Comments by "Solo Renegade" (@SoloRenegade) on "Sky News Australia"
channel.
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@old-pete you are missing my entire point. It went right over your head.
Let's say to power an entire nation, we needed 1000 gas-fired power plants. Now you go and replace those with 1,000,000 wind turbines. But now, over the course of every 20yrs, you have to tear down and rebuild every single one of those turbines. You have to rebuild the grid 100%, every 20yrs. This is NOT feasible nor sustainable.
Wind power is such a minor fraction of total global energy production right now, yet already contributes nearly 10% of all global plastics waste annually. If we converted everyone to 100% wind power magically, then our annual global plastic waste would increase something like ten fold over what it already is today. And every 20yrs we'd have to rebuild from scratch. Look at the wind turbine graveyards all over the western countries, the incinerators that burn old turbines, the ones that fail prematurely, the number of birds already being decimated by turbines that are still only a fraction of energy production. How many birds would die annually if we multiplied the number of turbines by 20? Wind turbines also disrupt local weather patterns and rainfall, creating droughts downwind , and causing flooding in places that never used to get so much rain. We can already see these effects, but they'd get so much worse with 20x as many wind farms everywhere.
Traditional power plants are cheaper, longer lasting, and more sustainable. We don't have to rebuild the entire grid every couple decades either.
1
-
@old-pete "Well maintained they can run longer than 20 years."
And many will still fail, get destroyed by factors beyond maintenance's control....
"Wind provides nearly as much electricity as nuclear power worldwide."
Only becasue Nuclear plants are being torn down by idiots like you. And govs basically ban them from being built. Few new ones have been built in the time I've been alive.
"You do not replace the grid, you replace the power plants."
Yes, that's what I've been saying. Congratulations, you can read.
"Windturbines are industrial sized mass production and are easy to replace."
No, they are not. Not when you have enough of them to power the US. the manpower required to replace/maintain all of them would be staggering. And we'd need all new grid infrastructure to get power where wind turbines don't work (such as where I live)
"I suggest you check your plastic waste numbers, you are off by at least a factor 100."
if you could refute it, you would.
"Fossil fuel powerplants kill 35times more birds for each produced kWh."
how do you figure that? What is your evidence?
"Coal power plants produce tentimes more waste than windturbines for each produced kWh just by counting the coal ash, which is indeed toxic and radioactive."
here I was talking about nuclear and gas power. nice try at a red herring loser.
"The floodings get worse because of climate change, not windturbines."
nope, try again. CO2 doesn't control temps. and CO2 doesn't change rainfall patterns. Wind turbines change rainfall by sucking energy out of the atmosphere, causing wind patterns to change, and rain to drop upwind of where it normally would have in places that never used to get that much rainfall. CO2 can't do that. One positive side effect, wind turbines have disrupted tornado formation. Your refusal to face facts doesn't make me wrong.
"Turbine graveyards are the responsibility of the countries that allow them. Other countries do not. The blades can all be recycled."
nice cop out. Except, you can't recycle fiberglass composites. They are either stored, buried, or chopped up and burned in incinerators to make electrcity. If you know of a recycling method that is scalable and sustainable, name it.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1