Comments by "Titanium Rain" (@ChucksSEADnDEAD) on "The TRUTH About Wind Turbines" video.

  1.  @insAneTunA  No offense, but that's not recycling. That's just reusing. I've seen their presentation and it seems they crush the composite into a powder which then gets mixed into the new product. That's an exercise in sweeping the problem under the rug. And the use of shredded composite as a filler was talked about in the video so he didn't do poor research. He just didn't name the companies proposing it.
    3
  2.  @insAneTunA  That's not recycling because the material isn't brought back to its original form for the original use, it's being physically shredded as used as filler inside another material. Recycling would mean restoring the fiber and resin to their original components so that a new fiberglass composite part could be made. Shredding and mixing is just reusing it as filler without recycling.
    2
  3. "what's the harm" oh so when I was a kid I was lectured about landfills and now they're cool
    1
  4.  @insAneTunA  Stop spamming, he mentioned the use of shredded composite as filler.
    1
  5. The blades on a turbine need to be light enough to be pushed by air. Airliners are powered by jet fuel rather than tailwind.
    1
  6. If you have to compare wind to coal to make it look favorable, you've already lost.
    1
  7.  @insAneTunA  Stop the spam. Separating the resin from the fibers would be a superior method as they could be reused in less stressed components in other uses, while shredding composite to use as filler is simply sweeping under the rug.
    1
  8. This is a fallacy. You're comparing wind to fossil fuel rather than comparing it to other renewable sources.
    1
  9. This is a complete fallacy. You want to downplay the issues with wind energy by bringing up fossil fuel, by pretending fossils are the only energy source we can use. What this says is that we should fix some issues before investing more in wind, or just accept that it's an avenue we may leave on the backburner as we invest in better renewables. But no, you people just say "ignore the issues because the alternative is fossil". This is a cult.
    1
  10.  @richardgould-blueraven  Look at it from the outside. If all the solutions have problems, cutting out the solutions with the most problems reduces the number of problems we have to deal with. Doubling down does not help us in any way. But somehow, people will defend wind simply because it's not fossil... But the point is that maybe we should rethink what we're doing and become more effective at replacing fossils - not insist on flawed solutions by saying that we should ignore the issues.
    1
  11. False dilemma fallacy.
    1
  12. That's a false dilemma fallacy. Instead of recognizing the issues and shifting priorities, you defend wind under the excuse that it's better than fossil fuels, even though there's more than fossil.
    1
  13. Because every structure is vulnerable to cyclical loading. There's boneyards with aircraft that won't break down anytime soon, but if you tried to fly them they'd break apart in mid air.
    1