Life with the Dekalb Turbines.

http://lifewithdekalbturbines.blogspot.com/2010/05/blade-failed.html">Our Life With the DeKalb Turbines

No one wants to live next to any source of energy production. Doesn't matter much what it is, an oil refinery, a nuclear power plan, wind turbines, a coal plant; there are issues no matter what it is.

Even living near electrical power lines is a nuisance.

I wish I had an answer but I don't.

40 years. Tens of thousands of people from DeKalb County changed planes at those airports during those 40 years whenever they left the country or landed and took off there whenever they visited the east coast. What can you do? Everyone has to put up with something or another.:shrug:

why are you posting anti environmental talking points? So you think it is good to tear down alternative energies if it increases interest in nuclear?

There are real environmentalists that adamantly oppose the cleanest, most reliable, most cost-efficient energy source that we have (an already-existing hydro plant). Why? Because they're focusing on one part of the environment (ecosystems) over another (providing power a cleanly as possible).

There are environmentalists who adamantly oppose many wind projects. Why? Because their impression of protecting the environment includes not scaring the land/sea-scape with giant manmade objects.

I don't agree with either example, but I don't mistakenly think that they aren't environmentalists. They're just misguided.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

CO2 is causing an extinction level event as we speak but the world is doing nothing about it (see: the failed COP15, which I predicted would happen).

The author of that crap should find solace in the fact that they, and their neighbors, are breathing cleaner air than they would if they got their power from coal-fired power plants.

The capacity utilization of the wind crap toys is about 25% in this country. Coal runs at 72% of capacity utilization. Feathering down coal plants requires the use of more coal than would otherwise be burned because of the second law of thermodynamics, and the reason that this is true should be obvious to any one who has ever boiled water on a stove.

The only system in this country - or any country - that has a higher capacity utilization than coal is nuclear, which runs about 90% of capacity utilization.

But never mind discussing something called "reality?" How big is the wind farm in your back yard. I assume you are willing to sacrifice your home and peace to "breathe clean air." No?

As is obvious from the picture, this pile of consumer distributed energy crap didn't last very long, did it?

Do you know what the repair crews will be using to fix the broken blade? They'll be running diesel trucks.



http://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/621541

"How big is the wind farm in your back yard." -- NNadir

They're power receptors that once picked up radiant energy, but now draw power directly from the other world.

complaining about the SHADOWS?
they should get a life.

But I personally am not easily disturbed by outside sources. Well, there was a ceiling fan I once had that rattled, but I eventually got used to it (I'd climb on a chair and bang it to shut it up).

I cannot say, however, that I would not complain for free money, though.

In the end the massive scaleup of wind will be out in the middle of nowhere so it's not a real issue for wind as a power source.