Comments by "" (@old-pete) on "Business Insider" channel.

  1. Coal power plants generate more than tentimes the waste per produced KWh and that does even include the powerplant itself...
    1
  2. Modern windturbines have a deicing function. And the amount of fuel burnt is negligible compared to the energy they produce.
    1
  3. That are US enviroment laws. In other countries recycling is mandatory.
    1
  4. That is not the problem of the turbine blades, but the countries that allow this.
    1
  5.  @ajhubbell3754  There are two ways. Using the fiberglass for cement or with newer ones, one can dissolve the resin and take the blades apart and sort the material. Apart from that, windturbines produce the multiple of the energy invested into them, similar to fossil fuel plants or even better.
    1
  6.  @ajhubbell3754  That is why they are called WINDturbines. Take a guess what GASturbines need to run.
    1
  7.  @ajhubbell3754  Tell that to Germany, who have to be careful with their gas use, since their main supplier is occupied elsewhere or the Texans who froze to death in 2021, when freezing gas regulators lead to blackouts, since some gas turbines got no fuel.
    1
  8. ​ @ajhubbell3754 That is still a lack of gas, which was not caused by turning off nuclear power plants. For countries that do not have fossil fuels, windturbines are way to energy independence. And no, the Texas disaster was not caused by windturbines. Gasturbines dropped over 11 GW of power, when the grid destabalized. And they dropped the power because they got no gas. And yes, gas regulators freeze, when they are not winterized, despite the same thing happening in Texas in 2011 before...
    1
  9.  @ajhubbell3754  Germany has gas and they had a good gas supply, until their main supplier was occupied elsewhere. And the US build cars and oil fired power plants, despite being dependent on oil from the middle east. Btw. Germany keeping nuclear power would not solved the problem. They still need gas. And when gas turbines do not get gas, they do not have gas. And yes, Texas has a lot of gas, but that did not help in the situation.
    1
  10. More like a problem with the lack of enviromental protection laws. Other countries do not have that problem.
    1
  11. Better than to cut down whole mountains and burn the carbon of thousands of forrests...
    1
  12. It is less than is needed to produce the same energy with fossil fuels.
    1
  13.  @davefroman4700  And? I think that is a good deal. Producing the emissions in 30 years that fossil fuels emit in half year. That is great.
    1
  14.  @Things_I_wish_I_knew  The flash freeze killed a lot of the gas supply, because the infrastructure had no cold protection. Only all a small part of the windturbines failed. Even coal and nuclear power was disrupted.
    1
  15.  @Things_I_wish_I_knew  Gas powered plants provided two and a half times as much power on average than windturbines in Texas in 2021. The days before the blackout, wind peaked at 10GW output, while gas provided 44 GW. The blackout was caused by 11 GW of gas powered plants going offline suddenly. Another 5 GW of gas powered electricity went offline after that.
    1
  16.  @Things_I_wish_I_knew  That was not the cause of the blackout. The gas regulators froze and stopped the gasflow to powerplants and private customers. And this happened 10 years after 75% of Texas was affected by rolling blackouts during a similar Storm in 2011. This was caused by 150 generators suffering from loss of supply, instrumentation failure and gas well head freezing. The fossil infrastructure in Texas is not frost protected and neither power companies or Government cared.
    1
  17.  @Things_I_wish_I_knew  Yes, they did. But they did not install many grid connectors, because they thought/still think? that is better for them. But connected grids are more stable and provide cheaper electricity. I guess that is what the power suppliers in Texas do not want, and the Governor protects their interest, instead of mandating an interconnection.
    1
  18.  @Things_I_wish_I_knew  No, they just want to evade federal oversight, which would happen if they were connected to the major natiinal grids.
    1
  19.  @mernshepherd6009  Not really. A 3 MW turbine needs around 28l oil per year for all lubrication. Some producers offer artifical lubricants that were manufactured CO2 free.
    1
  20.  @mernshepherd6009  No, that is pretty standard.
    1
  21.  @PhatRobs  One should be worried about eveyones carbon footprint. China is not alone in the world. The US is the second highest emittend of CO2 and plans to strenthen its industry. That kind of thinking leads to everyone else waiting for China. Everyone else means 75% of the world population are not doing enough.
    1
  22.  albinvega7008  That is much less than is needed for fossil fuels. And the more one decarbonizes the industry, the less fossil fuel is needed.
    1
  23.  @Things_I_wish_I_knew  The CO2 emissions of the US went down since 2005...
    1
  24.  @wrongfullyaccused7139  1. Then why can one see windturbines not moving. That contradicts your point. 2. The blades are not slowed down by brakes, but by pitching the blades and reduce power. The brakes are used for stopping the turbine blades. Using them to reduce power would overheat and destroy them quickly. 3. Maintenance makes up 15% of the yearly costs of a new turbine and around 25% of the yearly costs of older turbines. They make money just fine. There are enough communities that support their budget with the income from wind turbines. 4. But they are. 5. True. New technologies often need help from the goverment to get started, as did nuclear power. 6. The word you were looking for were "scientists"
    1
  25. ​ @dafunkmonster There are plants and animals that profit from sunprotection, especially when it gets warmer. Hops, the stuff we need for beer, grow better with shade. So I am all for it 👍
    1
  26.  @VanquishedAgain  Apart from these new reactors not running... And a lot of the reactor becomes waste after its runtime.
    1
  27.  @Ronkrein  Not really. The fossil energy demand becomes smaller with every turbine.
    1
  28.  @dafunkmonster  Not much. But it is an option and an example, as it also applies to bush beans, broccoli, cucumbers, garlic, cabbage, carrots, spinach, onions, .... and many more
    1
  29. ​ @mail-qh2qc But they do.
    1
  30. In some countries 20 years is a requirement to get a permit. Windturbines for 25 year lifespan are a business standard. Siemens and GE offer some models for up to 35 years, GE even offers 40 years. The oldes turbine runs for over 45 years...
    1
  31. Recycling does not cause much emissions. If one finds these emissions worrisome, one should immediately turn off all electricity.
    1
  32. ​ @Diponty That is not the argument. I am pointing out a double standard. That is like saving a couple thousand birds, only to kill billions with climate change.
    1
  33. In other countries they run 20+ years just fine. The new gerneration is designed for 30 years. One just needs legislation that prohibits dumping them into landfills, like other countries do.
    1
  34. Humanity uses windpower for hundreds of years. Countries got tamed with this.
    1
  35. Coal produces at least tentimes more waste for each produced kwh. How is that better than wind energy?
    1
  36. That is caused by lack of enviromental protection laws. That does not happen in other countries.
    1
  37. Your car makes micro plastic.
    1
  38. The glass becomes part of the cement. Some newer blade designs can be dissolved into their components.
    1
  39. Depends on the power plant. Wind turbines produce a lot less waste than coal power plants and can be easiliy removed compared to most other power plants.
    1
  40.  @Timeforchangenow  I am talking about long term effects. The enviromental effect of the blades depends on the country. Not all countries allow landfill disposal.
    1
  41. It is not much compared to the energy producted.
    1
  42. They do not need to.
    1
  43. That rarely happens. In most parts of the world they need to be certified for at least 20 years.
    1
  44. When one transforms it to a new product.
    1
  45. Plants need water. More heat does not help.
    1
  46.  @johnmarkgatti3324  Nobody is planning to reduce the CO2 in the atmosphere to 100ppm... And no, the planet is definetely not cooling the past 20 years...
    1
  47. No need to be alarmed. One just needs to be aware.
    1
  48. 1. Recycling costs less energy then making stuff new. 2. Depending on the processes, one can power the process with electricity.
    1
  49.  @Nomadcreations  Sure. But there is no issue with windturbines.
    1
  50. It is both. The fiberglass is used for the cement, the rest burns off and reduces the amount of waste.
    1