Oops...more 'green' energy BS

Maybe they should have thought this whole thing thru...

50,000 tons of non recyclable end of life wind turbine blades buried in landfill...Expect that amount to quadruple over the next decade.

https://srsroccoreport.com/the-rene...e-wind-turbine-blades-dumped-in-the-landfill/

 

That article is grasping at straws for their argument. While it's not perfect by any means, nor am I a "green" warrior, even at their proposed egregious 2034 numbers... they're still producing less than .25% of the non-recyclable waste that is being produced by the equivalent fossil generation they're replacing.

 

Do you make your living from wind turbines?

 

horseshit.

 

Looks like just one more example of the 'Green SJW' only looking at how green the actual generation is instead of looking at the total lifespan of the system.

When these morons start advocating the only real viable green energy, nuclear, Ill get on board. Until then they're just jerking off to their own smugness.

 

Imma need a cite on that claim...

 

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2019/07/21/wind-farm-back-of-the-envelope-economic-analysis/

from 2017
https://www.spectator.co.uk/2017/05...or-green-and-they-provide-zero-global-energy/

Warren Buffett, explained why his companies are in the wind business. “We get a tax credit if we build a lot of wind farms. That’s the only reason to build them,” he said. “They don't make sense without the tax credit.”

 

There are exceptions but for the most part the environmental movement is just a bunch of lemmings who follow the latest feel good movement and are not that adept at the application of logic. What is funny is when you start asking them what the birth to death costs and pollution created by the manufacturing of the "green" products all you get back is environmental activist buzzword bingo. And the second you say "nuclear" they start spewing out words like Fukushima, Chernobyl, 3 Mile Island, hundred thousand year waste and cancer. It is pretty sad but there is no reasoning with them. All feelz, no logic.

 

I've been saying for years that the only ones that benefit from wind power are they companies building the turbines. Guess I was only partly right.

 

It's better to be morally right than factually correct.

 

But they don't even have that correct.

 

I made my living and spent my career in fossil/nuclear power generation and t&d, have been an author/co-author on industry papers and regulations, and have served on several boards related to the industry. Never worked on a windmill in my life, other than once managed a substation grid tie-in project.

Simple math, you're a sparky... you get this stuff. The very article that he linked stated that windmills are expected to generate 50,000 tons of non-recyclable waste per year, and projects that they would be approaching 225,000 tons per year by 2034. A first year engineering student should question those numbers, as it's wildly unlikely they were produced by a solid engineering analysis with statistically significant numbers, so right off the bat we know the author doesn't have a background in this stuff and is just wildly projecting. Which makes sense, the authors is a self-proclaimed researcher with no experience in the industry or any industry and is obsessed with peak oil, peak energy, peak dollar, monetary collapse, the apocalypse, and his research is primarily published in well... not respectable journals or destinations... Even if we give credence to these numbers, and take the 2034 figure that's almost a decade and a half away. We generally generate 110-130 million tons of coal ash per year from the fossil side of power generation, feel free to reference on EPA, Edison Electric Institute, or any of the other federal or industry websites that track that data. That figure is current, not over a decade into the future. That figure also does not take into effect the end of life non-recyclable scrap of fossil power plants, which is considerable, even though a good portion of it can be recyclable. We can ignore that as well as the slight deviation between metric and US ton, which also raises question about where this "independent researcher" is pulling his facts from. Let's keep it simple, even just using 100M tons of annual coal ash that's not recyclable and compare it to the projected 225,000 tons of non-recyclable turbine blades, and we're at wind generation producing significantly less than 1%. Granted you can go down a few rabbit holes, some utilities actually have some inventive recycling options for coal ash and are able to recycle upwards of 70% of the ash in some circumstances, coal ash varies based on the blend which differs between regions. However, while there are variances, the EPA reporting numbers are generally the non-recyclable numbers. This also may change, as earlier this year the Federal Registry issued a new final rule that opens the door to additional recyclable options for coal ash.

 

What is the tons waste/Megawatt of electricity generated ratio?

 

Would have agreed that would have been the the logical format to go down if one was truly trying to attempt to make a comparative analysis. Realistically, it's still favorable towards wind generation. Although the coal ash produced per MW varies significantly based on the blend and boiler operating pressure/temperature, particularly between high pressure and supercritical or the more rare ultra/supercritical boilers. There are plenty of disadvantages of green energy and questionable economic viability concerns, but attacking scarecrows does us no good.

 

Coal Ash should be required to be mixed in with Road Paving projects and as a filler for HotDogs at Democratic Conventions.

 

Don't you think that Dems have eaten enough lead chips? Where's your humanity?

 

But hey, dpf, egr and def prevent diesel particulates from going into the ground

 

How about all the natural gas that went into carburizing all those goddamn gears and bearings? Not to mention the steel making and the lime that was used to make that?

 

Oh, and they Max out at a third of what they are rated. We won't mention the ones locally that I have not seen turn in 6-8 years. You know those ones are fucked.

 

Seems a considered, knowledgeable response. Are you including the EPA required scrubber lime in the waste number?