@SMEYou're absolutely right. Wind energy is so inefficient and
expensive. That's why it has to be so heavily subsidized. Windmills are great
for PR and might give us a big warm fuzzy, but there is a reason they are so
costly. Their construction requires tons of natural resources and energy, which
far outweigh the energy we get out of them.
To "LDS Tree Hugger" I suppose you will always be willing to "do something"
rather than "nothing" as long as it is other people's money that is being spent!
In order to make this more than a tree hugger's pipe dream, it is important to
be economically feasible. Otherwise it is somewhat akin to a guy wetting his
pants in a dark blue suit. It gives him a "nice warm feeling" but no one else
LDS Tree-Hugger | 8:29 a.m. "Saddest of all is that 3rd world places
like India and China ahead in the development of these technolgies. We should be
ashamed....."Developing isn't as important as implementing.The US now has more wind power installed than any other country, including
China.Meanwhile, according to the NYTimes, China is adding
coal-fired electrical generating capacity far faster than it is adding wind
power. By 2020, China is expected to get 75% of it's electricity from coal. We
currently get about 45%. What does China know that we don't?Maybe
that's what we should be ashamed about.
tree hugger and 42,do YOU pay the extra to Rocky Mountain Power for
To "LDS Tree-Hugger | 12:17 p.m. " nuclear power is renewable. Look up and see
how we can reprocess spent fuel rods. Also look up how one of the byproducts,
weapons grade plutonium, can be used in new reactors to produce more power.The best part of nuclear power is that it uses its own waste to provide
more power.Read the article "Wind + coal = More pollution than coal
alone, new study claims" in the The Holland Sentinel.Do some
research about how wind farms end up polluting more than a coal or gas power
plant. Wind farms pollute more because they require a coal or gas power plant
to idle, burning the very fuel they are intended to save.If you want
to make a viable replacement power source, find one that produces constant power
under any weather, 24 hours a day.
RedShirt | 12:06 p.m. June 8, 2010 To "LDS Tree-Hugger | 8:29 a.m." why
not put up a nuclear power plant out there?It would produce
clean-renewable energy, AND has the effect of not chopping up birds. It is also
a relatively quiet power source compared to wind turbines. =============
CleanER than fossil fuels - YESRe-newable - NOBTW - as a tree-hugger,I'm 100% in favor of Nuclear Power.It's all
part of being open-minded.
To "LDS Tree-Hugger | 8:29 a.m." why not put up a nuclear power plant out
there?It would produce clean-renewable energy, AND has the effect of
not chopping up birds. It is also a relatively quiet power source compared to
To "SME | 7:09 a.m." and "dave31 | 7:59 a.m." they are only able to save that
much because wind power receives over $24.34/Megawatt hour subsidies from the
government. So, if the government pays itself extra for each Megawatt hour of
electricity produced, do they save anything at all?
Only reason coal & oil are cheap is because we allow them to be.
SME & dave311. 25% of renewable CLEAN energy reduces emissions into
our atmosphere by.... 25% !!!2. and 30 years of continuously
burning coal 24/7 saves us what?3. Doing Something is ALWAYS better
than doing NOTHING at all !!!Saddest of all is that 3rd world
places like India and China ahead in the development of these technolgies.We should be ashamed.....
If the $125K savings is real net savings after maintenance and repair costs are
deducted, that will yield a return on invetment of 3.29%. That's not a wonderful
return! In order to make this a sensible investment, the net investment cost
must be reduced dramatically. Perhaps this may be possible as more units are
produced and as we learn to reduce the costs of site preparation, etc.I hope the estimates of savings and the estimate of the investment do not
reflect current government accounting methods which generally underestimate the
cost and overestimate the return.
So if they actually reach $125,000 per year, in 30 years they'll break even (not
counting interest). Will the windmill last 30 years?