more mindless waste of money, time and effort. generate nothing and piss away a fortune to generate a fraction of the energy produced by any other method you can name....it is a comical diversion put on for the new religion...greenies and the holy book of enviromentalism....but its meaningless.waste of land , money, time, effort...all for a 1930's technology on steriods. NO IMPROVEMENT but size.
I hope they put up 3000 of them off Martha's Vineyard. green DOPES.
Opgenomen langs het Eemmeer en ja...ik schrok, want ik brandde mijn handen aan een sigaret die ik voor iemand vast hield...mag wel ernstig op mijn taalgebruik gaan letten ;-)
It's not a panacea, nor _the_ solution, but in suitable areas, based on wind conditons, it can be very cost-effective now, increasingly as oil prices soar off.
Not to mention that it is sustainable, with minimal environmental degradation.
Check out the story of Hull MA, USA. They have two turbines, and want four more.
@GanderSteve Of course wind will NEVER been the primary source of energy, dummy. Not until we burn all our coal and oil anyway...
Go troll elsewhere!
Clearly your superior grasp of energy production and engineering will bring us forward into the 21st century with a revolutionary new fuel source... or not. Yup that's right; you're a shortsighted idiot. You criticise but don't offer up any new ideas to beat the fossil fuel era.
@richardyingren - If you're going to state "professional opinon" quote your sources. And oh; I forget, but the science that went into engineering wind turbines was in fact not science at all, it was "green whimsy"... *slaps face*... how could I have been so stupid to think otherwise. And incidentally what would you have the EU money source? More mines? It makes economic sense to use the money generated from fossil fuel sale to fund more renewable sources.
Elecricity generation and distribution professional engineers with years of 'hands on' experience tell us that wind as as source of electricity generation is a fallacy. Here in the UK .... EU money fuels the greed for large scale wind turbines and has totally distorted any sane scientific discussion. Fact based on knowledge not 'green' whimsy.
Right. Its the most stupid way to transform energy. Its unreliable, distrubing the landscape, weather dependend and not a primary energy supply. The reason why there are so many is that this is the only technology which is understood by dumb politicians and decision makers (the technology is 1:1 from the medieval). Lots of money wasted for crappy ideas.
Would you prefer to see a nuclear or coal plant in the landscape?
And in terms of money, when you take the cost of operating and dismantling a nuclear power plant, or the carbon credits for a coal plant, the cost per Khz is actually far lower using wind rather than another source. Get smart and read up pal... and I would start from medieval times moving forward - seems to have some catching up to do einstein!
you're right, we should be looking into alternatives to our power needs -- wind turbines are expensive and nearly generate enough for a few house holds -- arizona may have a nice solar generator ready soon -- but, by then it may be too late and our skies will be masked with thick smog that blacken the skies and block our only true free source of electricity
lightning? damn at least it didnt decapitate itself like they usually do :P
fig8man 1 year ago
more mindless waste of money, time and effort. generate nothing and piss away a fortune to generate a fraction of the energy produced by any other method you can name....it is a comical diversion put on for the new religion...greenies and the holy book of enviromentalism....but its meaningless.waste of land , money, time, effort...all for a 1930's technology on steriods. NO IMPROVEMENT but size.
I hope they put up 3000 of them off Martha's Vineyard. green DOPES.
s6u6r6f6 1 year ago
Opgenomen langs het Eemmeer en ja...ik schrok, want ik brandde mijn handen aan een sigaret die ik voor iemand vast hield...mag wel ernstig op mijn taalgebruik gaan letten ;-)
MargueriteEfde 1 year ago
should it be bent like that??
jonnypaget 1 year ago
haha auw! ik brand me klauwen
SinneDnl84 1 year ago
@SinneDnl84 Goed geluisterd haha, ik zal moeten opletten wat ik zeg ;-)
MargueriteEfde 1 year ago
Hey,
Dat zijn Nederlanders. Haha. Grappig.
waar is dit opgenomen?
davyhattem 1 year ago
Which then would mean "yes".
It's not a panacea, nor _the_ solution, but in suitable areas, based on wind conditons, it can be very cost-effective now, increasingly as oil prices soar off.
Not to mention that it is sustainable, with minimal environmental degradation.
Check out the story of Hull MA, USA. They have two turbines, and want four more.
woodscritter 2 years ago
@GanderSteve Of course wind will NEVER been the primary source of energy, dummy. Not until we burn all our coal and oil anyway...
Go troll elsewhere!
Clearly your superior grasp of energy production and engineering will bring us forward into the 21st century with a revolutionary new fuel source... or not. Yup that's right; you're a shortsighted idiot. You criticise but don't offer up any new ideas to beat the fossil fuel era.
22hosting 2 years ago
@richardyingren - If you're going to state "professional opinon" quote your sources. And oh; I forget, but the science that went into engineering wind turbines was in fact not science at all, it was "green whimsy"... *slaps face*... how could I have been so stupid to think otherwise. And incidentally what would you have the EU money source? More mines? It makes economic sense to use the money generated from fossil fuel sale to fund more renewable sources.
22hosting 2 years ago
i had that on full blast on earphones put them in my ears and then i almost became deaf!
kimmysquirt09 2 years ago
stop talking before knowing the facts. a windmill will generate between 80 and 120 times the energy it consumed in the production of it.
fredefalk 2 years ago
Elecricity generation and distribution professional engineers with years of 'hands on' experience tell us that wind as as source of electricity generation is a fallacy. Here in the UK .... EU money fuels the greed for large scale wind turbines and has totally distorted any sane scientific discussion. Fact based on knowledge not 'green' whimsy.
richardyingren 2 years ago
Right. Its the most stupid way to transform energy. Its unreliable, distrubing the landscape, weather dependend and not a primary energy supply. The reason why there are so many is that this is the only technology which is understood by dumb politicians and decision makers (the technology is 1:1 from the medieval). Lots of money wasted for crappy ideas.
GanderSteve 2 years ago
Would you prefer to see a nuclear or coal plant in the landscape?
And in terms of money, when you take the cost of operating and dismantling a nuclear power plant, or the carbon credits for a coal plant, the cost per Khz is actually far lower using wind rather than another source. Get smart and read up pal... and I would start from medieval times moving forward - seems to have some catching up to do einstein!
tidewater 2 years ago
you're right, we should be looking into alternatives to our power needs -- wind turbines are expensive and nearly generate enough for a few house holds -- arizona may have a nice solar generator ready soon -- but, by then it may be too late and our skies will be masked with thick smog that blacken the skies and block our only true free source of electricity
djk4tt 2 years ago