did you know the production costs, energy used, pollution released and maintenance for turbines and solar powercurrently outweigh any benefits they can provide.
The reason for companies pushing them is because they get grants and subsidies from governments wanting to appear to be eco friendly.
nPower are currently throwing lots of money to get a massive windfarm behind our house so we've done a lot of research :(
It would be ironic if I entered this challenge and won.
(The reason for companies pushing them is because they get grants and subsidies from governments wanting to appear to be eco friendly.
nPower are currently throwing lots of money to get a massive windfarm behind our house so we've done a lot of research :(
It would be ironic if I entered this challenge and won.
HappyToast Groat froth,
Wed 16 Jun 2010, 15:19,
archived)
yeah I know there's lots of conflicted messages on this issueI have no problem with you entering your views into the challenge and if you win - you win.
(
rob,
Wed 16 Jun 2010, 15:22,
archived)
So...will they select the winneror us?
(
Letum Your Ad here £2.40,
Wed 16 Jun 2010, 15:23,
archived)
And what will they do with the images? Letum Your Ad here £2.40,
Wed 16 Jun 2010, 15:23,
archived)
paint them on the turbine blades
Griffin Saver Something, something, 2006, something.,
Wed 16 Jun 2010, 15:25,
archived)
!!!!POV LEDs on a wind turbine displaying b3ta
That would be wonderful
ed. bindun:
hackaday.com/2009/12/02/worlds-largest-pov-display/
(That would be wonderful
ed. bindun:
hackaday.com/2009/12/02/worlds-largest-pov-display/
Letum Your Ad here £2.40,
Wed 16 Jun 2010, 15:27,
archived)
dunnojust trying to find out
EDIT: Ecotricity pick the winner. You can vote of course, but the prize goes to one picked by them.
Also ecotricity aren't going to do anything with the images - they are sill yours etc. It's not a cheapo way of getting stuff for a poster campaign.
(EDIT: Ecotricity pick the winner. You can vote of course, but the prize goes to one picked by them.
Also ecotricity aren't going to do anything with the images - they are sill yours etc. It's not a cheapo way of getting stuff for a poster campaign.
rob,
Wed 16 Jun 2010, 15:30,
archived)
My click can be bought for a reasonable fee
Tribs 🦇 ↓ dn ʎɐʍ sᴉɥʇ ↓🦇,
Wed 16 Jun 2010, 15:22,
archived)
Certainly true for PV solar,but my understanding is that wind and non-PV solar this is not true.
( Letum Your Ad here £2.40,
Wed 16 Jun 2010, 15:23,
archived)
The one planned behind us (8 turbines 125m tall)would require various roads to be rebuilt and the turbines to be transported across the country from where they are made in Wales.
They would not be able to be active all the time not just due to wind dropping, but also excessive winds in the area, estimates put them at 30% efficiency (which is the national average I think).
Plus the usual concrete pollutants, 20 year MAX lifespan, untested engines, etc. And then you start considering environmental issues like wildlife killed (turbines kill bats not through collision but air pressure changes crushing their ribcages) and peoples lives disrupted my house would be less than a km from the first turbine, someone elses about a quarter of a km.
They are money grabbing cnuts. making a quick buck before the laws are changes to a 2m minimum distance from homes (like there is in Europe) which would cancel something like 80% of current proposed windfarms onland. Oh and they want to do these onland ones because its cheaper for them even though the wind levels/energy produced is massively less than at sea. See they couldn't give a fuck about energy production, they just want that subsidy. Rargh! Rant! happytoast has gone off on one again, get the tranquiliser gun.
(They would not be able to be active all the time not just due to wind dropping, but also excessive winds in the area, estimates put them at 30% efficiency (which is the national average I think).
Plus the usual concrete pollutants, 20 year MAX lifespan, untested engines, etc. And then you start considering environmental issues like wildlife killed (turbines kill bats not through collision but air pressure changes crushing their ribcages) and peoples lives disrupted my house would be less than a km from the first turbine, someone elses about a quarter of a km.
They are money grabbing cnuts. making a quick buck before the laws are changes to a 2m minimum distance from homes (like there is in Europe) which would cancel something like 80% of current proposed windfarms onland. Oh and they want to do these onland ones because its cheaper for them even though the wind levels/energy produced is massively less than at sea. See they couldn't give a fuck about energy production, they just want that subsidy. Rargh! Rant! happytoast has gone off on one again, get the tranquiliser gun.
HappyToast Groat froth,
Wed 16 Jun 2010, 15:34,
archived)
You are such a NIMBY!You and your educated ways and facts and things.
( Tribs 🦇 ↓ dn ʎɐʍ sᴉɥʇ ↓🦇,
Wed 16 Jun 2010, 15:48,
archived)
personally, I quite like them.Theyre not perfect now but they are a relatively new technology which, if we start developing them now, have the potential to significantly lower the amount of fossil fuels we use.
(,
Wed 16 Jun 2010, 15:52,
archived)
Neuclear power is my fave
Jamnog Sardines in her eyebrows, lobsters up and down,
Wed 16 Jun 2010, 15:27,
archived)
Outweigh how? Cost during production shouldn't be that much of an issue.Do turbines and solar plants produce pollution? Or do you mean during manufactor/building? And if you do, do they produce more than during the building of a coal/gas/whatever plant?
(
Mu Dinofiddler,
Wed 16 Jun 2010, 15:30,
archived)
I would love them to be the solution I really wouldand wouldn't mind seeing them out my window all the time.
But there's just too many problems with them right now.
Sticking them out to sea is an improvement because at least you get a much better level of consistent wind to make them worth the negatives.
(But there's just too many problems with them right now.
Sticking them out to sea is an improvement because at least you get a much better level of consistent wind to make them worth the negatives.
HappyToast Groat froth,
Wed 16 Jun 2010, 15:37,
archived)
I quite like the look of turbines.I hear they're bastard noisey though.
( Mu Dinofiddler,
Wed 16 Jun 2010, 15:47,
archived)
that's what scares methe sound reports that the power firms are using are at least 10 years out of date, they are pushing through turbines based on audio data of designs a 10th of the modern sizes.
Plus the "acceptable" level of noise is the same as a town high street during rush hour. The thing is, even high streets don't have rush hour 24 hours a day, villages with no through traffic have it even less :(
(Plus the "acceptable" level of noise is the same as a town high street during rush hour. The thing is, even high streets don't have rush hour 24 hours a day, villages with no through traffic have it even less :(
HappyToast Groat froth,
Wed 16 Jun 2010, 16:03,
archived)
PV is a messThe plants that build the PV cells have been dumping all the nasty
chemicals used in silicone doping in rivers in China. the PV cells have
finite lifespans of around 20 years; not long enough for them to make
enough energy to cover their production (or purchase!) costs.
Wind has problems, but isn't half so bad.
(chemicals used in silicone doping in rivers in China. the PV cells have
finite lifespans of around 20 years; not long enough for them to make
enough energy to cover their production (or purchase!) costs.
Wind has problems, but isn't half so bad.
Letum Your Ad here £2.40,
Wed 16 Jun 2010, 15:37,
archived)
not as much research as the two academic doctorswho i share an office with i am willing to bet!
although they would say 'it depends' rather than make a definite statement.
fwiw, it's surely a stepping stone thing, even if for now they are carbon positive, the cultural shift is to be encouraged, as only through uptake will systematic efficiencies be developed.....
and on a more basic level, the farm i am selling my paintings at this weekend have a turbine that provides enough energy that it has recovered it's cash costs in 6 years.
(although they would say 'it depends' rather than make a definite statement.
fwiw, it's surely a stepping stone thing, even if for now they are carbon positive, the cultural shift is to be encouraged, as only through uptake will systematic efficiencies be developed.....
and on a more basic level, the farm i am selling my paintings at this weekend have a turbine that provides enough energy that it has recovered it's cash costs in 6 years.
moke a man, a plan, a canal, panama!,
Wed 16 Jun 2010, 15:38,
archived)