Discussion About Anti-Nuclear Energy/Arms Protest

Status
Not open for further replies.
14,000 Abandoned Wind Turbines Litter the United States

The towering symbols of a fading religion, over 14,000 wind turbines, abandoned, rusting, slowly decaying. When it is time to clean up after a failed idea, no green environmentalists are to be found. Wind was free, natural, harnessing Earth’s bounty for the benefit of all mankind, sounded like a good idea. Wind turbines, like solar panels, break down. They produce less energy before they break down than the energy it took to make them. The wind does not blow all the time, or even most of the time. When it is not blowing, they require full-time backup from conventional power plants.

Without government subsidy, they are unaffordable. With governments facing financial troubles, the subsidies are unaffordable. It was a nice dream, a very expensive dream, but it didn’t work.

California had the “big three” of wind farm locations — Altamont Pass, Tehachapi, and San Gorgonio, considered the world’s best wind sites. California’s wind farms, almost 80% of the world’s wind generation capacity ceased to generate even more quickly than Kamaoa Wind Farm in Hawaii. There are five other abandoned wind farms in Hawaii. When they are abandoned, getting the turbines removed is a major problem. They are highly unsightly, and they are huge, and that’s a lot of material to get rid of.

Unfortunately the same areas that are good for siting wind farms are a natural pass for migrating birds. Altamont’s turbines have been shut down four months out of every year for migrating birds after environmentalists filed suit. According to the Golden Gate Audubon Society 75-110 Golden Eagles, 380 Burrowing Owls, 300 Red-Tailed Hawks and 333 American Kestrels are killed by the turbines every year. An Alameda County Community Development Agency study points to 10,000 annual bird deaths from Altamont wind turbines. The Audubon Society makes up numbers like the EPA, but there’s a reason why they call them bird Cuisinarts.

Palm Springs has enacted an ordinance requiring their removal from San Gorgonio Pass, but unless something else changes abandoned turbines will remain a rotting eyesores, or the taxpayers who have already paid through the nose for overpriced energy and crony-capitalist tax scams will have to foot the bill for their removal.

President Obama’s offshore wind farms will be far more expensive than those sited in California’s ideal wind locations. Salt water is far more damaging than sun and rain, and offshore turbines don’t last as long. But nice tax scams for his crony-capitalist backers will work well as long as he can blame it all on saving the planet.
 

Attachments

  • Wind farm.png
    Wind farm.png
    136.8 KB · Views: 76
Hah. Environmentalists getting wind turbines shut down. Oh the irony. Money well spent there.
 
Kadija_Man said:
Fair enough but that piece reads like it was written by the Fossil Fuel Appreciation Society. Fossil Fuels are on their way out, no matter what that piece claims. Whether it's alternative or nuclear the future energy is not going to be Fossil.

There is at least 200 ZJ (Zetta or a thousand billion billions) worth of energy in fossil fuels in this planet's crust. Current total global energy use is 0.5 ZJ per annum of which ~85% is generated using fossil fuels. Energy use is growing at 2.4% per annum. So at this rate we won't be running out of fossil fuels for 300-400 years.
 
http://dailycaller.com/2016/03/17/obama-backed-solar-plant-could-be-shut-down-for-not-producing-enough-energy/

California regulators may force a massive solar thermal power plant in the Mojave Desert to shut down after years of under-producing electricity — not to mention the plant was blinding pilots flying over the area and incinerating birds.
 
Interesting how an estimated “about a thousand… to 28,000” birds" perhaps being incinerated changes to "Many birds were incinerated by the intense heat" then is transformed in your anti-Environmental mindset to the
the definitive "incinerated birds"...

I wonder how the evidence of one (1) bird being singed becomes "incinerated" which means "burnt to death"? I suspect you'll find that the birds become very aware of the danger very quickly of flying over the sight path of the sun's rays. How many birds do they think exist in an arid environment anyway? :eek:

I wonder how many birds have died because of Coal Fired Powered Power Stations?
 
Kadija_Man said:
Interesting how an estimated “about a thousand… to 28,000” birds" perhaps being incinerated changes to "Many birds were incinerated by the intense heat" then is transformed in your anti-Environmental mindset to the
the definitive "incinerated birds"...

I wonder how the evidence of one (1) bird being singed becomes "incinerated" which means "burnt to death"? I suspect you'll find that the birds become very aware of the danger very quickly of flying over the sight path of the sun's rays. How many birds do they think exist in an arid environment anyway? :eek:

I wonder how many birds have died because of Coal Fired Powered Power Stations?

We've been through this before. Let me refresh your memeory. "Streamers" (Google it) are very common around solar power plants.

http://www.csmonitor.com/Environment/Latest-News-Wires/2014/0818/Birds-igniting-California-solar-power-plant-scorches-birds-in-mid-air-video

http://www.natureworldnews.com/articles/12918/20150223/solar-farm-set-hundreds-birds-ablaze.htm

http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/188328-californias-new-solar-power-plant-is-actually-a-death-ray-thats-incinerating-birds-mid-flight

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2965070/Solar-farm-sets-130-birds-FIRE-Extreme-glow-power-plant-ignites-creatures-mid-air-tests.html
 
sferrin said:
Kadija_Man said:

If ever there were damning evidence of scientific ignorance in the US those results are it.
The polls own bottom line is relevant

"Gas prices have been relatively low over the past year, likely because of the sharp decline in oil and natural gas prices and the apparent glut of oil around the world. This seems to have lessened Americans' perceptions that energy sources such as nuclear power are needed. The increased opposition to nuclear power does not seem to result from a fear of it"
 
In other news: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/03/19/rolls-royce-could-power-britains-nuclear-future-with-mini-reacto/
 
http://www.delmarvanow.com/story/opinion/2016/03/20/nuclear-power-best-fight-climate-change/81991932/
 
bobbymike said:
sferrin said:
Kadija_Man said:

If ever there were damning evidence of scientific ignorance in the US those results are it.
The polls own bottom line is relevant

"Gas prices have been relatively low over the past year, likely because of the sharp decline in oil and natural gas prices and the apparent glut of oil around the world. This seems to have lessened Americans' perceptions that energy sources such as nuclear power are needed. The increased opposition to nuclear power does not seem to result from a fear of it"

That's encouraging to hear actually.
 
sferrin said:
Kadija_Man said:
Interesting how an estimated “about a thousand… to 28,000” birds" perhaps being incinerated changes to "Many birds were incinerated by the intense heat" then is transformed in your anti-Environmental mindset to the
the definitive "incinerated birds"...

I wonder how the evidence of one (1) bird being singed becomes "incinerated" which means "burnt to death"? I suspect you'll find that the birds become very aware of the danger very quickly of flying over the sight path of the sun's rays. How many birds do they think exist in an arid environment anyway? :eek:

I wonder how many birds have died because of Coal Fired Powered Power Stations?

We've been through this before. Let me refresh your memeory. "Streamers" (Google it) are very common around solar power plants.

http://www.csmonitor.com/Environment/Latest-News-Wires/2014/0818/Birds-igniting-California-solar-power-plant-scorches-birds-in-mid-air-video

http://www.natureworldnews.com/articles/12918/20150223/solar-farm-set-hundreds-birds-ablaze.htm

http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/188328-californias-new-solar-power-plant-is-actually-a-death-ray-thats-incinerating-birds-mid-flight

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2965070/Solar-farm-sets-130-birds-FIRE-Extreme-glow-power-plant-ignites-creatures-mid-air-tests.html

Must be non-stop in your Solar Power Plants. Very pretty, I'm sure, all those birds just flashing into fireworks. ::) ::)

In reality, the first generation would learn, quickly. The next generation would be taught, quickly. Arid environments don't abound with massive numbers of bird life either. There isn't the water nor the prey to support them. Thousands? 28,000? Yeah, sure. Green lunacy and you choose to believe it rather than accept a clean alternative to nuclear power. :eek:
 
Kadija_Man said:
sferrin said:
Kadija_Man said:
Interesting how an estimated “about a thousand… to 28,000” birds" perhaps being incinerated changes to "Many birds were incinerated by the intense heat" then is transformed in your anti-Environmental mindset to the
the definitive "incinerated birds"...

I wonder how the evidence of one (1) bird being singed becomes "incinerated" which means "burnt to death"? I suspect you'll find that the birds become very aware of the danger very quickly of flying over the sight path of the sun's rays. How many birds do they think exist in an arid environment anyway? :eek:

I wonder how many birds have died because of Coal Fired Powered Power Stations?

We've been through this before. Let me refresh your memeory. "Streamers" (Google it) are very common around solar power plants.

http://www.csmonitor.com/Environment/Latest-News-Wires/2014/0818/Birds-igniting-California-solar-power-plant-scorches-birds-in-mid-air-video

http://www.natureworldnews.com/articles/12918/20150223/solar-farm-set-hundreds-birds-ablaze.htm

http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/188328-californias-new-solar-power-plant-is-actually-a-death-ray-thats-incinerating-birds-mid-flight

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2965070/Solar-farm-sets-130-birds-FIRE-Extreme-glow-power-plant-ignites-creatures-mid-air-tests.html

Must be non-stop in your Solar Power Plants. Very pretty, I'm sure, all those birds just flashing into fireworks. ::) ::)

In reality, the first generation would learn, quickly. The next generation would be taught, quickly. Arid environments don't abound with massive numbers of bird life either. There isn't the water nor the prey to support them. Thousands? 28,000? Yeah, sure. Green lunacy and you choose to believe it rather than accept a clean alternative to nuclear power. :eek:

You have absolutely unsubstantiated, "would, "should", "if", etc. (In other words, business as usual.) I have facts. Thanks for playin'.
 
"Estimates" are not "facts". Nice to have played with you...
 
This "clean energy" windmill killed the two men seen working on it. That's two more than died at Fukushima-Daiichi. Or Three-Mile Island. When properly managed, nuclear energy is safe and environmentally-friendly. It's the only hope for the future, especially in the form of breeder and fusion reactors. Intelligent and educated people understand this.
 

Attachments

  • Clean Energy 2.jpg
    Clean Energy 2.jpg
    139.9 KB · Views: 35
It may be the right answer for the US. Here in New Zealand due to our natural resources, we are already at 75% renewable energy, so it really isn't necessary.
 
PaulMM (Overscan) said:
It may be the right answer for the US. Here in New Zealand due to our natural resources, we are already at 75% renewable energy, so it really isn't necessary.

And when your population is three times higher and per capita energy usage three times higher? When petroleum is gone and all your cars and airplanes and ships and factories are electric? When petroleum is gone and all your fertilizers and plastics need to be processed from other feedstocks, requiring far more energy? Gonna run all that on sunshine and hobbit farts?
 
Apparently, you have a point: total energy consumption (including cars etc) overall is 70% oil and its derivatives. There's a lot of unharnessed geothermal energy and hydroelectric still however.
 
circle-5 said:
This "clean energy" windmill killed the two men seen working on it. That's two more than died at Fukushima-Daiichi. Or Three-Mile Island. When properly managed, nuclear energy is safe and environmentally-friendly. It's the only hope for the future, especially in the form of breeder and fusion reactors. Intelligent and educated people understand this.

Any death is unfortunate. However, your premise falls down because humans are fallible and as long as they are playing with nuclear energy, they are playing at God and people aren't responsible enough to do. What happens when nuclear energy is mismanaged? How do you keep nuclear waste stored safely and for tens of thousands of years? How do you make sure nuclear waste stays secure? How do you make sure nuclear fuel remains secure? How do you make sure that the technicians follow the procedure correctly? The potential for danger are enormous. You seem to think that the examples you've used are typical. Japanese nuclear power has a poor record with safety. UK nuclear power has a poor record with safety. Do you really believe the US nuclear industry is any better?
 
Kadija_Man said:
circle-5 said:
This "clean energy" windmill killed the two men seen working on it. That's two more than died at Fukushima-Daiichi. Or Three-Mile Island. When properly managed, nuclear energy is safe and environmentally-friendly. It's the only hope for the future, especially in the form of breeder and fusion reactors. Intelligent and educated people understand this.

Any death is unfortunate. However, your premise falls down because humans are fallible and as long as they are playing with nuclear energy, they are playing at God and people aren't responsible enough to do. What happens when nuclear energy is mismanaged? How do you keep nuclear waste stored safely and for tens of thousands of years? How do you make sure nuclear waste stays secure? How do you make sure nuclear fuel remains secure? How do you make sure that the technicians follow the procedure correctly? The potential for danger are enormous. You seem to think that the examples you've used are typical. Japanese nuclear power has a poor record with safety. UK nuclear power has a poor record with safety. Do you really believe the US nuclear industry is any better?

How about we deal with actual, documented, historical fact instead of a bunch of hand-wavy fear mongering?
 
sferrin said:
Kadija_Man said:
circle-5 said:
This "clean energy" windmill killed the two men seen working on it. That's two more than died at Fukushima-Daiichi. Or Three-Mile Island. When properly managed, nuclear energy is safe and environmentally-friendly. It's the only hope for the future, especially in the form of breeder and fusion reactors. Intelligent and educated people understand this.

Any death is unfortunate. However, your premise falls down because humans are fallible and as long as they are playing with nuclear energy, they are playing at God and people aren't responsible enough to do. What happens when nuclear energy is mismanaged? How do you keep nuclear waste stored safely and for tens of thousands of years? How do you make sure nuclear waste stays secure? How do you make sure nuclear fuel remains secure? How do you make sure that the technicians follow the procedure correctly? The potential for danger are enormous. You seem to think that the examples you've used are typical. Japanese nuclear power has a poor record with safety. UK nuclear power has a poor record with safety. Do you really believe the US nuclear industry is any better?

How about we deal with actual, documented, historical fact instead of a bunch of hand-wavy fear mongering?

When you present some, not guestimates, get back to us.

Are you disputing that nuclear waste has a half-life of tens of thousands of years? Are you disputing that the nuclear industry has had numerous accidents over the decades? Are you disputing that anti-nuclear advocates have been murdered by the nuclear industry?
 
Kadija_Man said:
Are you disputing that nuclear waste has a half-life of tens of thousands of years? Are you disputing that the nuclear industry has had numerous accidents over the decades? Are you disputing that anti-nuclear advocates have been murdered by the nuclear industry?

I would LOVE to see your proof of that. Put up or shut up.
 
sferrin said:
Kadija_Man said:
Are you disputing that nuclear waste has a half-life of tens of thousands of years? Are you disputing that the nuclear industry has had numerous accidents over the decades? Are you disputing that anti-nuclear advocates have been murdered by the nuclear industry?

I would LOVE to see your proof of that. Put up or shut up.

Karen Silkwood ring any bells? ::)
 
Kadija_Man said:
sferrin said:
Kadija_Man said:
Are you disputing that nuclear waste has a half-life of tens of thousands of years? Are you disputing that the nuclear industry has had numerous accidents over the decades? Are you disputing that anti-nuclear advocates have been murdered by the nuclear industry?

I would LOVE to see your proof of that. Put up or shut up.

Karen Silkwood ring any bells? ::)

Once again you remind us all that your knowledge base is what you saw at the movies. Karen Silkwood died in a road accident. If you have any proof that she was killed by the "nuclear power industry" then please advise the law enforcement authorities. Conspiracy theory isn't proof. Even if she meet foul play the suspects could include a range of other 'bad guys'. Maybe even the criminals she had sold stollen plutonoum to? But someone driving long distances at night while high on quaaludes is very likely to die without the need for outside assistance.
 
Kadija_Man said:
sferrin said:
Kadija_Man said:
Are you disputing that nuclear waste has a half-life of tens of thousands of years? Are you disputing that the nuclear industry has had numerous accidents over the decades? Are you disputing that anti-nuclear advocates have been murdered by the nuclear industry?

I would LOVE to see your proof of that. Put up or shut up.

Karen Silkwood ring any bells? ::)

I'm not seeing any proof anywhere. Why am I not surprised? Do you know what the word "proof" means? Also you used the word "advocates" plural. Come back when you have evidence of multiple homicides to present. Short of that you're just demonstrating your usual behavior (it isn't flattering).
 
sferrin said:
Kadija_Man said:
sferrin said:
Kadija_Man said:
Are you disputing that nuclear waste has a half-life of tens of thousands of years? Are you disputing that the nuclear industry has had numerous accidents over the decades? Are you disputing that anti-nuclear advocates have been murdered by the nuclear industry?

I would LOVE to see your proof of that. Put up or shut up.

Karen Silkwood ring any bells? ::)

I'm not seeing any proof anywhere. Why am I not surprised? Do you know what the word "proof" means? Also you used the word "advocates" plural. Come back when you have evidence of multiple homicides to present. Short of that you're just demonstrating your usual behavior (it isn't flattering).

Karen Silkwood. Her death resulted in the longest running court case in Oklahoma history at the time. Her employer settled without admission of liability when it was obvious they were losing the court case. Karen Silkwood was just one of many such cases which shows the corruption in the nuclear industry.
 
Kadija_Man said:
Her employer settled without admission of liability when it was obvious they were losing the court case.

All that means is the company decided the bad publicity was costing them more than the case was worth, so they paid to make it go away. Cheaper that way. This kind of thing happens every day. In fact your "source" said the US government offed her:

"The book says that the United States government covered up many details about Silkwood's death, and allegedly carried out her assassination."

LOL.
 
You asked for "facts" and now you apply "hand-wavium" to them. How convenient. ::)
 
Kadija_Man said:
You asked for "facts" and now you apply "hand-wavium" to them. How convenient. ::)

You haven't provided any facts that demonstrate the nuclear industry murdered anybody. Show us the conviction. There isn't any.
 
Gentlemen... may I suggest?

Profile -> Modify Profile -> Buddies/Ignore List -> Edit Ignore List

You're being trolled. Ignore the troll. Use the "ignore feature" and live a happier life with a whole lot less dumbth taking up your mental bandwidth.
 
Kadija_Man said:
sferrin said:
Kadija_Man said:
sferrin said:
Kadija_Man said:
Are you disputing that nuclear waste has a half-life of tens of thousands of years? Are you disputing that the nuclear industry has had numerous accidents over the decades? Are you disputing that anti-nuclear advocates have been murdered by the nuclear industry?

I would LOVE to see your proof of that. Put up or shut up.

Karen Silkwood ring any bells? ::)

I'm not seeing any proof anywhere. Why am I not surprised? Do you know what the word "proof" means? Also you used the word "advocates" plural. Come back when you have evidence of multiple homicides to present. Short of that you're just demonstrating your usual behavior (it isn't flattering).

Karen Silkwood. Her death resulted in the longest running court case in Oklahoma history at the time. Her employer settled without admission of liability when it was obvious they were losing the court case. Karen Silkwood was just one of many such cases which shows the corruption in the nuclear industry.

How do you settle out of court for murder?
 
Abraham Gubler said:
How do you settle out of court for murder?
The court case against Karen Silkwood's employer concerned plutonium contamination.
From Wiki, which tallies with my memory of the case:
She [Karen Silkwood] worked at the Kerr-McGee Cimarron Fuel Fabrication Site plant near Crescent, Oklahoma, United States. Silkwood's job was making plutonium pellets for nuclear reactor fuel rods. This plant experienced theft of plutonium by workers during this era. She joined the union and became an activist on behalf of issues of health and safety at the plant as a member of the union's negotiating team, the first woman to have that position at Kerr-McGee. In the summer of 1974, she testified to the Atomic Energy Commission about her concerns.

For three days in November, she was found to have plutonium contamination on her person and in her home. That month, while driving to meet with David Burnham, a New York Times journalist, and Steve Wodka, an official of her union's national office, she died in a car crash under unclear circumstances.

Her family sued Kerr-McGee on behalf of her estate. In what was the longest trial up until then in Oklahoma history, the jury found Kerr-McGee liable for the plutonium contamination of Silkwood, and awarded substantial damages. These were reduced on appeal, but the case reached the United States Supreme Court in 1979, which upheld the damages verdict. Before another trial took place, Kerr-McGee settled with the estate out of court for US $1.38 million, while not admitting liability.
No murder case was brought before a court, see 'unclear circumstances'.
 
Arjen said:
Abraham Gubler said:
How do you settle out of court for murder?
The court case against Karen Silkwood's employer concerned plutonium contamination.
From Wiki, which tallies with my memory of the case:

Thanks but i kind of knew all that. The OP claimed murder and then used a civil case to back it up. Of course there is no connecrion between the two. The "unclear circumstances" of her death require willfull imagination on behalf of anyone who makes that conclusion. To misquote the Bard "Of these bones is bullshit made". But the power of film, conspiracy thinking and ignorance based social causes makes for all sort BS being readily accepted as plausible and even factual.
 
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/apr/03/adanis-carmichael-coalmine-leases-approved-by-queensland?CMP=soc_567
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom