It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Don Quixote

page: 6
9
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 24 2019 @ 06:02 PM
link   
a reply to: neformore

Look where smiley gladhands got us? Stagnant wages increased costs and less returns.

Trump has improved this. Why would i care about gravitas? Thats just feelings. Wells fargo wont accept deposits of feelings.

Eta...i didnt drink 8ball water so have no idea what the future holds. I do know that personal carbon is miniscule compared to corporate. And i do know the US is a minor carbon player compared to asia. Not sure why i need to worry about it when its futile until the rest of the world stops trying to tax me and actually does something productive about it. Its not like Trump can fix that.

Living in the land of 50000 windmills they arent all their cracked up to be. Great...energy production will save humans while making the Earth untenably ugly. Since i live where they are built that is my problem. Not people living in the beautiful vistas of the coasts and mountains. Sorry im not gung ho.
edit on 12/24/2019 by bigfatfurrytexan because: (no reason given)




posted on Dec, 24 2019 @ 06:04 PM
link   

originally posted by: CitizenZero
a reply to: chr0naut





Why would Trump have cut the aid? He didn't explain to anyone a good reason for it. What was his reason to cut $400 million in military aid to an ally that was actively at war with the enemy of the US?

Perhaps Trump was intending to use it as leverage?

Which means there was quid pro quo intended.

Again, why would Trump have cut the aid?



He didn’t cut the aid. So why would you ask why he did?


- Defense Secretary Mark Esper and National Security Adviser John Bolton were asked to place the military aid to Ukraine under review, a status that effectively halts the payment schedule, prior to the 'phone call.

- Trump himself confirmed that he had withheld aid: Trump changes story on withholding Ukraine aid - Politico

- Then there is this, as well: Trump's budget officials ordered the Pentagon to deny Ukraine aid 90 minutes after Ukraine call, new documents found - Politico

- Then we have the testimony of at least six witnesses before Congress that they were instructed by Trump to withhold the aid.

- Then we have the (after the 'phone call) State Department Letter, delivered to the Ukrainian government, that explained that the aid had been withheld.

From before his Presidency, Trump has raised concern that he may be an asset of Russia. This is yet one more bit of evidence. Trump halted military aid to an ally, which was to Russia's advantage, and there was no advantage to the US or US interests.

Trump clearly intended it for a reason and he absolutely and truly suspended aid to an ally while they were actively at war with an enemy of the US.

edit on 24/12/2019 by chr0naut because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 24 2019 @ 06:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: burdman30ott6

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
a reply to: neformore

He's not wrong.
economics21.org...
Wind power is a fool's errand on anything beyond individual unit scale.


You can make a windmill out of wood and cloth sails. Once it is turning, it is just as efficient as anything else that can turn a generator.

If your design is reasonably good, it just generates power, which we all pay a lot for, from wind, which we don't pay for at all.


You also have to consider the fabrication of the generator and the batteries to store that generated power. Also, no... a wood and cloth windmill will not generate the same power as an engineered high tower windmill. Physics is a thing, you realize. You can't aerodynamically design wood and cloth, you can aerodynamically design plastics, maleable metals, and fabricated materials.


The world has had windmills and water wheels for thousands of years. They work, even if aren't made of modern materials.

The first aerodynamic aircraft propellers were made of wood. The first aircraft wings and fuselage were made of cloth stretched over a wooden frame.

The principles are the same and you don't actually want a windmill to spin at high speed, which is noisy and kills birds. You just want to have it turn a generator at 60 RPM, which can be done with a gearbox. No tech magic involved.

You don't need high tech to build a windmill.

You also don't need high tech to build an electrical generator.

The tech just makes it a bit more efficient and durable, that's all.



posted on Dec, 24 2019 @ 06:56 PM
link   
a reply to: chr0naut

We have had a member in this thread literally go from advocating wood and cloth windmills for electricity generation that will save us all to arguing that nuclear power wont/cant meet needs without building a reactor in every American town. Let what you are arguing sink in a bit, just a small amount of thought here... if something that produces thousands of times more energy than the pinnacle models of wind turbines and that more productive and more efficient source isn't enough to keep up with future demand, why in the eternal blue hell would wind power be a feasible path to go down?

I get it, chugging down that AGW Kool Aide has sapped much of the globe of precious oxygen to their brains, but even the shallower peek into your logic finds the situation sorely lacking.



posted on Dec, 24 2019 @ 06:58 PM
link   
a reply to: neformore




I don't need to call him an idiot (although he is one).


I should've spent more of my years in pursuit of such idiocy.
If I'd have only known that's all it takes. I know for sure I could
pull that one off.


Merry Christmas my fellow member.



posted on Dec, 24 2019 @ 06:59 PM
link   
a reply to: chr0naut

If we are going by what was said while campaigning, you seem to have forgotten Trump said his administration would hold NATO members to their prior funding commitments which his predecessor had allowed them to slack on OR he would withhold US aid payments until those other member states fulfilled their promises. That's exactly what happened with the Ukraine.



posted on Dec, 24 2019 @ 07:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: chr0naut

You don't need high tech to build a windmill.

You also don't need high tech to build an electrical generator.

The tech just makes it a bit more efficient and durable, that's all.

True, you don't need high tech to build a windmill.

You need high-tech to build a windmill that converts the wind into electricity on a serious rate.

Even then these windmills are not really feasible. There is a reason my government starts to wreck down 26 000 (!) windmills starting next year that will not be replaced.

But of course everyone else is stupid. Why don't you pull up a startup, you can make the blades out of certified 100% organic cotton then. You will be rich in no time and your windmills will span the horizons 360°.

Since you got it all figured out



posted on Dec, 24 2019 @ 07:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: Oleandra88

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
a reply to: neformore

He's not wrong.
economics21.org...
Wind power is a fool's errand on anything beyond individual unit scale.


You can make a windmill out of wood and cloth sails. Once it is turning, it is just as efficient as anything else that can turn a generator.

If your design is reasonably good, it just generates power, which we all pay a lot for, from wind, which we don't pay for at all.

May I inject because I work in the energy sector, looking at data and figuring out the best ways so the grid is staying stable.

That is all nice and good on a individual scale, like the poster you answer to wrote. But if you do not want the grid to collapse every time the wind settles, you need stable base loads.

We are buffering this by running a stable base load on coal and nuclear power plants. Then we have gas plants that can jump in relative fast. Solar power input is a leading factor.

Wind turbines: we shut them off in the first order. They are unreliable. Then solar power is regulated down but most often and this has to do with the price of the single energy sources, it is not and a gas plant is powered down. Or we know the upcoming load.

Pump storage water power plants are on call 24/7 to feather huge grid loads, when we know they will happen beforehand. The water that is pumped up and stored is pumped up during the night or during phases where energy prices go negative.

That means we get money for pumping water around that we later use to discard it down the hill to generate power that we in turn sell to you (the customer).

"we" as in, the energy distribution sector / business


Storage has always been a problem. But tidal forces such as wind and water, alongside hydro and geothermal are all relatively perpetual.

If the intent was there we could have all sorts of energy storage that would be effective. The thing is it take a little investment and power companies would rather upfront profit. So they stay with 80 year old and relatively dirty technology because who care what the future holds.


and if you live on a small island, you may find tidal forces easy to come by. But there is this country called the United States of America, and it's kind of big. Which makes it a little different than where you live. This post has been done for informational purposes only.


Holland, very flat. A country. Windmills.




posted on Dec, 24 2019 @ 07:35 PM
link   
a reply to: chr0naut

They move water, not electrons. A bit of a difference.

The water they move, it happens at an almost unpredictable rate. Sometimes nothing, sometimes more, most of the time fluctuating. This is junk for electricity generation and grid management.



posted on Dec, 24 2019 @ 07:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
a reply to: chr0naut

We have had a member in this thread literally go from advocating wood and cloth windmills for electricity generation that will save us all to arguing that nuclear power wont/cant meet needs without building a reactor in every American town. Let what you are arguing sink in a bit, just a small amount of thought here... if something that produces thousands of times more energy than the pinnacle models of wind turbines and that more productive and more efficient source isn't enough to keep up with future demand, why in the eternal blue hell would wind power be a feasible path to go down?

I get it, chugging down that AGW Kool Aide has sapped much of the globe of precious oxygen to their brains, but even the shallower peek into your logic finds the situation sorely lacking.


You know all those powerful dynamos at Hoover dam. They turn at exactly the same speed as every other AC power generator dynamo. It relates the the cycle (60Hz) of your mains power. Of course you can have multi-pole generators but the same theory holds. And all they are doing is moving a coil through a magnetic field. How hard is that?

And, I'm not advocating any one power generation methodology. I think we have to spread the load across multiple technologies. That is our best option.

Nor am I throwing out a viable power generation technology because it doesn't have the peak efficiency of coal. The thing is, coal is very, very dirty when it burns. Even if you try and remediate against its dirtiness, it reduces the efficiency greatly and you'd still get all those "incredible fumes", just a bit less.

So, would you go and 'play the didgeridoo' with the exhaust pipe of a running fossil fuel engine? Huffing down all those "incredible fumes"?


edit on 24/12/2019 by chr0naut because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 24 2019 @ 08:14 PM
link   
a reply to: chr0naut

China presently sends coal fumes straight up their stacks, unfiltered... but I'm supposed to reject clean coal technology like scrubbers because removal of 97% of emissions from the coal exhaust isn't enough? Yeah, keep kissing China's asz while calling for the West to handcuff themselves over a pittance of the world's carbon emissions because: misplaced reasons and selling your soul to the global warming cult.

America won't be doing that anymore and, frankly, the world can do two things about that fact; nothing and learn to like it. This is your actual reality.


Merry Christmas, its snowing here right now so time to throw another log in the fireplace.



posted on Dec, 24 2019 @ 08:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: Oleandra88

originally posted by: chr0naut

You don't need high tech to build a windmill.

You also don't need high tech to build an electrical generator.

The tech just makes it a bit more efficient and durable, that's all.

True, you don't need high tech to build a windmill.

You need high-tech to build a windmill that converts the wind into electricity on a serious rate.

Even then these windmills are not really feasible. There is a reason my government starts to wreck down 26 000 (!) windmills starting next year that will not be replaced.

But of course everyone else is stupid. Why don't you pull up a startup, you can make the blades out of certified 100% organic cotton then. You will be rich in no time and your windmills will span the horizons 360°.

Since you got it all figured out



I built a wind generator in high school out of a ceiling fan (we ran it bolted to a bench, we never set it up with a directional vane and pivot). It's problem was that it turned deadly fast. But it generated a reasonable voltage & current.

31 volts peak, unladen, if I recall. That's just a ceiling fan, about 4 feet tip to tip. A proper generator with better regulation could probably power a street light.

Extend the blades a foot or so each way, give them a feathering mechanism (perhaps one of those old style mechanical governors) and a gear box and a proper generator or permanent magnet motor, set it up on a pole to follow the wind at all times, could perhaps power an appliance or two at mains voltage.

edit on 24/12/2019 by chr0naut because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 24 2019 @ 08:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
a reply to: chr0naut

China presently sends coal fumes straight up their stacks, unfiltered... but I'm supposed to reject clean coal technology like scrubbers because removal of 97% of emissions from the coal exhaust isn't enough? Yeah, keep kissing China's asz while calling for the West to handcuff themselves over a pittance of the world's carbon emissions because: misplaced reasons and selling your soul to the global warming cult.

America won't be doing that anymore and, frankly, the world can do two things about that fact; nothing and learn to like it. This is your actual reality.


Merry Christmas, its snowing here right now so time to throw another log in the fireplace.


What, you have to light fires to keep warm?

Temperature near to me.




posted on Dec, 24 2019 @ 08:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: Oleandra88
a reply to: chr0naut

They move water, not electrons. A bit of a difference.

The water they move, it happens at an almost unpredictable rate. Sometimes nothing, sometimes more, most of the time fluctuating. This is junk for electricity generation and grid management.


And sawmills, grinding grain, making paper, pumping bellows (smithies) and pumping oil.



posted on Dec, 24 2019 @ 09:04 PM
link   
a reply to: neformore

You should do more mud pit threads. Have a good one:


“The truth may be stretched thin, but it never breaks, and it always surfaces above lies, as oil floats on water.”

Cervantes

It's like gifts from the Magi himself, quint-essentially.

Aaaanyhow. Merry Nothin, fellow heretics!
We'll get those tree-huggers one day, eventually.



posted on Dec, 24 2019 @ 09:17 PM
link   
a reply to: chr0naut

Indeed. Northern hemisphere checking in, far northern hemisphere to boot... its winter here and that still means cold, same as it always has.



posted on Dec, 24 2019 @ 10:16 PM
link   

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
a reply to: chr0naut

China presently sends coal fumes straight up their stacks, unfiltered... but I'm supposed to reject clean coal technology like scrubbers because removal of 97% of emissions from the coal exhaust isn't enough? Yeah, keep kissing China's asz while calling for the West to handcuff themselves over a pittance of the world's carbon emissions because: misplaced reasons and selling your soul to the global warming cult.

America won't be doing that anymore and, frankly, the world can do two things about that fact; nothing and learn to like it. This is your actual reality.


Merry Christmas, its snowing here right now so time to throw another log in the fireplace.


Not that I condone it, but: Everything You Think You Know About Coal in China Is Wrong - Center for American Progress



posted on Dec, 25 2019 @ 04:23 AM
link   
a reply to: chr0naut

Then you have all the knowledge to start your own windmill company and rock the world.



posted on Dec, 25 2019 @ 04:25 AM
link   
a reply to: chr0naut

Mostly water though. You make a fool out of yourself because you refuse to understand what was written by me and others.



posted on Dec, 25 2019 @ 11:20 AM
link   
a reply to: watchitburn

I have often heard that these windmills are also call bird cuisinarts!!!

PETA should investigate!!!



new topics

top topics



 
9
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join