Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Nature
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-11-2016, 08:27 AM
 
Location: california
7,321 posts, read 6,926,415 times
Reputation: 9258

Advertisements

I have a wind mill and would like more.
I have never had a bird die due to them, EVER, 10 years running.
I have birds all over the house and flying over head through out the day . None even go near the mill ,but they do perch on all the trees and radio antenna every where .
I think that any complaints on mills are bogus .
There have been extensive bird die offs due to poisoning due to government agencies ,but not wind mills .
Personally I think that homes should all be built with solar, both thermal, photovoltaic, and wind generation, and battery banks.
You already drive a car that requires a battery ,and practically all of your electronics , the house should be on battery as well.
I started my system years ago and take it with me when ever I move. Probably the best investment of a lifetime I can pass down to my children, better than money.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-11-2016, 09:49 AM
 
1,201 posts, read 1,224,078 times
Reputation: 2244
Yea because burning coal is way better for the environment then wind farms.


Last time I checked wind farms dont cause acid rain, put heavy metals into the atmosphere like lead,mercury. Cause increase in CO2.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-11-2016, 10:19 AM
 
Location: The Woods
18,358 posts, read 26,495,840 times
Reputation: 11351
It's a false dichotomy to suggest the decision is these big wind turbines or coal. There are a myriad of options. Solar, smaller scale wind on buildings, biofuels, and there is a potential for greener, safer nuclear technology as well.

The mountains where these turbines are being put up where I live have to date escaped development and are ecologically intact. The soils, plants, fungi, wildlife are all there that have been there. There are no paved roads disturbing the areas. The wind projects change that. They blast the tops of the mountains to create level building sites, build roads as large as highways for access, changing the hydrology, destroying the soil, eliminating the presence of certain species, fragmenting the habitat. They are not green and never will be. The scenery is the least of the environmental impact.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-11-2016, 10:47 AM
 
Location: Free From The Oppressive State
30,253 posts, read 23,737,137 times
Reputation: 38634
Quote:
Originally Posted by ca_north View Post
I sure hope so. It could be a bright spot in the Trumpocalypse. As ignorant as his views on climate change are, I see some hope for the scenic integrity of nature in a Trump presidency. It's based on his fight against offshore wind turbines near his golf course in Aberdeen, Scotland. He lost that particular round but if he wasn't just against them in that case, he ought to continue such actions.

I don't approve of his stances on coal mining and fracking, but there are serious consequences to misguided "green" technologies that have morphed into extreme construction projects, more widely visible than mines or fracking sites. Wind machines are built in places where older energy schemes wouldn't tread, which invalidates clichés like "would you rather live near a coal (mine) or nuclear plant?" Wind turbine facilities damage the land with clearcut logging, road-building, cement and the addition of semi-permanent structures that completely alter the view. Ocean turbines are no real improvement since they're almost always visible from shore.

You can call windfarms "green" but they violate core environmental principles like Tread Lightly and Leave No Trace. It doesn't matter that other things have damaged the environment already. We're living on a finite rock that's running out of greener pastures to build and dump things in. Wind turbines are visible at over 30 miles in many cases, and already encroaching on designated scenic areas and parks. Mountain climbers these days can scarcely avoid seeing them, which ruins the ability to get away from it all unless you go to latitudes where nobody lives. This is new machinery that merely adds to old damage and is worse in many cases. Brainwashed Greens refuse to see what industrial wind projects are really about. Bernie Sanders was pushing the unworkable, ugly Jacobson renewables scheme and I'm glad he didn't get in.

There are smarter ways to deal with climate change than tarnishing rural life and seashores with intrusive machines that do little to replace fossil fuels. Subsidy money slated for wind power could be shifted to small-footprint technologies like solar roofs that don't divide communities and kill flying wildlife. Here's to hoping Trump doesn't flip-flop on the wind energy issue like so many other things. This is not a general endorsement of Trump!
Same. I am tired of paying $30 each month in my electric bill for a fricken windfarm that I never asked for. No, it doesn't save any money, it makes my electric bill $30 higher every month.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-11-2016, 11:03 AM
 
24,559 posts, read 18,259,472 times
Reputation: 40260
There's no such thing as global warming and fracking is 100% environmentally safe. Why do we need windmills?

I'm not thrilled with windmills in residential areas. They put out a lot of noise pollution. If they're profitable selling electricity into the grid at the same wholesale price a natural gas or nuke plant gets for selling electricity into the grid, I'm all for them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-11-2016, 01:12 PM
 
Location: Berwick, Penna.
16,215 posts, read 11,335,819 times
Reputation: 20828
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pretzelogik View Post
I hope so it is a waste of $$$$$$$$$$$ and killing all our birds.
(emphasis added)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Katie1 View Post
IF Birds are getting hurt or dying they need to put wire cages on them.... like the fans in your home... Covered for safety!
This is a typical example of oversimplification in order to appeal to the environmental fringe. Nature is, by its very nature, cruel, and unless a particular species with a positive view from the touchy-feely mindset is involved, and seriously threatened, it's just a factor in a bigger equation. If you really believe that "other species have rights" -- get thee to an ashram!

Quote:
Originally Posted by BLAZER PROPHET View Post
I feel it is important to do what we reasonably can to expand renewable sources of energy. Coal, and oil are finite. Wind and sun are infinite. And there are other forms such as nuclear and incineration of garbage...

That is not to say I am 100% against coal- only that it needs to be mined and burned responsibly, and I think we are pretty much there. But at some point in time this will cease. It behooves us to be best prepared.
The largest single dividend (and if that word automatically offends you, go back to the Lefty Playpen) which I can see in the environmental focus which has emerged over the last fifty years, is that it has awakened us all to the need to identify and protect the most vulnerable sectors of our environment, but that the answers are never simple; also, that entire sectors of our economy will either prosper or stagnate and die over environmental concerns, but as demonstrated earlier this week, oversimplified crusades like "global warming", as opposed to the more-rational discussion of "climate change" and the supposed "war on coal" also have political consequences.

The "oil shocks" of 1972-75, 1980-81 and 1999-2000 probably had at least as big an impact as any organized environmental movement -- precisely because they affected the entire entrepreneurial world every bit as much as the man and woman in the street. And speaking mostly as a logistics/transportation studies graduate, I can attest that very little in the energy production and transportation sectors is much like it was back in 1971; there are more options and, thanks mostly to the much-vilified, but under-appreciated role of deregulation, stronger competitive pressures.

Last edited by 2nd trick op; 11-11-2016 at 01:34 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-11-2016, 01:46 PM
 
Location: not normal, IL
776 posts, read 580,687 times
Reputation: 917
Quote:
Originally Posted by shortel View Post
Last time I checked wind farms dont cause acid rain, put heavy metals into the atmosphere like lead,mercury. Cause increase in CO2.
CO2 yes, most would agree you are very correct on this. However, before the Gov. shut down the coal industry, they were working together to improve their efficiency. They are much cleaner than a hundred years ago, which I think many people think of when they think of a coal power plant.
Quote:
Originally Posted by arleigh View Post
I have a wind mill and would like more. I have never had a bird die due to them, EVER, 10 years running. I think that any complaints on mills are bogus .
I don't think they are bogus, just railroaded.
http://wildlifecenter.org/sites/defa...n-on-Lead4.pdf
http://www.nwhc.usgs.gov/publication...birds_2009.pdf
Think about it, how are extremely intelligent birds flying into fan blades like a mosquito or butterfly would do?
Quote:
Originally Posted by hljc View Post
Wind turbines can only be used in areas were wind is usually strong, so if you dot the land with these you may be 10% of the electricity the people need. The solar also may only come up with 10% of your needs of electricity in solar farms.
Yes, but we it also takes a lot of energy to send electricity over a long distance. Those small towns in the mountains, cornfields, and desert, will be generating the energy 'on the spot'. Not only reducing the energy needed to help transfer it, but also the resources it takes to maintain the lines and poles.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NYCresident2014 View Post
Are you really insinuating that it takes more energy to install a windmill once than it does to blast, dig, and haul coal every day? Are you SERIOUSLY advocating for coal over wind?!?!
Quote:
Originally Posted by arleigh View Post
Probably the best investment of a lifetime
The fact of the matter is, 'coal energy' is cheaper than 'wind energy'. This is easily seen through out the world, or china would be nothing but wind farms right now. If we look at the last ten years of Nuclear production and profits, we see that things can change. When oil was high, nuclear made a lot of money. Now that oil is low, many Nuclear plants are closing, because they are out marketed. Coal is low as there is little demand right now, but once it goes up, and oil of course, over a certain price, wind will be cheaper. Like arleigh said, it is an investment. Just like diversifying your portfolio, it would be best to diversify the US power plants.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-11-2016, 01:58 PM
 
Location: not normal, IL
776 posts, read 580,687 times
Reputation: 917
Quote:
Originally Posted by Three Wolves In Snow View Post
Same. I am tired of paying $30 each month in my electric bill for a fricken windfarm that I never asked for. No, it doesn't save any money, it makes my electric bill $30 higher every month.
? To be logical,
1. The power company is going to get you any way they can, clean energy is just another line they can add another bill. We both know if it wasn't clean energy, they would add some other stupid reason.
2. It could save the power company money if their NG or Oil cost rise. Just like you, I don't think I will see a penny of that though.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-11-2016, 03:38 PM
 
10,225 posts, read 7,585,138 times
Reputation: 23162
Quote:
Originally Posted by arleigh View Post
I have a wind mill and would like more.
I have never had a bird die due to them, EVER, 10 years running.
I have birds all over the house and flying over head through out the day . None even go near the mill ,but they do perch on all the trees and radio antenna every where .
I think that any complaints on mills are bogus .
There have been extensive bird die offs due to poisoning due to government agencies ,but not wind mills .
Personally I think that homes should all be built with solar, both thermal, photovoltaic, and wind generation, and battery banks.
You already drive a car that requires a battery ,and practically all of your electronics , the house should be on battery as well.
I started my system years ago and take it with me when ever I move. Probably the best investment of a lifetime I can pass down to my children, better than money.
That's good to know about the birds. Although I can understand how it would happen that a bird would fly into it.

Awesome that you have a windmill. Wish I could say the same.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-11-2016, 03:44 PM
 
10,225 posts, read 7,585,138 times
Reputation: 23162
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nothere1 View Post
CO2 yes, most would agree you are very correct on this. However, before the Gov. shut down the coal industry, they were working together to improve their efficiency. They are much cleaner than a hundred years ago, which I think many people think of when they think of a coal power plant.

I don't think they are bogus, just railroaded.
http://wildlifecenter.org/sites/defa...n-on-Lead4.pdf
http://www.nwhc.usgs.gov/publication...birds_2009.pdf
Think about it, how are extremely intelligent birds flying into fan blades like a mosquito or butterfly would do?

Yes, but we it also takes a lot of energy to send electricity over a long distance. Those small towns in the mountains, cornfields, and desert, will be generating the energy 'on the spot'. Not only reducing the energy needed to help transfer it, but also the resources it takes to maintain the lines and poles.


The fact of the matter is, 'coal energy' is cheaper than 'wind energy'. This is easily seen through out the world, or china would be nothing but wind farms right now. If we look at the last ten years of Nuclear production and profits, we see that things can change. When oil was high, nuclear made a lot of money. Now that oil is low, many Nuclear plants are closing, because they are out marketed. Coal is low as there is little demand right now, but once it goes up, and oil of course, over a certain price, wind will be cheaper. Like arleigh said, it is an investment. Just like diversifying your portfolio, it would be best to diversify the US power plants.
Coal does an enormous amount of damage, and it devastates the earth to mine it (not to mention killing the miners, although they need the work).

The future, it seems to me, will and should be a variety of environmentally & wildlife friendly energy sources. Batteries for cars, electricity, oil, LNG, wind, solar, and anything else that's clean. The mass of people are in no position to do anything out of norm for themselves because of the cost and time and expertise. They use whatever is supplied to the masses, so it's important to roll out new housing using the cleanest possible energy sources.

Conservation is also important. Insulation, turning thermostats up/down, not being such a sissy requiring a perfect temperature all the time, drapes over windows (instead of those stupid blinds that are popular right now), etc.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Nature

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:00 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top