Mad World of Wind Turbines

A small compilation of the adverse affects of the Wnd Turbines.
With the song titled "Mad World" sung by Gary Jules.

Category:

Education

Tags:

• Wind
• Turbines
• Power
• Mad
• World
• Turbine
• Issues

[NorthernWes]

@NorthernWes should read "this much fun"

[NorthernWes]

@NorthernWes Gotta go.... Haven't had this much on Youtube for.... ever.... Thanks.

[NorthernWes]

@NorthernWes And don't forget that almost all 'old' spent fuel is recyclable and reusable in a 3G reactor. But we will need deep storage facilities - about 8 of them worldwide to handle the next couple of hundred years until we invent something better.

[NorthernWes]

@Tamizushi I did a little bit of Northern work last spring. Trust me. There was almost no uranium prospecting going on. My understanding of the current market (Japan, Germany) is that several developments have been suspended and that there continues to be almost no new exploration going on. Message me the links that you've found and I'll forward mine to you but I know for a fact that there is little to no Ur exploration going on in Canada. P.S. Thorium. Buy Thorium futures.... you'll be rich.

[NorthernWes]

@Tamizushi It actually is true. We don't NEED Wind. Some people (urban dwellers, Liberals, Wind Industry companies, foreign suppliers, and a segment of the environmental/sustainability community) WANT Wind. But if Ontario doesn't build another IWT - nothing bad happens to us. Nothing. The lights stay on, our emissions continue to improve, our grid becomes easier to manage, we get to invest to "made in Ontario" tech.... etc. etc. etc. But nothing bad happens.

[NorthernWes]

@NorthernWes The second reason it is fallacious is something called "cumulative effect". If there were very few of us humans left, and someone wanted to build a new coal plant right beside a few of us - that would be stupid. Why introduce yet another hazard? But we are willing to build IWTs right beside or in the migratory paths of endangered species.... Wind Turbines vs Oil Tailing Ponds - both hazards are equally dangerous to birds. Especially endangered species.

[NorthernWes]

@Tamizushi Correct. That's why using this argument to counter observable wildlife impacts is also fallacious. It is impractical to tear down skyscrapers, and cars, and kill domestic cats. It is practical to simply not build IWTs where there are significant bird habitats. But the Ontario Wind Industry seems to have a "build everywhere" principle.

[NorthernWes]

@Tamizushi I actually have the list of North American coal mine disasters - I'm very familiar with it. The Coal industries OHS record is not good - ranks up there with commercial diving and fishing. BTW, of the Green Technologies, the Wind Industry's OHS record is, appears to be, the worst by far. I say "appears" to be because they don't formally publish their safety statistics... funny for a worldwide industry. I have to rely on Caithness for Wind accident stats.

[NorthernWes]

@Tamizushi Thanks for agreeing with me. The Coal argument is not one of the benefits accrued by Ontario if Ontario builds 7000 IWTs as intended. That's my point. And if we build them in Ontario, that won't, in any way, affect Ohio's use of Coal-fired electricity generation.

[NorthernWes]

@Tamizushi Grid combines wind with hydro not with coal? That's not how the Ontario grid works. Hydro is NOT paired with Wind. Gas/Nuclear/Coal/and Hydro are ALL impacted by Wind's intermittent supply characteristic. Only a small percentage of Nuclear can be "steamed off" during a surplus situation. Gas can be spun down (the Mississauga plant was intended to to help with intermittent supply - but it got "moved" in order to save a Liberal riding during the election). Ditto for coal and hydro.