World gone mad

Firms paid to shut down wind farms when the wind is blowing - Telegraph

Idiots!

Quote:

---

The electricity cannot be stored, so one solution – known as the 'balancing mechanism' – is to switch off or reduce the power supplied.

---

Pumped-storage hydroelectricity - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
There's always SOMETHING you can do with it, and a nice head of water is an excellent storage medium.

Plus, hydro can go from zero to peak output and back to zero in the time it takes to turn a tap.

Failing that, ALL spare capacity should be shunted into the electrolysis plants cracking water into hydrogen (which can be stored and then 'burned' to release energy on demand).

Nice. So there is actually a surplus of energy. Shhhhhh. Don't tell anyone. Those kinds of facts ruin the doomsday prophet scenarios of a barren resource-depleted earth.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bubba

So there is actually a surplus of energy.

---

Of wind generated energy, no less. :p

During peak wind times there's a surplus if those times coincide with a low in demand.
If there's a peak in demand during low wind periods, you're going to be short on electricity in the UK soon as powerstations are nearing the end of their technical (not just economic) life and no new ones are being constructed in order to comply with EU and Kyoto demands adopted by the Blair/Brown governments.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Salem

Pumped-storage hydroelectricity - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
There's always SOMETHING you can do with it, and a nice head of water is an excellent storage medium.

---

True, but for that you need some nice mountains with storage hydroelectric power plants first. England isn't exactly rich in those.

And even if they had enough of them (and they have some) "environmentalists" would protest the construction of those facilities because it will "disrupt nature", "destroy the natural environment", etc., etc.

In fact they're now protesting the development of more wind power for precisely those reasons, wind farms they first lobbied to be developed (yes, they first demand more wind farms, then protest the construction of those same wind farms they lobbied for in the first place).

To quote the very wiki page I cited:

Quote:

---

The upper reservoir (Llyn Stwlan) and dam of the Ffestiniog Pumped Storage Scheme in north Wales. The lower power station has four water turbines which generate 360 MW of electricity within 60 seconds of the need arising. The size of the dam can be judged from the car parked below.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jwenting

In fact they're now protesting the development of more wind power for precisely those reasons, wind farms they first lobbied to be developed (yes, they first demand more wind farms, then protest the construction of those same wind farms they lobbied for in the first place).

---

The real environmentalists who lobby for wind power are not the same people who protest the aesthetics of wind farms. Those people may claim to be "environmentalists", but I dare you to name even one that actually has any history of supporting any other (real) pro-environmental initiative. They're just the worst kind of NIMBY-ist, and they could care less about environmental issues.

The fact that various self-interest groups can generate astroturf "grass roots" [sic, since they are not that either] groups only demonstrates something about the habitual dishonesty of such people, by way of which they hope to confuse and distract the public. Apparently you are a victim of this strategy.

Jwenting,

What MK27 is saying is that real environmentalists support wind power. Fake environmentalists don't.

He then concludes that environmentalists who don't support wind power are dishonest, confuse and distract people like you and me. Which is marvelously ironic because calling environmentalists who don't support wind power fake and dishonest, is pretty much dishonest in itself and an attempt to spread confusion. MK27 wins the demagogy award.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mario F.

What MK27 is saying is that real environmentalists support wind power. Fake environmentalists don't.

---

I hate to argue semantics :p but actually what I said was that there are no environmentalists who oppose wind power because it will "destroy the natural environment". I did not say they all support it.

I think there are some cases where there has been opposition to placing windfarms in bird estuaries, etc, but that certainly does not mean there was some bunch of environmentalists who lobbied for a wind farm in a bird estuary and then when they got it said, "Oh, we changed our minds." Environmentalists in general favour things like environmental impact studies for any kind of industrial construction.

This is also very different from opposing them because they are "unsightly", which many wind farms in the US have been stopped because of this patently absurd complaint. Those people are not environmentalists, never were, and presumably will never be, and to the extend that they try to make such claims, they are just being manipulative and obfuscatory.

In short, the phenomemon jwenting refers to has never taken place, ever, anywhere.

It has taken place, maybe not where you live but elsewhere.
And yes, they don't first demand a specific spot known to be a bad one, then protest that.
But they do demand wind farms be build, knowing full well that the only realistic places are on bird migration routes, then protest the construction based on that.
Or after construction demand they're shut down because they're meatgrinders, or the noise disrupts nesting birds (both arguments have been successfully used here).

These are the same groups doing both, and deliberately so.
They don't want ANY energy at all, instead wanting a return to a medieval society (or stone age, even better) of hunter gatherers living "in harmony with nature".
So they protest everything that will get electricity into peoples' homes, keep their cars running and their fridges cold.
These are the people who want powerstations shut down, then protest the demolishing of those same powerstations because of the "environmental impact" that would cause.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jwenting

It has taken place, maybe not where you live but elsewhere.

---

If you can provide a link to even one single news article (hopefully they have news where you live) or other piece of evidence, I'd be interested to read about it. Otherwise this is just some slightly silly hearsay. No doubt it has some popularity amongst people who are opposed to wind power and environmentalism in general, but saying something over and over again does not make it true.

Quote:

---

provide a link to even one single news article

---

BBC News - David Bellamy joins Lammermuir Hills wind farm protest

A crazy man but still an environmentalist.
David Bellamy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bernt

BBC News - David Bellamy joins Lammermuir Hills wind farm protest

---

Yes, but those people don't agree with MK, which means they're stupid and not worth acknowledging for the points he's trying to make. I'm sorry jwenting, I think you've lost this one.

More madness from the UK: now they remove crosses from cemetaries because of "health and safety concerns": Council rules that crosses are 'too dangerous' for cemeteries | Mail Online

Maybe this thread should be renamed to UK gone
mad. We're completely sane and rational over here
in the United States.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ethic

Maybe this thread should be renamed to UK gone
mad. We're completely sane and rational over here
in the United States.

---

He says with his funky "I'm not going to make my lines long because I don't want you to expend the 0.0000000000000000000000000000000001 watts of energy required to move your eye from right to left".

you're welcome.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SlyMaelstrom

Yes, but those people don't agree with MK, which means they're stupid and not worth acknowledging for the points he's trying to make. I'm sorry jwenting, I think you've lost this one.

---

I didn't ask for an article where a former environmentalist (qv. his wikipedia page) marches against a wind farm.

David Bellamy was never an advocate of wind power. So this is not an example of some environmentalist (or group thereof) first lobbying for wind power and then against it, which is what jwenting claimed and what I'm saying has never happened in reality.

Also, everything I found on the web about the guy indicates people on both sides consider him a quack. He apparently was president of a wild plant conservation charity for a long time until a few years ago when they asked him to resign because of public anti-environmental statements he was starting to make. He's now associated with neo-liberal thinktanks*, hence a former environmentalist.

Finally, taking one dubious quack as representative of anything is only a demonstration of how you are lead around by your own prejudices, seeing only what you want to find.

* ie, a for hire mercenary

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MK27

Also, everything I found on the web about the guy indicates people on both sides consider him a quack. He apparently was president of a wild plant conservation charity for a long time until a few years ago when they asked him to resign because of public anti-environmental statements he was starting to make. He's now associated with neo-liberal thinktanks*, hence a former environmentalist.

---

He's probably a commie, too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SlyMaelstrom

He's probably a commie, too.

---

You mean a
Sleeper agent - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
;)

Quote:

---

Yes, but those people don't agree with MK, which means they're stupid and not worth acknowledging for the points he's trying to make.

---

Haha. ROFL. :D :D :D