently most popular methods of generating electricity come with. Not to mention pesticides which is increasingly being determined to be the largest factor of bee, bird and bat population reduction. It hurts my brain too.

a reply to: MysterX

A 97 acre solar farm is proposed near here. It will power 7,000 homes allegedly for 25 years but we'll have to wait and see if it lasts that long. Berkeley nuclear power station is a short distance from the proposed solar farm. It covers 66 acres and generated enough electricity to run a small city for 27 years.

Berkeley is a Magnox site. I'm not exactly their favourite person because I make videos like this. And I write stuff like this. www.abovetopsecret.com... Check out my last comment on that thread. I've seen evidence that the nuclear industry watches all my online activity and probably a lot more as well.

The most likely cause of my mother-in-law's fatal cancer was waste from that site. It's personal. I have inside information on the thoughtless way waste at that site was treated historically. Have I demonstrated to you that I am not a nuclear apologist?

The point I'm making here is 'renewables' such as wind and solar farms cover a much larger area and any EM effects therefore cover a much larger area.

Harmless, clean and environmentally friendly electricity generation sounds great. Where does it happen? How are wind turbines and solar panels made? What raw materials are used? What is the complete picture? Decommissioning is the bit that everyone has difficulty factoring in to their calculations. Sellafield was not built with decommissioning in mind. They admit that on their website. Crazy. After it's manufactured and installed it still has to be maintained and sooner or later decommissioned. In my personal experience of 'renewables', much sooner than claimed by the advertisers. What's green about making high tech stuff that doesn't even work right?

Use less is the best way forward. Somehow the debate always seems to be framed as 'how will we meet our energy needs', instead of 'how do we reduce our energy wants'. Surely that is because everything paid for by the private bankers fractional reserve/fiat currency system, infrastructure, media, even the carefully controlled 'protest' movement, is all guided towards dependance on a financial system designed to funnel all property title to a very small group of individuals. The fake green energy world is part of that. Go small scale and off grid. Use less.

The private financiers behind the oil corporations are running the large scale fake green energy world. It's all the same to them.

a reply to: Kester

What kind of solar farm? PV or boiler/steam? I do believe there is a functional boiler solar plant out west. Those have been around since the turn of the 20th Century and produce a great amount of power.

It seems that you bought a faulty heat pump system from a snake oil salesman who was able to sell as green energy. Do not blame renewable sources of energy and those who want to end the addiction on oil on one device that clearly has a faulty design.

There are many other smart ways to make electricity without burning fuel.

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Ok so I read that bats lungs are being destroyed from the pressure from the blades, wouldn't the same thing happen near cars, trains, airplanes?

It makes sense that insects would be attracted to windmills because of the heat, this in turn would attract birds and bats.

Should we outlaw highways and roads and railroad tracks? Should we out law lights because they attract insects thus attracting bats? I have had lights on near a patio door and both bats and birds flew into it, should we out law patio doors and the lights?

The deaths of birds and bats blows, but white nose disease is killing bats by the millions each year.

This is a young industry and research is continuing.

a reply to: Kester

Hmmm guess it would have been a good idea to check those product reviews before purchasing them?