"Ten Reasons why People who Support Wind Farms Are Deluded, Criminal or Insane. Which One Are You, Vince Cable?"

[rehmwa 2]

GeorgiaDon

Quote

in the tunnel last year we broke the 50 point barrier in a 35 second stretch for F-M-P-O-E

Hove you posted video of that somewhere? It'd be cool to see.

I'll try. Have to find the vids and pull the segment if my adobe editor is still in date (or I have the teammate that's actually good at this stuff do it for me) - 90 second clip from an hour video. (remember - no exit, no worries, we built up to that pace, etc etc etc.....SO different in a real dive)

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[GeorgiaDon 362]

It would be cool if you could do it without knocking yourself out, but not worth a heroic effort. I was wondering more if you already had it up some place. 50 points in 35 seconds seems magical to me, even if you had to build up to that speed.

Don

_____________________________________
Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996)
“Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

[rehmwa 2]

I can't find better than 42 stretch (thanks to a scoring tool Jan Vassar developed) on the two FMPOE's I'm finding just scanning through the vids from that camp (it's been our 'warm up' dive for the specific team I've been playing with for years). I'm sure it's hidden somewhere in there (8 hours of vid). We've hosted a big tunnel camp every year for the last 15 years, this last camp had nearly 50 hours and over 40 campers, great fun.

I did find a 4 pointer with a 46 stretch in the middle. Equivalent point burner as designed. nothing over 50 and I have to get back to work.

sorry - I can't put my money where my mouth is. Probably counted wrong standing there in the chamber (video on delay in the tunnel at CO). Still pretty fun. It's my fault, I'm the OC and pretty much gate the pace of all random dives.

will take it to the correct forum if I get to it and send you a note. later

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[GeorgiaDon 362]

42, 46, 50, whatever, it's still amazing (to me anyway).

Cheers,
Don

_____________________________________
Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996)
“Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats)

[champu 1]

rehmwa

***

Quote

in the tunnel last year we broke the 50 point barrier in a 35 second stretch for F-M-P-O-E

Hove you posted video of that somewhere? It'd be cool to see.

I'll try. Have to find the vids and pull the segment if my adobe editor is still in date (or I have the teammate that's actually good at this stuff do it for me) - 90 second clip from an hour video. (remember - no exit, no worries, we built up to that pace, etc etc etc.....SO different in a real dive)

If you don't have a meltdown at some point between 35 seconds and break off it means you weren't going fast enough!

[billvon 2,991]

============
Wind blows away fossil power in the Nordics, the Baltics next
Reuters
Wed Oct 15, 2014

* Rising wind power output pushes Nordic prices down
* Low power prices cut gas, coal power profitability
* Denmark, Finland seen shutting abt 2,000 MW of condensing power
* Norway mothballs 420 MW Kaarstoe gas-fired power plant

By Nerijus Adomaitis

OSLO, Oct 15 (Reuters) - Wind power is blowing gas and coal-fired turbines out of business in the Nordic countries, and the effects will be felt across the Baltic region as the renewable glut erodes utility margins for thermal power stations.

Fossil power plants in Finland and Denmark act as swing-producers, helping to meet demand when hydropower production in Norway and Sweden falls due to dry weather.

The arrival of wind power on a large scale has made this role less relevant and has pushed electricity prices down, eroding profitability of fossil power stations.

"Demand for coal condensing power in the Nordic power market has decreased as a result of the economic recession and the drop in the wholesale price for electricity," state-controlled Finnish utility Fortum said, booking an impairment loss of about 25 million euros($31.67 million).
=================

[rushmc 23]

billvon

============
Wind blows away fossil power in the Nordics, the Baltics next
Reuters
Wed Oct 15, 2014

* Rising wind power output pushes Nordic prices down
* Low power prices cut gas, coal power profitability
* Denmark, Finland seen shutting abt 2,000 MW of condensing power
* Norway mothballs 420 MW Kaarstoe gas-fired power plant

By Nerijus Adomaitis

OSLO, Oct 15 (Reuters) - Wind power is blowing gas and coal-fired turbines out of business in the Nordic countries, and the effects will be felt across the Baltic region as the renewable glut erodes utility margins for thermal power stations.

Fossil power plants in Finland and Denmark act as swing-producers, helping to meet demand when hydropower production in Norway and Sweden falls due to dry weather.

The arrival of wind power on a large scale has made this role less relevant and has pushed electricity prices down, eroding profitability of fossil power stations.

"Demand for coal condensing power in the Nordic power market has decreased as a result of the economic recession and the drop in the wholesale price for electricity," state-controlled Finnish utility Fortum said, booking an impairment loss of about 25 million euros($31.67 million).
=================

First off I have to say thanks as your post here supports what I have been saying
and that is, wind energy can not be considered as a base power supplier
That said, you do have a situtation here where hydro can, for the most part, be that part of the puzzel

Natural gas will continue to grow (fast) for supplying base power and wind will continue to effectively double the cost of generation capital construction because, as I have said, for every megawatt of wind, a meg of coal, nuke, hydro or gas must be in place

Cause in iowa, solar can supply power about 15% of the time and at best wind is at 20%

Thanks Bill

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[wolfriverjoe 1,523]

Did you actually read what he wrote?

Hydro is not the base supplier. It's the one that is variable.

"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

[rushmc 23]

wolfriverjoe

Did you actually read what he wrote?

Hydro is not the base supplier. It's the one that is variable.

If coal and gas are removed, hydro is the only one that can cover base load

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[JerryBaumchen 1,363]

Hi joe,

Quote

Did you actually read what he wrote?

Reading and comprehending are two different things.

Jerry Baumchen

[billvon 2,991]

>First off I have to say thanks as your post here supports what I have been saying

Hmm. So you agree with the post. So does Breitbart think you are deluded, criminal or insane?

[jakee 1,489]

Quote

First off I have to say thanks as your post here supports what I have been saying
and that is, wind energy can not be considered as a base power supplier

But Rush, that's only true in part, isn't it?

What you've been saying is that wind power is expensive and useless, period. How does the post support you on that?

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[rushmc 23]

jakee

Quote

First off I have to say thanks as your post here supports what I have been saying
and that is, wind energy can not be considered as a base power supplier

But Rush, that's only true in part, isn't it?

What you've been saying is that wind power is expensive and useless, period. How does the post support you on that?

You will have a hard time finding where I say wind is worthless
There are two issues for me
First, the false premise that we are endangering the planet by using coal
Second, (and this has a couple of parts) This is not free. In fact, today, large scale wind generation can not be profitable unles large tax subsidies are included. Even one of the biggest builders of them in the US says this (Warren Buffet) and they can not deliver base power. Therfore, for every Meg of wind you need a meg of coal, gas, nuke, or hydro (and even hydro can be problimatic) to cover useres needs. This raises the cost of electricity. And raising the cost for bogus reasons is political. Not scientific

So, his post demonstrated that other generation sources are needed to supply power

Third, they are incredibly loud. I cound not believe what I was hearing the first time I was around them

I would take a nuke plant in my back yard any day next to one of those things

And I have been very close to two coal plants and they were better too

Put one in your back yard if you want
Not mine

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[rushmc 23]

billvon

>First off I have to say thanks as your post here supports what I have been saying

Hmm. So you agree with the post. So does Breitbart think you are deluded, criminal or insane?

Actually, I am just happy you are starting to figure this out

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[billvon 2,991]

>First, the false premise that we are endangering the planet by using coal

Well, the planet doesn't much care. But parts of the ecosystems like birds, humans and forests do. Coal kills thousands of people a year in the US, and I have a feeling the families of those people would prefer to have them back.

>Second, (and this has a couple of parts) This is not free. In fact, today, large scale
>wind generation can not be profitable unles large tax subsidies are included.

"- Without the PTC, the American wind market will contract but not collapse, falling to roughly 3,000-7,000 MW per year from a peak of about 13,000 MW in 2012."

So it would still be profitable, just on a smaller scale.

>This raises the cost of electricity. And raising the cost for bogus reasons is
>political. Not scientific

And yet in reality wind is lowering the cost of power. So there's a disconnect between your political theories and reality.

>Third, they are incredibly loud. I cound not believe what I was hearing the first
>time I was around them
>I would take a nuke plant in my back yard any day next to one of those things
>And I have been very close to two coal plants and they were better too

The Brayton Point coal plant kills between 15 and 39 people per year. And that's just one power plant. How many people have been killed by wind power?

[rushmc 23]

I would like to see from where the price is lowered
Along with those death certificates of those dead people

Otherwise, you post is just rehtoric

BTW
I looke at distributive generation differently
Not sure how this is all going to shake out yet but there is much happeening with that here in Iowa right now

And I will go with the billionare buffet on the profitability of big wind

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[jakee 1,489]

rushmc

You will have a hard time finding where I say wind is worthless

"wind farms are a waste of money "
"wind is a wast of capital dollars and the only reason they are being built today is a political reason"

Quote

Second, (and this has a couple of parts) This is not free. In fact, today, large scale wind generation can not be profitable unles large tax subsidies are included.This raises the cost of electricity.

But Bill's post was about wind power decreasing the cost of electricity. So how does it support what you were saying all along? After all, you also said this: "They are even shutting these things down overseas as the cost and health issues are now being seen as greater than any supposed benefit." Bill's post was about increased wind power output overseas. Where's the support there?

Quote

So, his post demonstrated that other generation sources are needed to supply power

You don't say. Where has anyone here argued that wind could be a sole provider of power?

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[rushmc 23]

jakee

***You will have a hard time finding where I say wind is worthless

"wind farms are a waste of money "
"wind is a wast of capital dollars and the only reason they are being built today is a political reason"

Quote

Second, (and this has a couple of parts) This is not free. In fact, today, large scale wind generation can not be profitable unles large tax subsidies are included.This raises the cost of electricity.

But Bill's post was about wind power decreasing the cost of electricity. So how does it support what you were saying all along? After all, you also said this: "They are even shutting these things down overseas as the cost and health issues are now being seen as greater than any supposed benefit." Bill's post was about increased wind power output overseas. Where's the support there?

Quote

So, his post demonstrated that other generation sources are needed to supply power

You don't say. Where has anyone here argued that wind could be a sole provider of power?

Decreasing from what?????

You need a starting point

If the past price was a dollar a kilowatt and it going down a penny, it that a good thing?

Now for them it may be
And at those prices it has a chance

And they are a waste of money
And the reason they are being built is right on the money
You can relate the comments if you wish but I dont see them as the same

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[jakee 1,489]

Quote

Decreasing from what?????

Average around $0.28/kWh in 2011 to $0.25/kWh in 2013 for non-industrial customers and half that for industry, from a small amount of research.*

Regardless of amount or starting point, Bill's post says that wind farms are driving down energy costs. So how does it support your argument?

Quote

And they are a waste of money
And the reason they are being built is right on the money

SO you're saying they're useless. So how does Bill's post support your position?


* EU stats webiste, purely the price for the electricity without taking into account fixed infrastructure costs, I believe. Norwegian office of stats says that pure electricity prices dropped over 20% quarter for quarter from 2013 to 2014.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[billvon 2,991]

>I would like to see from where the price is lowered

I've posted the story twice so far. You can read or ignore; your choice.
But here's another link for you to ignore:
=======================
Wind Power Is Reducing Electricity Rates
Triplepundit
Andrew Burger
Monday April 7th, 2014

Higher performance turbines, lower manufacturing costs and lower prices for consumers drove new U.S. wind energy construction to record heights in early 2014 — despite the U.S. Congress still debating whether or not to renew the federal renewable energy production tax credit (PTC), which expired Dec. 31. In many parts of the U.S., wind energy is now the cheapest form of electricity generation – cheaper than natural gas and even coal, NextEra chief financial office Moray P. Dewhurst recently stated on an earnings call. . . .

"The 11 states that produce more than 7 percent of their electricity from wind energy have seen their electricity prices fall by 0.37 percent over the last five years, while all other states have seen their electricity prices increase by 7.79 percent over that period."
http://www.triplepundit.com/2014/04/wind-power-reducing-electric-rates-pays-back-tax-credit-17-times/
========================

>Along with those death certificates of those dead people

Why would that help? The death certificates list the disease that causes their death, not what caused the disease. A three-pack-a-day smoker who dies of lung cancer has "cancer" as cause of death, not "smoking."

[billvon 2,991]

>You need a starting point
>If the past price was a dollar a kilowatt and it going down a penny, it that a good
>thing?

Absolutely. Do that every year and the future looks quite bright.

>And they are a waste of money

And yet there is billions in PRIVATE investment in them. I guess an awful lot of people disagree with you. (Even if Buffett agrees.)

[billvon 2,991]

>I live next to these things and the people who are closer than I say the same as I

=========================
No, Wind Turbines Do Not Make Us Sick, Says Most Comprehensive Study Yet

Brian Merchant
Senior Editor

November 7, 2014 // 05:08 PM EST

Thousands of people around the world are convinced that living near wind turbines can make you physically sick. The phenomenon, colloquially called Wind Turbine Syndrome—a term coined from the eponymous self-published book on the topic—has inspired complaints, grievances from those who live near wind farms around the world. There is no scientific evidence at all that it, or anything like it, exists.

Nina Pierpont, the author of Wind Turbine Syndrome, describes the "countless people who suddenly find themselves grievously ill from the subtle yet devastating infrasonic jackhammer" of wind turbines. Purported symptoms include sleep disturbance, nausea, and migraine headaches.

The theory that wind turbines are damaging to human health has been debunked a number of times by scientific inquiry already, and one study went so far as to investigate the 'nocebo' effect that appeared to promulgate belief in the disease. Stephen Colbert even took some potshots at the hysteria.

But WTS, as the theory's adherents acronymize it, has joined 'vaccines cause autism,' gluten intolerance, and, of course, climate change denial in the pantheon of pseudoscientific ideas that have stubbornly lodged themselves in the orbit of the mainstream. It's not just e-books, either; it's got its own Gasland-style activist documentary film and some credulous reports from respectable journalistic outlets, too.

Now, Canada's national health department, partly in response to its citizen's own complaints about turbines, has published what its principal investigators calls "the most comprehensive report done, internationally, in this area." It is the biggest investigation into the health impacts of wind turbines yet carried out.

The study consisted of three components; a self-reported questionnaire among those who live near wind turbines, biologic measurements of hair cortisol, blood pressure, and sleep quality, and an analysis of more than 4,000 hours of wind turbine noise.

Their conclusion? No, wind turbines do not make anyone sick. Even the self-reported surveys revealed as much—people who lived near wind turbines were simply not more stressed, losing more sleep, or falling more ill at a greater rate than civilians living anywhere else.

"In our study, we did not find any support for direct health effects, including sleep disturbance and stress," Dr. David S. Michaud, the principal investigator of the study, told me in an interview. The commonly reported symptoms of WTS—sleep deprivation, migraines, and stress—didn't surface any more than usual. The physical samples backed that up too; cortisol levels and blood pressure matched the average population.

"Migraine levels were comparable to that of the general population," Michaud said. "We didn't find any support in this study for any of these conditions to be related to the wind turbines." However, he did note that his was a population study, and was not explicitly designed to investigate the existence of WTS, but to offer advice to Canadians integrating wind turbines into their communities.

The most egregious effect of the wind turbines was "annoyance." A small segment of the population that lives near wind turbines was found to be "annoyed" by their presence. And yes, it's a small segment: 16 percent of those who lived very close to turbines, and 6 percent of those who lived a bit further from the turning blades.

"There was an increase in annoyance," Michaud said. "The noise, the shadow flicker, the aircraft warning lights that blink... No, we didn't find any of the other things—but we found this annoyance."

And that's nothing to scoff at. The persistence of an annoying factor in a community could certainly be deleterious to its social and psychological wellbeing. Who wants to live under the shadow of nonstop irritation?

But we need to be honest. Communities that find turbines aesthetically ugly, or are bothered by the noise, or are politically predisposed to dislike clean energy, may need to reexamine where the basis for their grievance probably lies. Those aforementioned studies found that perceived WTS-like symptoms can be drummed up with the power of suggestion (and anti-wind turbine lobbying) alone, and it's more apt to happen in populations that dislike the turbines in the first place.

The new Canadian research supports that it's far more likely that anger, or hysteria, or ideology is what's making anyone sick about wind turbines than the spinning, blinking structures themselves.
======================================
http://motherboard.vice.com/read/no-wind-turbines-do-not-make-us-sick-says-most-comprehensive-study-yet?trk_source=popular

[rushmc 23]

I dont know about the science but I know they are irritating as hell
they also DO cause motion sickness if in the shadow flicker because I have experienced it

As for the political pre disposition?

I like them for many years
I went over to western Iowa just to drive the 40 miles of some of the first ones put up in the state
I thought they were cool
Untill I had to work around them so I throw the bull shit flag on that one

But of course the site you use for this is not whay anyone would call unbiased huh


http://motherboard.vice.com/author/BrianMerchant

BTW
I had never heard of "wind turbine syndrome" before your post and it is the same for many of the physical claims made by some in your article

I just know what I have experienced and it is the same for my friend and nieghbors (some of whom like the things)

And of course this all does not cure the economic failure these things would be without our tax dollars feeding this frenzy

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[skypuppy 1]

jakee

Quote

Decreasing from what?????

Average around $0.28/kWh in 2011 to $0.25/kWh in 2013 for non-industrial customers and half that for industry, from a small amount of research.*

Regardless of amount or starting point, Bill's post says that wind farms are driving down energy costs. So how does it support your argument?

Quote

And they are a waste of money
And the reason they are being built is right on the money

SO you're saying they're useless. So how does Bill's post support your position?


* EU stats webiste, purely the price for the electricity without taking into account fixed infrastructure costs, I believe. Norwegian office of stats says that pure electricity prices dropped over 20% quarter for quarter from 2013 to 2014.

Bill's post regardless, the fact remains that in ontario wind makes up about 4 % of the power supply, and is responsible for 20% of the cost increases in recent years...

If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead.
Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone

[DanG 1]

Quote

Bill's post regardless, the fact remains that in ontario wind makes up about 4 % of the power supply, and is responsible for 20% of the cost increases in recent years...

Do you have a source for that?

- Dan G