F
FMurtz
Guest
https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2018/10/large-scale-wind-power-has-its-down-side/
C
Computer Nerd Kev
Guest
FMurtz <haggisz@hotmail.com> wrote:
> https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2018/10/large-scale-wind-power-has-its-down-side/
Not enough to turn me anti-wind, but indeed worth pondering.
I wonder whether they would have any noticable effect on fire
behaviour due to the effect on wind patterns?
--
__ __
#_ < |\| |< _#
> https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2018/10/large-scale-wind-power-has-its-down-side/
Not enough to turn me anti-wind, but indeed worth pondering.
I wonder whether they would have any noticable effect on fire
behaviour due to the effect on wind patterns?
--
__ __
#_ < |\| |< _#
N
news18
Guest
On Sat, 06 Oct 2018 01:46:03 +1000, FMurtz wrote:
Sounds like the one guy(wrote both papers) with an objective under the
guidance that if you can not dazzle them with brilliance, then baffle
them with bullshit.
From what I've read, he is saying if you cover 1/3rd of the USA(to
replace existing generation) in windfarms, then you'll raise the
temperature by 0.24degrees Celcius. Woopee-do, they have already raised
the temperature by average two degrees celcius from the activity of their
airlines. there was an interesting news report after 11-09-2001 when
average temperatures had dropped by two degrees when all the airlines
were grounded.
I wonder what the figure is for the reduction in thermal pollution from
coal, and other forms of thermsl generation.
When an paper includes crap like this; âFor wind, we found that the
average power density â meaning the rate of energy generation divided by
the encompassing area of the wind plant â was up to 100 times lower than
estimates by some leading energy experts,â said Miller, who is the first
author of both papers." you know they are desperate for a point.
BTW, a 1.5 degree warming of night has probable piqued the interest in a
few farmers trying to grow crops that suffer from periodic frost damage.
this should help the wind energy companies lease a few more farms.
Sounds like the one guy(wrote both papers) with an objective under the
guidance that if you can not dazzle them with brilliance, then baffle
them with bullshit.
From what I've read, he is saying if you cover 1/3rd of the USA(to
replace existing generation) in windfarms, then you'll raise the
temperature by 0.24degrees Celcius. Woopee-do, they have already raised
the temperature by average two degrees celcius from the activity of their
airlines. there was an interesting news report after 11-09-2001 when
average temperatures had dropped by two degrees when all the airlines
were grounded.
I wonder what the figure is for the reduction in thermal pollution from
coal, and other forms of thermsl generation.
When an paper includes crap like this; âFor wind, we found that the
average power density â meaning the rate of energy generation divided by
the encompassing area of the wind plant â was up to 100 times lower than
estimates by some leading energy experts,â said Miller, who is the first
author of both papers." you know they are desperate for a point.
BTW, a 1.5 degree warming of night has probable piqued the interest in a
few farmers trying to grow crops that suffer from periodic frost damage.
this should help the wind energy companies lease a few more farms.
F
FMurtz
Guest
news18 wrote:
On Sat, 06 Oct 2018 01:46:03 +1000, FMurtz wrote:
https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2018/10/large-scale-wind-power-
has-its-down-side/
Sounds like the one guy(wrote both papers) with an objective under the
guidance that if you can not dazzle them with brilliance, then baffle
them with bullshit.
From what I've read, he is saying if you cover 1/3rd of the USA(to
replace existing generation) in windfarms, then you'll raise the
temperature by 0.24degrees Celcius. Woopee-do, they have already raised
the temperature by average two degrees celcius from the activity of their
airlines. there was an interesting news report after 11-09-2001 when
average temperatures had dropped by two degrees when all the airlines
were grounded.
I wonder what the figure is for the reduction in thermal pollution from
coal, and other forms of thermsl generation.
When an paper includes crap like this; âFor wind, we found that the
average power density â meaning the rate of energy generation divided by
the encompassing area of the wind plant â was up to 100 times lower than
estimates by some leading energy experts,â said Miller, who is the first
author of both papers." you know they are desperate for a point.
BTW, a 1.5 degree warming of night has probable piqued the interest in a
few farmers trying to grow crops that suffer from periodic frost damage.
this should help the wind energy companies lease a few more farms.
You beat Trevor to the punch
N
news18
Guest
On Sat, 06 Oct 2018 19:43:12 +1000, FMurtz wrote:
Nah, just been reading a few related reporting sites recently. Renewable
energy has been going quietly abouts its business and a few of the fossil
heads are getting a bad shock. When you get a major energy retailer
saying they no longer think in the concept of base loads and they are
planning on idling their coal power station during the day time, you know
the game is changing very fast. Plus the fact that renewables are signing
long term contracts at prices better/lower than aged coal plants ever
can, things have changed. If i had spare capital ATM, it would be going
into battery manufacturers.
You beat Trevor to the punch
Nah, just been reading a few related reporting sites recently. Renewable
energy has been going quietly abouts its business and a few of the fossil
heads are getting a bad shock. When you get a major energy retailer
saying they no longer think in the concept of base loads and they are
planning on idling their coal power station during the day time, you know
the game is changing very fast. Plus the fact that renewables are signing
long term contracts at prices better/lower than aged coal plants ever
can, things have changed. If i had spare capital ATM, it would be going
into battery manufacturers.
T
Trevor Wilson
Guest
On 6/10/2018 12:36 PM, news18 wrote:
**Actually, the temperature went UP! And that is a potentially very
serious problem. Visible pollution keeps temperatures down, because a
lot of Solar radiation fails to reach the surface. Imagine the problems
we will experience when China and India manage to deal with their
pollution problems.
**Well, like most things, it's complicated. Removing all coal fired
power from the planet will do very little overnight. It will likely take
a few generations before temperatures begin to fall. It's not entirely
clear, because we have not tried the experiment yet.
--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au
**Actually, the temperature went UP! And that is a potentially very
serious problem. Visible pollution keeps temperatures down, because a
lot of Solar radiation fails to reach the surface. Imagine the problems
we will experience when China and India manage to deal with their
pollution problems.
**Well, like most things, it's complicated. Removing all coal fired
power from the planet will do very little overnight. It will likely take
a few generations before temperatures begin to fall. It's not entirely
clear, because we have not tried the experiment yet.
--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au
Guest
On Monday, October 8, 2018 at 2:31:04 AM UTC+8, Trevor Wilson wrote:
The solar radiation warms up shit in the atmosphere instead.
It does magically go away.
The solar radiation warms up shit in the atmosphere instead.
It does magically go away.
T
Trevor Wilson
Guest
On 13/10/2018 12:49 PM, bruce56@topmail.co.nz wrote:
**Indeed it does. However, heating up a gas is far less of a problem
than heating a solid or liquid, since gases do not hold heat as well or
far as long.
> It does magically go away.
**Well, not quite. ANY extra heat in the system raises temperatures.
--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au
**Indeed it does. However, heating up a gas is far less of a problem
than heating a solid or liquid, since gases do not hold heat as well or
far as long.
> It does magically go away.
**Well, not quite. ANY extra heat in the system raises temperatures.
--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au