Wind power now considered environmentally unfriendly

[Don Corleone]

Think of all the poor birds. And think of the damage that 'might' occur to the bay. Nope, sorry, wind farms along the coast are a bad idea too, according to environmentalists.

So I'm interested. Thus far we've removed from the list of possible energy sources:

Petroleum
Coal
Natural Gas
Wood
Nuclear Fission
Wind

And I've heard a lot of environmentalists bemoan solar, because of the cadmium and other toxic metals that are left from a spent solar cell (a point I actually happen to agree with them for once).

So I'm curious. Is it just me, or are the environmentalists trying to say "We should return to the days before fire", without actually coming out and saying it.

Are there any environmentally sources of energy, or should we all just do the planet a favor and commit mass suicide as a species?

[Lemur]

It saddens me that loonbat extremists give environmentalism a bad name. Opposing wind farms is just madness. And yeah, some of the more out-there greens seem to want to return to hunter/gatherer lifestyles, but without the hunting part. It's maddening.

[Xiahou]

It saddens me that loonbat extremists give environmentalism a bad name. Opposing wind farms is just madness. And yeah, some of the more out-there greens seem to want to return to hunter/gatherer lifestyles, but without the hunting part. It's maddening.

I've come to the conclusion that a fair portion of the enviros are more about controlling what we do than finding actual, workable solutions for environmental problems.

[Husar]

And yeah, some of the more out-there greens seem to want to return to hunter/gatherer lifestyles, but without the hunting part. It's maddening.

Reminds me of kindergarten where some girls used to say that plants live: "Do you really want to gather those berries and hurt the poor bush?"

Concerning windmills: Too bad we plastered half of Germany with them and have plans to build even more.

[Louis VI the Fat]

Reminds me of kindergarten where some girls used to say that plants live: "Do you really want to gather those berries and hurt the poor bush?"

Fruit WANTS to be eaten. That's why it tastes so good and has such vivid colours. When you eat fruit you are really having sex with a plant. It procreates through you.

Vegans drive plants to extinction.

Concerning windmills: Too bad we plastered half of Germany with them and have plans to build even more.

Build them at the border, silly. Like we do with nuclear power plants. That way you have all the benefits and all the drawbacks are shared.

Sheesh, the rest of the world are such girlie wimps.

[Don Corleone]

Actually, for all the talk about socialist, leftie-weenies... I envy France their ability tomaintain an intelligent energy policy that includes nuclear among other sources. Would that we weren't so driven by sound-bytes and buzzwords like "China Syndrome".

[Husar]

Fruit WANTS to be eaten. That's why it tastes so good and has such vivid colours. When you eat fruit you are really having sex with a plant. It procreates through you.

Vegans drive plants to extinction.

I hope you intended to contradict yourself there.

Build them at the border, silly. Like we do with nuclear power plants. That way you have all the benefits and all the drawbacks are shared.

Sheesh, the rest of the world are such girlie wimps.

I've always been wondering what we did to deserve such an energy policy but I guess our green party just hates our country a lot.
Apart from that, if we build them too close to the border your power plants will act as windshields and the damage done if one falls over the border is probably less than if one of those powerplants suffers from severe flatulence.

[Somebody Else]

French (powerplants), flatulent? Never...

Incidentally, Nuclear for the win! That, and giant hamster wheels. Does anyone know if the boys at CERN and JET are getting anywhere yet?

[rvg]

Are there any environmentally sources of energy, or should we all just do the planet a favor and commit mass suicide as a species?

You can't appease the radicals. We should stop trying to cast pearls before the swine and just start doing what makes sense from a completely pragmatic, technocratic, non-politicized perspective: that means using Nuclear power, Wind power and Solar power to the max.

[drone]

The bird thing is overstated, the newer turbines don't slice-and-dice like the earlier ones did. Altamont Pass had this problem, but those were smaller turbines with higher blade speeds than modern ones.

You don't have geothermal on your list, but I'm sure the greenies would find something to complain about. Ruining the CHUD's natural environment or something.

[Tribesman]

Wind farms can cause extensive environmental damage , but the objections by this group concerning birds are pretty much bollox , so the fact remains that an extensive environmental impact report is a neccesity (but you would have thought that such a report would be par for the course anyway) .
So is this obejection about the scope of the report and survey or just the proposed project itself ?

[Don Corleone]

Wind farms can cause extensive environmental damage , but the objections by this group concerning birds are pretty much bollox , so the fact remains that an extensive environmental impact report is a neccesity (but you would have thought that such a report would be par for the course anyway) .
So is this obejection about the scope of the report and survey or just the proposed project itself ?

From what I understand the group is suing to be included and have supervisory control of the project. It was implied in the article that the group wanted to actually use that role to block the project, or at least regulate it heavily.

[Sasaki Kojiro]

From what I understand the group is suing to be included and have supervisory control of the project.

Siggied!

[Don Corleone]

Siggied!

I'm not certain why that particular statement strikes you as signature-worthy, but okay...

[Tribesman]

Supervisory in which manner Don and at what level ?
I can think of two recent local wind farm projects where full and limited supervisory oversight was exluded with very bad results (in one case a very expensive and yet to be more expensive bad result) , both due to a lack of impact reports or failure to follow guidlines set out in the impact report .
Though there is another local one where the impact report was 90% wrong and the problems they envisioned actually turned to be benefits .

[Don Corleone]

Well, to be perfectly honest, the article doesn't make the desired supervisory level particularly clear, so I can't really say. Should ELF and every other fringe gorup have veto power over every public works project? On the other extreme, do we want to allow these government/corporate collaborations to go forward without enivormental impact studies? As with most things, the wise course remains somewhere in between.

I just hadn't heard anything about negative environmental impacts of wind farms. The only specific charge the article levels is cutting up birds which frankly, rings a little hollow with me.

[Soulforged]

Are there any environmentally sources of energy, or should we all just do the planet a favor and commit mass suicide as a species?

Yeah!! Their own ego.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Don C., Lemur, et. al:

To what extent do you believe that modern "environmentalism" has been hijacked by an anti-capitalism/quasi-luddite fringer mentality?

Basic issues -- clean water and clean air are a common good, try to restore things back more or less the way they were when you're finished -- aren't really a bone of contention in the first place.

Are there really "watermelons" out there? Greenies who, underneath it all, are pursuing an old Red agenda?

I would think that it would be obvious that we, collectively, are not going to chuck out all of the advantages of modern living and return to anarcho-agrarian collectives any time soon....or ever. Yet that seems to be the only level of change that would make some of the most strident Greens happy.

[JR-]

Wind power is about to get more expensive and thus less economic because the insurers have cottoned on to the fact that turbines need loads maintaining and need replacing quicker than they were led to believe, so the premiums could as much as double.

[KukriKhan]

Those wacky Dutchmen are trying out a new wind-capture device


And others are also working on "urban turbine" http://www.pushpullbar.com/forums/showthread.php?t=6019

so rather than some huge, centralized facility, maybe several smaller, local sources can make do. Pro: fewer dead birds. Con: still a bit noisy.

[Tribesman]

Con: still a bit noisy.

Another con is vibraton .

[Banquo's Ghost]

Basic issues -- clean water and clean air are a common good, try to restore things back more or less the way they were when you're finished -- aren't really a bone of contention in the first place.

Not now, but they were. If you look at the early attempts to bring out clean air acts, industrialists were pretty seriously against any such idea. Much as they despised the idea of legislating against child labour and so forth.

Are there really "watermelons" out there? Greenies who, underneath it all, are pursuing an old Red agenda?

Yes, indeed. Certainly here in Europe, many Green parties started off as more acceptable versions of Communist parties, and though many have moderated, there is still that tradition of the Red-Green Alliance.

I would think that it would be obvious that we, collectively, are not going to chuck out all of the advantages of modern living and return to anarcho-agrarian collectives any time soon....or ever. Yet that seems to be the only level of change that would make some of the most strident Greens happy.

There are still vociferous extremes that think that. I have yet to find one who is willing to be the first to starve to death as an example in reducing the population to Stone Age levels.

The pressure groups such as Greenpeace are there to raise awareness and do so by direct action and challenging tactics. They do this because nice people don't get listened to. It's a time-honoured tactic when outgunned, but moderate voters get turned off by the rhetoric.

There are however, some extremely intelligent voices that get sidelined with/co-opted by the fanatics where in fact they are very well worth understanding. James Lovelock is the most compelling of these. You can tell he is worth listening merely by the fact both hard-line greenies and see-no-evil industrialists hate him with a passion.

Sadly, in our partisan western world, intelligent and complex situations are always reduced to monosyllabic headlines.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Not now, but they were. If you look at the early attempts to bring out clean air acts, industrialists were pretty seriously against any such idea. Much as they despised the idea of legislating against child labour and so forth.

I don't recall there being that much opposition, but it has been a while. I'll bone up a bit.

There are still vociferous extremes that think that. I have yet to find one who is willing to be the first to starve to death as an example in reducing the population to Stone Age levels.

The pressure groups such as Greenpeace are there to raise awareness and do so by direct action and challenging tactics. They do this because nice people don't get listened to. It's a time-honoured tactic when outgunned, but moderate voters get turned off by the rhetoric.

There are however, some extremely intelligent voices that get sidelined with/co-opted by the fanatics where in fact they are very well worth understanding. James Lovelock is the most compelling of these. You can tell he is worth listening merely by the fact both hard-line greenies and see-no-evil industrialists hate him with a passion.

This makes him worth a Google from me. Thanks.

[Big_John]

James Lovelock is the most compelling of these.

i used to have a signed copy of his original 'gaia' book. but it was apparently lost in one of my moves. :(