14000 Abandoned Wind Turbines In The USA

Abandoned wind farm at South Point Hawaii

There are many hidden truths about the world of wind turbines from the pollution and environmental damage caused in China by manufacturing bird choppers, the blight on people’s lives of noise and the flicker factor and the countless numbers of birds that are killed each year by these blots on the landscape.

The symbol of Green renewable energy, our saviour from the non existent problem of Global Warming, abandoned wind farms are starting to litter the planet as globally governments cut the subsidies taxes that consumers pay for the privilege of having a very expensive power source that does not work every day for various reasons like it’s too cold or  the wind speed is too high.

The US experience with wind farms has left over 14,000 wind turbines abandoned and slowly decaying, in most instances the turbines are just left as symbols of a dying Climate Religion, nowhere have the Green Environmentalists appeared to clear up their mess or even complain about the abandoned wind farms.

The US has had wind farms since 1981:

Some say that Ka Le is haunted—and it is. But it’s haunted not by Hawaii’s legendary night marchers. The mysterious sounds are “Na leo o Kamaoa”– the disembodied voices of 37 skeletal wind turbines abandoned to rust on the hundred-acre site of the former Kamaoa Wind Farm…

The ghosts of Kamaoa are not alone in warning us. Five other abandoned wind sites dot the Hawaiian Isles—but it is in California where the impact of past mandates and subsidies is felt most strongly. Thousands of abandoned wind turbines littered the landscape of wind energy’s California “big three” locations—Altamont Pass, Tehachapin (above), and San Gorgonio—considered among the world’s best wind sites…
California’s wind farms— comprising about 80% of the world’s wind generation capacity—ceased to generate much more quickly than Kamaoa. In the best wind spots on earth, over 14,000 turbines were simply abandoned. Spinning, post-industrial junk which generates nothing but bird kills…”

The problem with wind farms when they are abandoned is getting the turbines removed, as usual there are non Green environmentalists to be seen:

The City of Palm Springs was forced to enact an ordinance requiring their removal from San Gorgonio. But California’s Kern County, encompassing the Tehachapi area, has no such law

Imagine the outraged Green chorus if those turbines were abandoned oil drilling rigs.

It took nearly a decade from the time the first flimsy wind turbines were installed before the performance of California wind projects could dispel the widespread belief among the public and investors that wind energy was just a tax scam.

Ben Lieberman, a senior policy analyst focusing on energy and environmental issues for the Heritage Foundation, is not surprised. He asks:

“If wind power made sense, why would it need a government subsidy in the first place? It’s a bubble which bursts as soon as the government subsidies end.”

“It’s a bubble which bursts as soon as the government subsidies end” therein lies a lesson that is going be learnt by those that sought to make fortunes out of tax payer subsidies, the whole renewables industry of solar, wind and biomass is just an artificial bubble incapable of surviving without subsides from governments and tax payers which many businesses and NGO’s like WWF, FoE and Greenpeace now think is their god given right, as the money is going on Green Climate Religion approved clean energy.

The Green evangelists who push so hard for these wind farms, as usual have not thought the whole idea through, no surprises for a left agenda like Climate Change, which like all things Green and socialist is just a knee jerk reaction:

Altamont’s turbines have since 2008 been tethered four months of every year in an effort to protect migrating birds after environmentalists filed suit. According to the Golden Gate Audubon Society, 75 to 110 Golden Eagles, 380 Burrowing Owls, 300 Red-tailed Hawks, and 333 American Kestrels (falcons) are killed by Altamont turbines annually. A July, 2008 study by the Alameda County Community Development Agency points to 10,000 annual bird deaths from Altamont Pass wind turbines. Audubon calls Altamont, “probably the worst site ever chosen for a wind energy project.”

The same areas that are good for siting wind farms are also good for birds of prey and migrating birds to pass through, shame for the birds that none of the Green mental midgets who care so much about everything in nature, thought that one through when pushing their anti fossil fuel agenda.

After the debacle of the First California Wind Rush, the European Union had moved ahead of the US on efforts to subsidize “renewable” energy–including a “Feed in Tariff” even more lucrative than the ISO4 contracts.

The tax payers who paid for the subsidies to build the wind farms, then paid over the odds for an unreliable source of power generation will, ultimately be left to pick up the bill for clearing up the Green eco mess in the post man made Global Warming world.

 

Updated November 24th

In answer to several allegations that the number of abandoned wind turbines was made up,  the following quote from the article and link will confirm this figure to be true:

California’s wind farms — then comprising about 80% of the world’s wind generation capacity — ceased to generate much more quickly than Kamaoa. In the best wind spots on earth, over 14,000 turbines were simply abandoned. Spinning, post-industrial junk which generates nothing but bird kills.

About these ads

About Tory Aardvark

Climate Realist, Conservative and proud NRA member. I don't buy into the Man Made Global Warming Scam, science is never settled. http://toryaardvark.com @ToryAardvark on Twitter ToryAardvark on Facebook

Posted on November 17, 2011, in Anthropogenic Global Warming, Church Of Climatology, Climate Change, Green Environmental Holocaust, Green Lies, Renewables, Wind Power and tagged . Bookmark the permalink. 303 Comments.

  1. A company has applied to build a huge wind turbine on farmland near to me. It will be huge and will destroy the beautiful countryside that leads up to Moorland. Of course, the subsidy the firm will receive and the subsidy the farmer will get for allowing this blot to be built has nothing to do with green energy but greed. The money the company and farmer will get will be out of all proportion to the cost of building the blot machine, installing it and then maintaining it. Then the fact that it will chop up large numbers of raptors (killing a raptor is a criminal offence, but it seems turbine builders get away with it) and that most of the time will not be producing anything but a blot on the countryside as being very windy up here I can bet it will be out of commission for over 90% of the time because the wind is too strong for it to cope.
    I hope my letter of complaint about the proposed turbine will help. If anyone calls me a NIMBY, I will not be able to see the darn thing from my house, but like the coast of Holland and NE Germany knowing that these things are useless still makes me angry that they are built in the first place and I will sign any petition to have them stopped blotting the land.

    • i had no idea, i thought wind farms were amazing till know

    • So put a cage around the blades of the generator. Bird problem solved. As to the unreliability of wind generators, it would be best if they are used in conjunction with solar power, and perhaps even the local power grid. Use what is generated, and if possible sell the excess back to the power company.

      • Your cage will negatively impact the efficiency of the wind tower and if attached to the blades themselves, destroy the bearings and gear train. Basically you will need to redesign and build a whole new tower! Or were you envisioning a 400ft tall by 400 ft diameter cage to cover each tower? Either way dollars go wayyy up to retro-fit all 80,000 towers in the US alone.

      • No one ever said your idea was thought through.

      • Sorry wont work for many reasons. one of them being that they kill millions of bats every year. Bats do not fly into the wings, they die near the wings because of pressure, they drown in their own blood. Germany alone managed to kill a bit over 200.000 bats last year, and that was only the ones they found.

  2. Tory is there anyway to forward this article and post to Joanne Nova and Anthony Watts. WUWT. We know that Victoria has now changed legislation regarding where wind turbines can be placed, that has put the cat amongst the pigeons. It followed a program that brought to public notice the health of people living near them.(Very similar to Menieres disease or syndrome). But they are planning more in NSW, even advertising for investors along with solar farms, and one decent one the hydroelectric scheme along the Ord River in the Kimberlys. Northern Australia.

    Keep at them please for Australia’s sake!

  3. I fear, sadly, that this is the shape of things to come here in East Yorkshire. Our Government seems hell bent on wrecking our countryside with these useless things, sacrificing the well-being of all those unfortunate enough to live near them on the altar of the unbridled greed of the developers and of course the landowners prepared to sell our heritage to the highest bidder. As well as the raptors identified by Rich, turbines also subject bats – another protected species – to a horrible death. Nobody seems to be talking about the effects they have on human health – but the assurances from the Companies – and the Government – that they are benign are horribly reminiscent of the assurances with respect to thalidomide, cigarettes and asbestos of times gone by. The stupidity is that, exactly as identified in the article, we are paying through the nose for this highly unreliable source of energy and, as like as not, will pay through the nose again to have the turbines removed when, as they must, our legislators remove the subsidies. We are resisting – but the odds are very heavily stacked against small communities without the huge resources necessary to fight through the courts.

  4. Pete Lancaster

    I’m trying to do some action of my own, but I need some material to help in the fight. Where can I get the data showing the number of abandoned turbines ?

    thank you

    -pete

  5. Hi S Burt, actually I read in a book written by one of the fat ladies, the cook. That in Spain, one sees two turbines together. One decommissioned, as it was cheaper to replace them than repair them. There is a site on Newburgh in Fife, Scotland. Google it.

  6. You'd like to know

    Is it true that Ian Dale said that this site is run by a bunch of nutters?

  7. In your opinion? Well gud luck to you ‘You’d like to know’, too. You tell ‘im Tory, LOL.

  8. Where is your source information regarding 14,000 unused wind generators?

  9. I found an Australian governmental source that was submitted to the senate, it’s an article from American thinker in February 2010: https://senate.aph.gov.au/submissions/comittees/viewdocument.aspx?id=58f5e734-5a91-4fcc-b8da-8a68bb6178c9

  10. I read through the article you supplied: https://senate.aph.gov.au/submissions/comittees/viewdocument.aspx?id=58f5e734-5a91-4fcc-b8da-8a68bb6178c9
    – it also did NOT have any source information regarding 14,000 abandoned wind farms. However, I did find this:

    Wind Turbines are multiplying at an immense pace as wind developers expand, because of the high winds that thrust through the Tehachapi Mountain range. Kern County has the highest concentration of wind farms in the nation at this point eclipsing the Altamont pass in Northern California.

    There are dozens of wind farms scattered around the Western rim of the Mojave Desert near Tehachapi pass. There are over 5,000 wind turbines in the area thanks to the wind rush of the 1970s and 1980s.

    Terra-Gen Power is planning hundreds and maybe thousands of wind turbines for its Alta Wind Energy Center, while, Helo Energy is planning to build 450 wind turbines. This green energy expansion is creating resistance from local residents. There are thousands of wind turbines today in the Tehachapi Valley already. They currently dominate the landscape, so thousands of additional towers will continue to change the views.

    And I found this:

    Built in 1986, the Kamaoa wind farm at South Point on the southern tip of the island of Hawaii stopped producing energy for the Big Island’s grid in the last ten years. The 37 battered and beaten Mitsubishi 250 kw turbines essentially went dormant and were recently replaced by fourteen new 1.5 mw at the Pakini Nui wind farm.

  11. Hi, Prince Phillip just announced he felt wind farms are useless and too expensive to run per the output of energy they supply. Go Phil!

  12. Thanks for sharing this.. :)

  13. I notice that no-one has clued into the fact that these are 20-30 year old windmill designs and that technology has improved since then.

    Or the fact that any coal or nukular power plant would require several million times the clean up cost and create a toxic waste dump that no-one could build or live on.

    Because if you are going to complain about the number of abanonded turbines you better be prepared to list the number of abanonded coal power plants that are out there as well and the cost of them.

    Overall this complaint about abandoned windmills is beyond silly. You may as well complain about computer waste and suggest we should stop using computers for all the abandoned computers that exist.

    Overall I get it you don’t like windmills. However if you are going to say you don’t like it at least do it for intelligent reasons.

    • Guess you must have missed the third paragraph that says

      The US has had wind farms since 1981:

      • What has that got to do with anything?

        BTW Where did you get that source figure of 14,000 abandoned windmills?

      • He’s trying to say that he addressed the 20-30 year old part. Or rather that he glossed over that fact that these windmills he’s complaining about are of an old and out dated design and have almost ZERO relevance to today’s windmill technology. Or that even the average power plant gets replaced in the same time period.

        Considering that out of my list of points making this article irrelevant he addressed only one and still missed the point.

        Or that he hasn’t addressed where he got his figure of 140,000 considering many were replaced not abandoned that other users have brought up.

        I think i’m safe in saying this is largely irrelevant.

        I get it you don’t like global warming. Awesome great. Try actually doing the math on how much it costs to build a coal power plant as opposed to a wind farm. It’s cheaper by far to build a wind farm and in less than 5 years at the current rate of commodity prices it’s going to be cheaper to get the power as well.

        It’s simple economics not politics.

        There is a reason the Red state of Texas has more wind farms than almost any other and it’s not because of the environment.

    • Private Citizen

      Amen. Well said.

      And while I believe AGW is dubious, certainly oil and coal burning do foul the oil, earth and water–ie Gulf of Mexico.

      A house cat likely kills as many birds as a windmill.

      And while critiquing subsidies, why not point to the billions the centralized quasi-monopoly non-green utilities get?

      While aesthetics is a personal issue, I see beauty in an installation of kinetic sculptures making use of the wind for human good.

      • If the Housecat could fly, maybe. Even a flying tabby would not likely tangle with a raptor. What drives the birds into the turbines is that the birds either ride or get caught up in the wind currents. Putting shields on the turbines would only ensure that instead getting ground to the pulp they hit a solid object at a very high speed. Of course, you could always place some housecats at the feet of the turbines to clean up the carnage, and say, “Look, the housecats did it. Bad housecats. Bad!”

  14. If you are going to write about it you should learn how to spell it. It is not nukular; it is nuclear power. Spelled wrong and not pronounced the same.

  15. Would they care if I took a couple of them. I figure the copper inside the charger ought to be worth quite a bit and one of those babies would spin my electric meter backwards when it was running – free electricity. I never could afford one, but if they’re not using them, I’ve got my box of tools and a big trailer I can borrow…..

  16. The trouble with nuclear is that a reactor needs 200,000,000 litres of water a day to keep it cool. OK for some, James Hansen suggested that Australia would be great, putting the reactors so they could use sea water. Not sure I am happy with that, think of Japan. And the majority of our population lives on or near coastal regions. But these turbines are not exactly fool proof themselves. California is in a spot of bother with them, increased electricity prices, and also industry is moving to Texas?

  17. Maybe Don Quixote had it right, after all:

    “…Just then they came in sight of thirty or forty windmills that rise from that plain. And no sooner did Don Quixote see them that he said to his squire, “Fortune is guiding our affairs better than we ourselves could have wished. Do you see over yonder, friend Sancho, thirty or forty hulking giants? I intend to do battle with them and slay them. With their spoils we shall begin to be rich for this is a righteous war and the removal of so foul a brood from off the face of the earth is a service God will bless…”

    Cervantes, Don Quixote — Part 1, Chapter VIII.

  18. Tony Aardvark has now had one week to tell us all where he got the 14,000 figure that he so prominently displayed in his headline and he has failed. It appears he invented it.

    What does that say about Tony and his message?

    • No I did not invent it, you can always Google it or Bing it to see if I am making it up

      http://www.zimbio.com/member/StoryReports/articles/qmUuK2zben5/Abandoned+Rusted+Wind+Turbines+Reflect+Hoax

      California’s wind farms — then comprising about 80% of the world’s wind generation capacity — ceased to generate much more quickly than Kamaoa. In the best wind spots on earth, over 14,000 turbines were simply abandoned. Spinning, post-industrial junk which generates nothing but bird kills.

      • Where in that article is the SOURCE information regarding 14,000 wind generators? There are studies cited for birds — NOTHING for wind generators.

        Citing another questionable article that does not cite sources as your proof is lazy journalism bordering on dishonesty.

      • From the State of California: http://www.energy.ca.gov/wind/overview.html

        Wind power in California has been an area of considerable activity for many years. California was the first U.S. state where large wind farms were developed, beginning in the early 1980s. By 1995, California produced 30 percent of the entire world’s wind-generated electricity. In 2004, California produced 4,258 million kilowatt-hours of electricity, roughly 1.5 percent of the total energy consumed by the state.

        More than 13,000 of California’s wind turbines, or 95 percent of all of California’s wind output, are located in three primary regions: Altamont Pass Wind Farm (east of San Francisco); Tehachapi Pass Wind Farm (south east of Bakersfield), and San Gorgonio Pass Wind Farm (near Palm Springs, east of Los Angeles). The new Alta Wind Energy Center, is also located within the Tehachapi Pass region.

        Did you read that Tony? It turns out that California has a total of 14,000 wind turbines IN OPERATION (not abandoned). Kind of makes the entire premise of your article seem a tad ridiculous, doesn’t it?

  19. So where do you disprove the 14,000 abandoned wind turbines, there may or may not be 14,000 working windturbines now, that in no way proves anything more than there are that number allegedly working now.

    http://webecoist.com/2009/05/04/10-abandoned-renewable-energy-plants/

    Guess the camera must have lied about the pictures in the above link

    • Those pictures don’t show 14,000 abandoned wind turbines. And from your own link: “Some of the HUNDREDS of turbines not spinning have been derelict now for decades.” And even that statement is not referenced.

      Face it Aardvark, you wanted to write a sensationalistic little piece of trash for some biased personal reasons and you got caught making things up. Rather than admit it, you want me to disprove something that you, yourself, cannot prove as truthful!?! Isn’t that back asswards?

      • It’s Drewski, the little Cool Whip Kid. So this is where you’ve been hiding. Got fed up playing with the big boys then?

        Suppose you got fed up being made to look an idiot all the time.

      • I’m not sure if he’s insulting Drewski. or Tory with that comment.

      • sphincter567, I’m sure PJ doesn’t need to insult the little Cool Whip Kid as Drewski does that all on his own, and I see you two are joined at the hip here or joined at uranus.

  20. Yes PJ, Here is yet another example (14,000 abandoned wind turbines) of what a sCeptic idiot is. Can’t wait to see it reposted at Climate Disbadshit.

    Climate Disbadshit: “No citations — no problem.”

    • How clever Me — R U in HI Skool?

      I take you it that you believe in the fantasy of 14,000 abandoned wind turbines in California and that you don’t require proof of the truthfulness of this assertion.

      Delusion is the standard M.O. of the sCeptic.

      • Drewski, Your mama called the police, to have you removed from occupying her basement.

      • The fall back of the clueless mind.

      • You mean The fall back of the cool whip cowboys mind right up sphincter567 behind.

      • How is that site Sceptictank Science working out for ya, you seem to like that one.

      • Actually it’s working out pretty well. I’m standing here without a single thing I said being refuted having an adult conversation.

        Meanwhile you are throwing a temper tantrum like a small petulant child trying to harass people and imagining homo-eroticism (you have weird fantasies)

        It pretty much shows that you don’t have anything useful to say and you’ve given up trying.

        Best of Luck to you PJ keep up the good work of invalidating Tory’s opinions.

  21. This Green Nightmare unfolding right in front of us will become the most damaging Environmental DISASTER ever on this planet since humans walked upright! One can thank all the eco-religious idiots for this! WWF, Sierra Club, Suzuki Foundation, Environmental Defence, Greenpeace, U.N., and on and on……………hang your heads in SHAME!!!!!!

    • With respect I think you should re-read what you wrote.

      The only one making baseless claims and believing far reaching and physically impossible events is you.

      Maybe you accusing the wrong people of religion.

    • Pray tell what “green” environmental disasters will be bigger than Chernobyl, Exxon Valdez, Gulf oil spill, Fukashima, 3-Mile Island, the Nigerian Delta, the smog in cities like Beijing or Mexico City, the “chemical” rivers in Ohio or China, the disappearance of the lakes (more like seas) in Chad or Kazakhstan, the retreat of glaciers, or even the Love Canal?

      Tick, tick, tick (birds chirping).

      I would be amazed with a germane reply.

  22. Drewski, environmental disasters have nothing to do with climate change. And they should be meant to pay for their environmental clean ups. I can mention a few also. Atomic testing on Christmas Island (that’s where all our asylum seekers are housed right now I reckon if the word went around the people smugglers might divert to Hawaii.Atomic testing on Australian soil (some say it is still contaminated).. This was done by the British by the way! So clean energy if it worked and lasted more that 30 years, might be good for the environment in someways, but wind turbines have been known can cause health problems. (Inner ear disturbances). Even solar panels don’t work in cold climates or when the sun don’t shine. And the subsidies for running them seems the Chinese are now investigating America’s subsidy schemes and are claiming they are not viable to free trade. CARBON PERMITS ARE CRASHING, DIDN’T YOU KNOW! And some have invested their pension schemes in them, like the BBC. Now only worth 5 Euros a tonne? Some investors have got that wrong because they were told lies right from the start. By Al Gore, the UN IPCC, James Hansen, Phil Jones and Michael Mann.

    So get off you self righteous high horse, and think. If it don’t work, then change it. If it works,
    don’t change it. Simple as that, without the fraud of CO2 and GHG being a threat to humanity and creating unnatural climate change, then why buy into these costly and inefficient energy producers. A banker’s wet dream for sure.

    • Bushbunny,
      My post was in reference to the “Green Nightmare” from biggreenlie . And while your post about atomic testing interesting, what are you referring to?

      BTW, my “self righteous high horse” is the indignation I feel about the complete fabrications that are perpetually posted on sites like this. It is also about people — like you — who are too lazy or are too invested do the simplest background check on the accuracy of the sewage presented to you before jumping into the cesspool with the other crazies.

  23. And Drewski as an encore…. have you invested in clean or green energy? Say if you had ex amounts of lolly to do it, would you? More likely you would buy some nice villa or home by the seaside or river Thames. Like Prof Flannery has where the only access to it is by water. Fair dinkum, he has a secret hide away on the Hawksbury River, so there goes his prediction sea level rises would inundate coast and riverine homes! Like Al Gore the crook. Why would anyone with any financial expertise invest in a failing market? Particularly with the grim warnings that this Durban meeting next week, looks to be another debacle more interested in raising money for the UNCCF than addressing the challenges of climate change.(Natural climate change not AGW!) Why you ask, because environmental protection requires a more difficult tactic than taxing carbon or CO2. The planet is very self regulating, after a drought comes lots of rain. But it is that yellow globe up in the sky, that partly dictates our weather. Remember Mark Twain …’ Climate is what we expect … weather is what we get..’.

    • Who is this Al Gore that you speak of. I think I’ve heard of him. I hear he some stupid American Politician. What on earth does he have to do with me or the other 200+ countries on earth or the hundred of other political parties and ideas. Al Gore did not invent global warming it’s only the American public that associates it with him. I’m sorry that in America that there is such confusion on the issue but the rest of the world is not so confused. As harsh as it sounds the US is not known for it’s science standards. I am fully capable of checking the background of the information provided to them with out talking to a politician.

      For instance this Article as shown is almost a complete fabrication. It’s the same with most of the other articles that are of this bent.

      I personally always find it amusing when people demand perfection from anything green. The least bit of failure or failed company and instantly the entire industry is a sham. The simple reality is that they are human just like every other industry. now one else expected perfection.

  24. Dear Drewski, environmental damage created by humans is a serious issue in agricultural countries. But this can be corrected, given enough time. So is building on flood plains, or in some instances beneath an active volcano or over a tectonic breach in the plates. Damming rivers like the Nile at Aswan, can change the amount of humidity in the surrounding environment from natural evaporation and down stream alignments and allocation of a natural water supply. I’ve been involved in this since at University where I graduated with a BA in archaeology and Palaeoanthropology, and we studied the effects of climate change on human evolutionary stages. Over two million years of it. And how people eventually adapted. So humans are responsible for a lot environmental damage, I agree with that. It’s just that humans do not effect the climate to the degree that alarmists suggest. They can by cutting down huge tracts of rain forest, it has been found it does shift the precipitation patterns, because of the fact the clouds are higher. However can be mitigated by leaving large tracts of land in between cleared pasture. Cities do create their own heat islands, UHI, yet 5 kms out side a large urban development this doesn’t happen. If you are a glider (plane type) you will know the air currents are different over a city or urban area, than over grasslands and forests. Tall buildings of glass and concrete or bitumen roads, hold heat and this is released at night. Natural wind patterns are altered by buildings.

    So as soon as I heard of Al Gores fantastic discovery and invested in Green energy, I knew from what I had learned over twenty years regarding environmentalism, physics, and archaeology etc., he was dead wrong. It does warm up before an ice age (God Forbid not another glacial period) or a mini-ice age. And that all happened before humans became electricity uses. Sewerage (not sewage) my friend is been spoon fed to those who have the audacity to think that humans can change the climate, by cutting down CO2 and methane.

    It’s almost as bad as seeding clouds with sulfur dioxide to cool the planet, or what they did in Australia to induce rain. Seed the clouds, that didn’t work. But an Aboriginal shaman succeeded, in bringing rain because he knew how to spot the weather changes imminent.
    And all he got was a glass of beer as a reward.

  25. I think I am better informed than you dear Drewski, probably a lot older and wiser, and very
    experienced in politics, having been involved in politics longer than I can remember. If you are aware of history and politics, people will invent a lie and usually if they mention investment benefits, it is you who should take note. Money is the root of all evil? Quite so
    this carbon bubble about to burst, is very similar to the 18th Century South Sea Bubble.
    And millions of pounds were lost by investors then. Some politicians of the day forewarned got their money out before it burst including the then PM.

    • Well I will give you this bushbunny — you do babble on. However, all your self-indulgent pontification has nothing to do with the topic of 14,000 abandoned wind turbines. What is germane is that this figure cannot be PROPERLY referenced or verified (unless, of course, it is in respect to OPERATING wind turbines) and so this article belongs in the category of fantasy rather than news.

  26. Spector you jest I suspect. Al Gore won the Nobel Prize with the UN IPCC, and produced the oscar award winning documentary called an Inconvenient Truth.

    I am still rolling in laughter. Such better comedians I have yet to meet.

    • I do Jest. I have never watched that movie. Nore will I ever watch that movie.

      However, Please understand that I find it laughable that ANYONE thinks Al gore had anything to do with AWG. It’s a 40 year old theory that had lots of support over 20 years ago. We’ve spent the last 40 years trying to figure what else could cause the warming without much luck. Just because the American public only knew about it from Al Gore does not mean that everyone else did. I knew about it since high school.

      I also hope you understand that the American public has some serious blind spots when it comes to science. After all 50% of the country thinks the earth is 6000 years old and you use an outdated method of measurement.

      Interestingly when you hear a report that the average Global temperature increased by 2d…… That in Celsius It actually increased about 3.6d Fahrenheit. I think the entire American population is accidentally half the measurements because they didn’t convert to metric.

  27. Drewski and Spector, to answer your question, coal fired plants and clean-up are completely free! Private investors cover 100% of the costs. They don’t cost us a penny and provide cheap reliable energy and thousands of real jobs.

    Wind and Solar can’t exist without hundreds of billions of dollars confiscated from hard working tax payers. Once they are built, they require a continuous infusion of tax payers money to keep giving expensive and unreliable energy.

    Of course, as you both well know, Wind and Solar cannot provide reliable power so the coal fired plants have to be built anyway and operate in a very inefficient stand-by mode to fill in the frequent and lengthy gaps in power generation by the least efficient and least reliable power on the planet.

    Might want to check into re-hab. Sounds like you two could use some.

    • First of all, I didn’t ask a question except for verification of the 14,000 abandoned wind farms.

      Secondly, land was appropriated for both rail, shipping and for the mines, themselves, for coal mining in almost all cases all around the world. As well, coal pollution is dirty pollution in terms of smog, heavy metal contamination and the fouling of waterways. Coal pollution is also a leading cause of lung disease (hardly free).

      Thirdly, tax breaks enjoyed by the fossil fuel industry are legendary and yet costs continue to rise while at-the-same-time renewable energy is becoming more efficient and cheaper. Best estimates are that oil generated electricity will cost as much as PV electricity by 2018 and coal generated electricity will be on a par by 2021.

      In other words, in ten short years people will be wondering why we waited so long for something so right.

  28. I suspect our two trolls, believe the American Moon Landing was a hoax too. What has never been revealed is the Russians beat them too it. Oh, yes, from a university book in Astronomy that was a required text. Why haven’t we heard about this? Two days before,
    the Russians crash landed on the moon. Politics is sometimes so convoluted it is hard to separate truth from fiction. And only those with experience and knowledge on the subject can separate bullshit from reality. Do I believe that, I don’t know it is a rather perverse way for the Russians to suggest, we got there first? They lost all their astronauts and equipment, so where the hell is it.

    • No, the Japanese recently took photos of the moon landing site — I am now convinced. Where is your evidence for 14,000 abandoned wind turbines?

      • Just recently….LOL. They landed 42 years ago! Read the articles dear, its not news that old wind turbines wore out before we realized they were out of date. good site, and article by the way.

        http:/opinionfinancialpost.com/2011/11/25/durban-downbeat

        sent via WUWT by Davidmhoffman. Also on that site is pics of disused green energy sites.

    • With respect how am I a troll. I haven’t insulted you or called you names. On average my posts have been longer and more on topic than most others in this forum. Pointing out obvious flaws in the logic is not trolling it’s asking questions. If your view point can’t stand up to questions or conversation that you should be asking if your view point is worth having.

      Also with respect to conspiracies……..
      Your the one that thinks there is a massive world wide conspiracy being perpetrated by several million people from over 200 countries from several thousand different political parties, cultures, and walks of life. That all them have faked several billion points of that are all in sync and have kept this secrete without a single break in the ranks for the past 40+ years.

      Oh and lets not forget that Al gore invented AWG when he was 3 years old. (it’s a 40 year old theory)

      Do you believe in the above? (Honestly think about the scope of motives that drives the denial industry)

      What I believe is that the coal lobby takes a few stories and publishes the hell of them. That is all.

      The simple reality is that Yes Wind/kw is more expensive right now.
      That 40 year old designs were not as good as the ones that happen now. (duh)

      What is also true is that Wind is the CHEAPEST way to create NEW power capacity. It is capacity that North America is short on…… Not price right now.
      What is also true is the price of wind generation is going DOWN
      The price of Coal, Oil and Gas is going UP.

      The trends are obvious.

      Please note that NOT A SINGLE BIT of my reasoning is based on environmental reasoning. I could care less about the environment. What I do care about is basic economics and people being lied to.

      As to the environment clean up of these windmills…….. WHAT CLEAN UP????? They don’t leak oil into the ground water table, they contain at most a little battery acid. You could make a mint from salvaging the spare parts.

  29. Europe and the US of A are almost broke. They have spent billions on useless carbon trading, that has now crashed, and for no returns or carbon emission reduction. You have been conned sweetheart. What does 5 Euros a tonne convert too. About $3.50 a tonne?
    That makes Oz’s $23 a tonne look very expensive doesn’t it. Carbon bubble about to burst!

  30. Altamont Pioneer

    Having built some of the projects in question, i can clarify. Most of those 14,000 turbines still operate, still producing clean energy despite their age. Despite their being nearly 30 years out of date. In those days the state-of-the-art was 100-200 kW turbines with 18m rotors, now more than ten times the power, with 90m rotors and larger, and much greater efficiency. Yes, technology evolves.

    The replacement of those turbines in California, called repowering, has been held up by governmental, utility and environmental issues, but is now going forward. And most of the contracts from those days contain clauses mandating removal when they are past their useful life. Only in the case of a few bankruptcies by fringe players were turbines not removed appropriately.

    Additionally, the blogger should actually read the environmental history of the raptor issue. The Altamont Pass is almost the only place in the world where diverse conditions combine to have produced avian mortality. The cause is primarily two-fold. The majority of Altamont turbines are primitive downwind turbines with high-speed rotors and lattice towers (allowing places for raptors to perch, representative of the pioneering days of the first commercial windpark in the world. Turbines nowadays are slow-speed, upwind with tubular towers. Finally, the main reason for the Altamont’s problems is the surrounding urban sprawl, which forces the raptors from a wide area to congregate there. Newer turbines already tested there do not have the same problem.

    So the avian issue is real, but focused on the Altamont. That’s a few hundred megawatts out of nearly 190,000 megawatts worldwide. period. (There is one migration route in Spain with similar problems, and strangely, it’s also the only other place in the world with those primitive downwind turbines from those days.)

    The subsidies are in place simply because there is no free market in electricity. Most of the costs of conventional fuels are not included in cost analysis, so the subsidies are designed to make up a small portion of a level playing field. And still the conventional fuel subsidies are far, far greater.

    Funny that prince Phillip, whose family has lived off complete subsidy for many centuries, can complain about these leveling subsidies. PS. Far greater experience than america in europe proves that windmills lower the cost of consumer electricity.

    One has the right to oppose windmills for whatever reason one chooses. This article is based on a desire to prove a point, but the actual reality proves the opposite. One does not have the right to make shit up, and then base one’s arguments on that shit.

    Or base one’s arguments on somebody else making shit up.

  31. Altamont Pioneer

    PS. Brian Carter, coal plants do not usually get cleaned up (at anyone’s cost), and that’s not the issue. The pollution they cause does not get cleaned up, especially the fuel source, the destruction of Appalachia, and the widespread poisons which are dispersed throughout the world’s lands and waters, with highly dangerous remnants.

    Intermittent power sources like renewables do not need 1-1 backup, in fact the already existing grid can handle the next decade or more development. Only later, when renewable sources contribute far more than now, must a plan be in place, relying on the diversity of sources and new grid technology to spread generation.

    How do i know? Because a decade ago transmission operators wouldn’t allow more than 3% wind into the grid in northern Europe because of the intermittency issue. A decade later there are only minor issues (continually being solved) with over 20% incursion.

    Care to refute existing reality?

    PPS. If there were no subsidies anywhere, windpower would be the cheapest source of electricity on the planet. Yet no one believes windpower should stand alone, it can only be developed with intelligent generation policy of diverse sources.

    Again, don’t let facts get in the way.

  32. Just keep burning that oil and coal and watching the “clean” energy of Fukushima drift around the world.
    What a barbaric species.
    After a hundred years a species too damned to wonder just WHY it is stuck burning the same monopoly fuel sources it was a century ago despite quantum leaps in progress in virtually every other avenue of human life.
    You’re being scammed folks…….
    Scammed by the same folks that never want you to leave their profitable controllable, monopoly power supplies.
    The answer lies in the Water Molecule.
    Look into it for yourself and see what has been hidden from your consideration and sustainable clean future on this planet.

  33. So why not simply take or reduce subsidies to coal instead of simply adding a tax? Which do you think would be more popular amongst voters?

    • Altamont Pioneer

      Because the very strong coal lobby (along with the other conventional fuels) wouldn’t allow it, nor would the congress they’ve bought. As i said above, with all energy subsidies taken away, wind is the cheapest source of electricity. Of course voters would appreciate that.

      • The coal lobby here in Australia, certainly couldn’t stop a tax!

      • I should add and I can only speak about Australia, either way tax or elimination of subsidies, the coal lobby would do all they can to stop it. Why not go for the one more likely to be popular with the voters?

  34. i would rather look at a wind turbine than a nuclear meltdown or an oil slick. not to mention the brown color of the sky… how many birds does one kill with one stone?

  35. P.S. lobbying should be illegal.

  36. Geothermal is the answer.

  37. Richard Beauman

    You people pay taxes? Boy you are some of the worst kind of monkey brains!

  38. There is a new energy source that will render all others virtually obsolete. The mainstream media hasn’t figured out what to do about it. Start your path to enlightment here-http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nURJGTEyNAg

  39. No mention of the subsidies for petroleum.

    How about the fact that they don’t PAY for the oil that is part of the national common wealth that they pump out from the ground and refine.

    Then they don’t have to pay if there is an oil spill like in Alaska or the Gulf.

    Pure profit with no responsibility, accountability or rules to benefit the few and the extremely wealthy at everyone else’s expense and risk.

  40. This report brought to you by oil and gas.

  41. The wind farms closed in the state of Hawaii, Kamoa, Lalamilo, Kahua Ranch, and Kahuku all had first generation turbines, as were most of the turbines in Palm springs and elsewhere in California, with some having designs from the 40’s. the rest were built by washing machine and Japanese Zero experts. The latest designs are as slick as oil and extremely reliable and they do work! Lets face it, the oil dependency, dirty coal and shaky nuclear resources aren’t the long term answers. Wind is great when it blows, we may as well use it when it does.

  42. Drewski, you are absolutely right to ask for evidence of the 14,000 ‘abandon turbines.’ People on the web, academia and the media play far too loose with the ‘facts.’ That being said,…

    “Secondly, land was appropriated for both rail, shipping and for the mines, themselves, for coal mining in almost all cases all around the world. As well, coal pollution is dirty pollution in terms of smog, heavy metal contamination and the fouling of waterways. Coal pollution is also a leading cause of lung disease (hardly free).”

    Appropriated? You mean like “nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.” How is that any different from appropriations of billions of private money and massive tracts of land for wind and solar, and the transmission lines, not to mention blighted landscapes, adverse health effects and hacked up bats and birds of prey?

    Pollution? Where? Show me. I’ve been to many brown-aired mega cities in China. So? The wind blows, it goes away to be recycled. The CO2 goes right back into the atmosphere where it was originally, nourishing plant life worldwide improving crop yields. Show me any person in America choking on pollution from coal fired plants. What would you prefer they choke on, smoke from a quaint old-fashioned wood stove because its night-time and the sun and wind are off?

    Heavy metals? Where did the heavy metals come from to begin with? They came from the very earth we are returning them to. We can pollute it for ourselves, but we can’t hurt “the environment.” One year after “the greatest environmental disaster in American history” the gulf of Mexico was back to normal with hardly any evidence remaining from the disaster.

    “a leading cause of lung disease?” Really? So is that #1, #3, #6, or is that just a convenient thing to claim? Citations?

    Coal is “all around the world”. Sounds like a cheap and plentiful source of energy for developed and developing nations.

    What do you have against people anyway?

  43. “they don’t PAY for the oil” C’mon, BS Detector.

    How much do they pay for exploration that may or may not pay off? How much do they pay the government for permits, leases, environmental impact statements and fees? How much did Exxon pay for cleaning up Prince William Sound?” BP paid $21 BILLION for the Deep Water Horizon spill.

    “They don’t pay”? C’mon, that’s BS.

    • Mr Brian Carter.
      There are a few odd parts of your statement.
      – As much as you care about hacked bats and birds, blighted landscapes, and adverse health effects. The reality is that EVERY Power plant in the existence has these problems. Can you say that Wind power causes these more than any other. Or as you know very well the effects far are less than most other power generating methods. I also highly doubt you care much about birds.
      People seem to DEMAND perfection from any renewable energy source. This is a silly position. You don’t throw away perfectly good technology because it’s not absolutely perfect. You didn’t expect this from other technologies why this one.

      – You also claim that heavy metals and Co2 that is being put into the atmosphere is simply being returned there. This is a 100% FALSE statement.
      These heavy metals and Co2 have been SEALED in ground. Far from human and animal populations. I have no idea how you can possibly consider 1000m deep in the ground to be as equivalent as being on your door step. Everything on this earth is “natural” however that does not mean that it’s good for you or that you should inhale or ingest it. If you disagree I recommend arsenic or any number of natural substances.

      – Coal is indeed around the world. However it is not cheap and is becoming harder and harder to get. This is reality. The price of Coal has been steadily increasing.
      – How much do that pay in projects that don’t pay off…….. This is true of EVERY SINGLE INDUSTRY ON EARTH. Including wind or solar. Do you think those wind power plants that are no longer working are from “successful” ventures. ALL ventures can fail. OIL is not the only one that takes a risk it’s foolish of you to suggest that.

      Adam….. Nice video about small wind. It was very informative. It’s fairly obvious that small wind would not be affective on a large scale. However, no one hear was talking about small wind. We are all talking about the large wind, large turbines. Just as Coal generated Steam power is ineffective it doesn’t mean the entire industries invalidated.

  44. I used to work for a company that managed small wind generators (1000 watt)mounted on 50ft poles with a solar panel attached. I witnessed that the 100w solar module put out 99.9 % of the power that charged the battery bank. These systems ran lights in locations where power wasn’t available. We would have to replace bearings every 3 years or so. The install cost around $10,000 u.s.f and if it was just a solar and battery it would of been around $1200. The turbine would spin a lot but not fast enought to get even 10 watts. I’m not sure about large wind but I know small wind sucks.

    http://cleantechnica.com/2009/07/29/small-wind-sucks-test-finds/

    There is a good film called Windfall that is a must see, it agrees that wind is not the answer

  45. cosmic mariner

    Why should the subsidy bubble burst for renewable wind and not for the nuclear or oil industries?

    http://www.earthtrack.net/files/uploaded_files/nuclear%20subsidies_summary.pdf

    NUCLEAR POWER: Still Not Viable without Subsidies

    “…This means that buying power on the open market and giving it away for free
    would have been less costly than subsidizing the construction and operation of
    nuclear power plants.”

    ———————————————————————————————–

    http://www.earthtrack.net/documents/budget-hawks-does-us-need-give-gas-and-oil-companies-41-billion-year

    Budget hawks: Does US need to give gas and oil companies $41 billion a year?

    ———————————————————————————————–

    http://www.icta.org/doc/Real%20Price%20of%20Gasoline.pdf

    THE REAL PRICE OF GASOLINE[/B]

    “…This report by the International Center for Technology Assessment (CTA) identifies and quantifies the many external costs of using motor vehicles and the internal combustion engine that are not reflected in the retail price Americans pay for gasoline.These are costs that consumers pay indirectly by way of increased taxes, insurance costs,and retailprices in other sectors.The report divides the external costs of gasoline usage into five primary areas (1)Tax Subsidization of the Oil Industry;(2)Government Program Subsidies;(3) Protection Costs Involved in Oil Shipment and Motor Vehicle Services;(4)Environmental, Health,and Social Costs of Gasoline Usage; and (5) Other Important Externalities of Motor Vehicle Use. Together, these external costs total $558.7 billion to $1.69 trillion per year, which, when added to the retail price of gasoline, results in a per gallon price of $5.60 to $15.14.

    ————————————————————————————-

    http://www.setamericafree.org/saf_hiddencostofoil010507.pdf

    THE HIDDEN COST OF OIL

    “…In October of 2003, the National Defense Council Foundation (NDCF) released the results of a year-long review of oil-related defense costs that entailed the most comprehensive analysis of that subject ever conducted. The entire order of battle of the United States armed forces was examined down to the battalion or equivalent level, including close scrutiny of roles and mission statements and unit histories. In addition, the entire Department of Defense budget was reviewed to determine if there had been any extraordinary expenditure that could be directly related to protecting oil supplies.The analysis concluded that the fixed costs of defending Persian Gulf oil amounted to $49.1 billion annually. These estimated, however were based on data compiled prior to the initiation of Operation Iraqi Freedom. As a result, in 2006, the Foundation revisited the issue to take into account any additional outlays that could be reasonably assigned to the protection of oil supplies. Based on a review of current circumstances, the initial estimate was increased to $137 billion.”

    • Dear Cosmic, The fossil fuel industry, to whatever extent it is subsidized, has provided Americans cheap, plentiful and relatively clean energy for the last 70+ years. So-called Green Energy is extremely expensive and unreliable.

      Subsidies for energy production is an investment.

      Subsidies for politically connected investors, environmental activist organizations, i.e. Earthtrack, Sierra club, Union of Concerned Scientists, G.E., the IPCC, Penn State, Hadley CRU,… ad nauseum,… are graft and corruption.

  46. Dear (Mr?) Spector, ” The reality is that EVERY Power plant in the existence has these problems.” Correct you are sir. So why keep throwing massive amounts of money into a failed technology supported by religious zealots, gold-digging scientists and politicians on the take? Let the market drive the innovation and you will have the best technology available.

    Case in point, Solyndra (et. al.) failed because it was built on obsolete technology, and with seemingly unlimited funds flowing into the company, there was no need of common business sense. The result, billions spent, thousands of tons of (harmless) CO2 spewed into the atmosphere, and very little (very expensive) energy created. Again, the rich cash in and the common man picks up the tab.

    There’s a reason they’re called “fossil fuels.” All the fossil fuels we combust today, whether coal, petroleum or natural gas were once living plants and animals. The plants derived carbon from the atmosphere, animals derived carbon from plants and each other. At the time these fossils were alive, atmospheric CO2 was many times higher than today.
    Perhaps you’re suggesting there was some ‘intelligent design’ that SEALED these bad things away from the plants and animals? The surface of the earth is constantly being recycled. Many of the highest mountains on earth were once the bottoms of ancient seas. There are many places on earth where radiation from naturally occurring Radon poses serious health risks.

    The only reason coal (and oil) is becoming harder to get is due entirely to extreme, radical environmental laws passed by politicians on the take and religious kooks imposing their dark, anti-human views on the rest of us.

    Let the market drive energy technology, not religion.

    • Altamont Pioneer

      the belief in free markets, especially regarding energy, is a religion. Mr. Carter, please give me one example of an energy free market anywhere in the world.

    • Where is your proof that over the hundreds of millions of years it took to create fossil fuels, the CO2 levels were higher during the entire period?

      The reason that fossil fuels are becoming more expensive is chiefly due to the increased difficulty and danger (environmental and geopolitical) there is in recovering the fuel. One hundred years ago you could stick a pipe into Pennsylvania and oil would gush out now you have to develop whole new technologies to extract oil from incredible ocean pressures and Arctic weather.

    • Dear Mr. Brian Carter.
      – Solyna…… and your point…. You seem to expect/demand that every single operation work. You concentrate on the 1% while ignoring the 99% that are successful. This is business. I believe I already brought this point out. By your logic that Automotive industry should have given up 80 years ago. Also as you be aware the efficiency of turbines has increase vastly in a short time and you can expect it to continue to decrease in cost. Afterall it`s not Wind extracting wind will get more expensive unlike oil and gas.
      Also as it`s been brought up the oil and gas industry receives massive subsidies and tax breaks of their own. Energy is a needed commodity.

      – Co2 already existed from the dinosaurs…. I’m sorry but this is a beyond silly argument. The intelligent design of this situation is called EVOLUTION. TODAYS plants and animals are not adapted to the vastly different environment of 20 million years ago (there were no HUMANS). To suggest it’s viable is silly. I also doubt that even the dinosaurs fared well to heavy metal pollution in there water supply. You are grasping at straws for this argument.
      It`s obvious to anyone that the earth was different in the past. What is also obvious is that there are about 8 billion more humans here today who expect long life spans and an un-interrupted food supply.

      – Coal and oil Cost. Coal and oil are becoming expensive because they are harder to get to. As drewski said you used to be able to poke a hole in the ground. Now we are trying to squeeze it from sand and in-case you haven`t noticed oil cost WORLD WIDE have increased vastly over the past 15 years. The US is not a major exporter and I doubt middle eastern dictatorships care much about the environment.
      What you probably don`t realize is that once oil drops to a certain price it is no longer profitable to extract. The oil sands shut down half its operations when the recession hit due to the price drop. It costs money to extract oil. You need massive drilling rigs to dig down several miles below the surface to find it. Than you need to transport it, and refine it. This costs money and people don`t do it for free. It`s doubtful that we`ll every run out of oil, it is probable though that you won`t want to pay for extracting it from the middle of the ocean in international waters.

      Overall I want to point out one thing. People seem to demand perfection from the wind industry. At some point this become silly. You didn`t expect it from coal, oil, gas or nuclear…. They all got government money, they all got and still get tax breaks. Yet somehow when someone else tries to get a piece of the pie they must be stopped.

      This is a blatant double standard. You don`t see me running around saying we should stop all nuclear because of 3 mile island….. That would be silly. Yet somehow when some 20 year old “small” wind turbine field shuts down you guys shout that the entire industry should be scrapped.

  47. Dear Spector, My point about Solyndra was simply that the lack of a free market and easy federal money gave them no reason to improve the technology thus the company failed. China for example has relatively free markets and they seized the best technology available to make solar panel producers competitive and profitable. Easy money killed Solyndra, Evergreen Solar and SpectraWatt.

    Prehistoric CO2 silliness? You might want to do some homework here. 20 million years ago, the earth was geologically and atmospherically not that much different than today.

    Phanerozoic carbon dioxide levels were 6 to 20 times higher 200-300 million years ago. This was when enormous volumes of biomass were being subducted into the intense pressures and temperatures in the earths’ mantle to produce the fossil fuels we use today. (citations follow)

    *Bergman, Noam M., Timothy M. Lenton, and Andrew J. Watson (2004). “COPSE: A new model of biogeochemical cycling over Phanerozoic time”. American Journal of Science 301: 182-204.
    *Berner, RA and Z. Kothavala (2001). “GEOCARB III: A revised model of atmospheric CO2 over Phanerozoic time”. American Journal of Science 304: 397–437.
    *Rothman, Daniel H. (2001). “Atmospheric carbon dioxide levels for the last 500 million years”. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 99 (7): 4167-4171.

    “noticed oil cost WORLD WIDE have increased vastly,..” Correct you are again sir. However I content it is due to extreme environmental restrictions not scarcity. Deep Water Horizon was in deep water because the easy oil in the shallow water is off limits. Now oil exploration is shut down for US companies in the gulf of Mexico, while other countries continue to drill.

    No one is demanding perfection from solar and wind, we’re just asking for viability and accountability.

    • Dear Brian
      Sollyandra is a great point about the lack of free market. However it is not a not represented sample. Most wind farms I know about got some help from the government but are a complete free market production. Same goes for the wind farms I know about.

      – As for prehistoric silliness. I was actually trying to be polite. I know very well that Co2 levels were higher, along with O2, it also had a thicker and moister atmosphere at with a single contentment and solar minimums. I thank you for the citation.

      That being said exactly how many humans were around at that point? Because that is the question you should be asking. I’m sure the dinosaurs did great. However human population, crops, and cities would not survive under similar conditions. Comparing today’s society to dinosaur population is beyond silly. It is actually pointless. We are not dinosaurs, There is a reason they are not around to day and there is a reason that human like animals or even mammals did not do well 20 million years ago.

      The life on this earth will survive absolutely anything you throw it. However, the real question is what will happen to human life and more importantly what will happen to human society. With over 8 billion people it is fairly easy to topple and cause problems.

      – Oil prices. I suspect you were going to bring up the US drilling restrictions. I suspect you think that somehow the US will keep the oil it drills. Something that is not true. If the US starts drilling more the price of oil will remain exactly the same. The OIL in the US is part of the GLOBAL MARKET. The oil industry just like anyone else will charge what the market will bare for the highest price it can get. The only way the price would be cheaper is if you lived in a communist government. Something that you don’t want for obvious reasons.

      Also even if your logic was correct. It would still mean that unless things change (doubtful) it would still mean that windmills will soon be the cheapest choice in every category not just new generation just as I said.

      – Demanding perfection…… You are asking for perfection. Most of your complaints about windmills occur in most other forms of other forms of power generation to an even greater extent. Yet somehow when this occurs in windmill technology is new and a great green disaster and a massive case of fraud. You put up with and ignore it in every other form of generation or industry but the minuet it occurs in wind or solar it’s proof that it should be completely scrapped.

      I get it. 5-10 years ago you saw how these things didn’t work as well. You saw that it was a waste of money. I would even agree with you on some points. However, time has gone by. Technology has improved the alternatives have gotten more expensive, and our need for quick power has become greater than ever before. However people are still stuck on that 20 year old windmill and that 5 year old solar panel forgetting that things have changed.

  48. Spector, You are right again about one thing. As late as five years ago I remember driving through the Columbia River wind farms at the east end of the gorge. Less than half the turbines were operating which is more than I was accustomed to seeing. This summer fully two thirds were operating. Obviously the technology is improving. I simply contend that nursing it along with rich subsidies is retarding progress.

    Now as far as the geophysical history of Earth is concerned, I’m fairly well versed. The subtle and tumultuous changes this planets surface has gone through are truly humbling and awe-inspiring. From a literally rusting planet to “Snowball Earth” when life was just beginning to the Permian extinction, the comings and goings of one super continent after another to the super volcanoes like Yellowstone and Lake Toba 75,000 years ago that brought the human species to near extinction,… I’ve done some homework.

    It was that course of study that has fairly well convinced me that there is nothing our species can do to harm this planet, it’s biosphere and especially, it’s climate. And that my dear Spector, is the crux of the debate. Without apocalyptic descriptions of Earths’ future from (once) respected leading climate scientists there would only be a tiny fraction of the wind and solar farms that we have today.

    Humans simply don’t matter, except to each other.

    • “super volcanoes like Yellowstone and Lake Toba 75,000 years ago that brought the human species to near extinction,… I’ve done some homework.

      It was that course of study that has fairly well convinced me that there is nothing our species can do to harm this planet, it’s biosphere and especially, it’s climate.”

      75,000 year old volcanoes convinced you that man cannot hurt the planet?!? Are you talking about a moon-sized asteroid slamming into the Pacific? That would hurt.

      What about the things that live on the planet? What about biodiversity?

    • Dear Brian

      I hope you understand that our experiences are different and we come from different countries. I am willing to admit I’m not sure what your government is doing. Mine however, appears to be taking a different approach.

      I also hope you understand that wind turbines do sit idle on occasion. For instance if turbine has made a 360d turn than it will stop and spin itself around in a rather lengthy process taking about a day. I think you confusing an Idle turbine with a non-functioning one and it’s confusing your view on them.

      As to the earth….. I think you are missing my point entirely. I know the earth will survive almost anything we throw at it. That is not the question. The question is can humans survive anything we throw at them? Will it be comfortable? Can we handle it happening to more than 8 billion all at once?

      75,000 years ago there were no cities, no farmers fields. Human populations just got up and moved if disaster struck. We can’t do that now. We are stuck, we have a limited and unmovable food supply, we require massive power infrastructure. To rebuild, change or alter this infrastructure will cost hundreds of billions a year. Our civilization can only adapt so fast and it will not be fun. I personally don’t think humanity will be doomed but the minimal infrastructure investments and life style changes we make now will save hundreds of billions later.

      Half of the government green movement is about saving money. Building new landfills are expensive, building new power plants extremely expensive. Health problems due to pollution and lack of active living are also expensive.

      Most of these changes and things that are happening have nothing to do with AWG. It’s just a marketing ploy. It has to do with saving money.

  49. Sherri with respect, I didn’t know that the mining or coal industry received subsidies such as being handed out to solar uses and these wind turbine investors/users? I mean to say if I could afford solar with subsidies I would install them. Not just for hot water though! If it lowered my general electricity costs for sure. But it doesn’t. And the problem is those that can’t afford to join the scheme, subsidise those that can, increasing those that can.

    Wind turbines and solar panels are better for isolated areas. Even for third world countries who have no grid electricity supplies, better than none at all. But they are no good for urban areas or industrial areas that depend on huge input of electricity supplies.

    There are many measures we can apply to aid sustainability in the long run, but we can’t at this stage ignore that the spark that drives us is electricity.

    I have after 4 years just completed my diploma in organic agricultural production. I have my Cert IV already. And the thing that concerns me most, is that we maintain and improve our ability to provide food to the Australian public. And that does not need a carbon tax to assist it.

    • Do you mean me? because if so, you totally misunderstood me. I was replying to a comment inregards to coal having more subsidies then renewables making it the reason it is cheaper. My point was, that if this is true why would the government feel they need to commit political suicide by trying to bring in a tax, when they could just reduce or stop the coal subsidies for the same effect.

      Whilst I don’t agree with the carbon tax and am concerned of wind per se because of health problems, birds etc, I do like solar, I didn’t know about the grid concerns until these comments. Ulimately our coal supplies are running out and we do need efficient renewable alternatives “that are safe” and I hope we find some suitable for Australia (some claim free energy is possible using magnets), but I don’t think this tax or ETS is there to help really. Our government depends on the revenue too much.

  50. Why are you all in such a hurry to abandone these wind turbines? Does anyone remember the Windmills that have been around for hundreds of years and are actually the method of life for many who rely on it for their power and electricity in remote locations. This wind turbine is nothing more than a revised windmill and with a few revisions/modifications,.., could be all the rage. Putting a guard around those blades (just like your ordinary fan in your home would eliminate killing of any birds and nobody has complained in a similar manner about the windmills which can be found throughout the countryside and are still being used in an increasing fashion on some farms??? I would love to have one of those “working” turbines sent to me, I’d put mine to good use and eliminate most of my electricity bill.

    • Because they somehow associate Windmill turbine techonolgy with global warming, Al gore, maxisms and probally bigfoot.

      Because don’t you know they are all in it together in a massive world wide conspiracy. lol.

  51. so the answer is to keep strip mining for coal and polluting the gulf and everywhere else in the world. ????

  52. If anyone wants to see the size and dishonesty of a REAL conspiracy — the anti-science anti-sustainability BS campaign on sites like Tory Aardvarks — simply look at the bottom of this page at the “Pingbacks” section.

    There is literally an army of idiots who can’t wait to jump into the cesspool of wilful ignorance and Tory is right there selling them flippers.

  53. Spector,

    Not only are our experiences different, I prefer to think there are over six billion experiences that are different and unique. My government is supercilious and drunk with power. Their enablers in the media feed their own broods and provide cover for government largess and the corruption of journalistic and academic standards. Sound familiar?

    ” The question is can humans survive anything we throw at them?” “We are stuck, we have a limited and unmovable food supply, we require massive power infrastructure.”

    Obviously we both care a great deal about the health and living standards of our fellow human species. With limited monetary resources and so many mouths to feed, we need to proceed judiciously with the best information available.

    Is there an immediate and actionable threat we need to respond to?
    Are we creating ‘energy poverty’ in a headlong dash to avert a crisis that may not exist?

    Oh, and Charles, the gulf of Mexico (aka Deep Water Horizon) returned to normal the following summer with barely a trace that anything happened. Except for the thousands of jobs lost due to the imposed drilling restrictions, the gulf survived unscathed. The people suffered.

    • Different experiences: I certainly do hope there are different unique experiences. However, I hoe you understand that America is VERY unique in it’s opinion on several things. You have a very partisan government, with a bias and self serving media coupled with a questionable science standard. Other countries more close examples to look at. America has few of them and tends to ignore them as un-american.

      Limited resources: You are absolutely right we need to respond with the best information available and sadly that is what people are doing.

      There is an immediate threat. Or rather a small window to avoid a threat. Due to various feed back loops and other factors there when it comes to AWG there is a point of no return and we are quickly approaching it. This is often called the tipping point it’s the moment that our athroprogentic forcing starts a feed back loop that will spell disaster 50 years from now. Some think we have already past that point, others think we still have time but they all agree that at some point it will be too late.

      In my experience the reasons for ignoring this usually centers around some vast worldwide conspiracy involving Al Gore and big foot. Don’t get me wrong there are many legitimate reasons to disagree. However, it’s also obvious that given the consequences doing nothing at all would be pretty stupid. Everyone hedges their bets it doesn’t make any sense not to.

      Also even if you don’t consider the above true the reality is that people are proceeding Judiciously. No one is stopping cars, banning cows or shutting down perfectly good power plants. What they are doing is trying to promote better ideas and beginning the long process of moving towards them. The only reason it seems shocking is because 3 generations have been doing the same thing for so long that any alteration of routine especially in areas that were previously considered too green or not useful seems is too much of a break from routine. Even you admit that most of the complaints about windmills not working have to do with previous outdated concepts.

      Energy Poverty: This has NOTHING to do with AWG. We are lacking energy due to pure economics. China, india and the rest of the 3rd world has hit the industrial revolution phase of growth and they are consuming resources that they never needed before. This is creating a lack of resources elsewhere.

      So here in the first world we are frantically building energy sources. We are using the cheapest to build, the easiest to put up, and the cheapest on average form for a 30 year life span…… WIND. Hence this head long rush into using it. Honestly you have to stop looking at the environment when you think of wind energy. It is little more than a political excuse a way to bolster some green credential for doing something that makes sense to do in the first place.

      Now that this has gone for a bit I want to point out one very important thing to you. Your arguments has progressively gotten smaller and smaller.
      You started out with what you thought were some very strong points and ideas of why people would do certain things. However, as you have discovered they were not as strong as you might have thought and people are doing things for completely different reasons than you were told.

      Now of course this doesn’t mean that I’m right it just means that I’ve been able to make some strong and logical arguments about wind turbine technology. However, I hope I made you stop and think about it more and realize there is more too this than you previously thought and that others who promote this technology might have even stronger arguments and good logical reasons to continue doing so.

      • “Energy Poverty: This has NOTHING to do with AWG. We are lacking energy due to pure economics. “

        This is demonstrably incorrect. Windmills currently have everything to do with AGW and this is evidenced that they are only built with tax payer subsidies in one form or another. The day that windmills are to do with a genuine lack of energy will be when they become the cheapest way to produce energy-and then the spenders of the tax payers dollar won’t be able to compete with the genuine investors in the industry.

        Cheers

        Roger

        http//www.rogerfromnewzealand.wordpress.com

      • Dear Rogers.

        Do you understand the difference between political spin and reality??? It spins both ways. Political parties want to boost there green credentials so they do something they would do anyway and say it’s because it’s “green” and people are capitalizing on that.

        Remember spin happens both ways.

        Also wind is the CHEAPEST way to add NEW capacity to the power grid per kw. Remember I”m talking about new capacity and ability to produce power. The power grids need Capacity.

        Per KW/h it’s slightly more expensive NOW. However current predictions say it will be one of the cheapest by 2016.

        Long story short you DO NOT BUILD POWER PLANTS FOR THE NOW. You build them based on the recurring trends and the power plants lifespan. Why would you build a coal plant that will last 40+ years only to have it be more expensive for 35 of those years.

        All you have to do is look at the current trends. Wind, Solar, Hydro electric are getting CHEAPER. Coal, oil and gas are getting more expensive in part due to environmental regulations but largely due to the 130%- 250% increase power need of countries like china and and India.

  54. Offered a global clean energy generation concept. Blocked by bureaucracy. It would seem that ludicrous technologies get great funding ( I wonder why).
    COP17..I’d say total failure. Carbon credits? bizarre. Where would there be a carbon debit?
    Of course, everyone is on the hunt for a solution, without willing to pay for it…corporates say ‘ give us your ideas, we’ll air the best ones’..sure…waiting for the idea to monopolize.

    Perhaps offering to fix the US deficit issue, and lower carbons globally sounded a tad much from the ranks of the nobody’s..but all’s cool..keep listening to the political whackjobs and economist type zits ( well, maybe that should be ‘all’s warm’)..lol.

    A gathering of many heads, never takes account of the many that arrived without a brain.

  55. Whoever came up with this dead bird count is a liar. These wind mills are not pretty and my elecrtric bill went up not down when they came to Maine so I’m not a real supporter of them. However to say they kill birds is a hoot. In fact if would kill Red Tail Hawks I would support them. We only have a million too many hawks anyway.

    • The whole article is simply recycled trash submitted by a lazy “journalist” with an agenda but not much else.

  56. Here is a highly biased but essentialy factual record of the wind farm industry in Hawaii.

    http://hawaii.gov/dbedt/ert/wwg/history.html

    I say factual, because the record of the installation and decommisions is probably accurate but I say biased, because this is the official website of the wind farm industry of Hawaii and one has to interpret the facts in order to decide whether their implied claims of success are to be believed.

    Cheers

    Roger

    http://www.rogerfromnewzealand.wordpress.com

  57. Gud on yer Roger the Surf. Oh Bull Drewski. Remember the billions invested in carbon trading and clean so called energy. They will go broke, and we won’t be any better off, as AGW is a myth, fraud, and all it is doing is financing the banks who invest in this. The crunch will come when no one wants to invest in clean energy projects, geo thermal projects have shut down in UK and Australia, however, the only God Send in Australia is solar thermal, not solar panels or windmills. Years away from being affective but might be one day be a good and reliable source of energy, providing they an bank energy during the times that de sun don’t shine and at night. 25 years away from being effective. Carbon tax and credits, a carbon bubble like the 18th century South sea bubble. And people, not the Al Gores et al will be hurt financially.

    • Bushbunny you are big on homespun philosophy but mighty thin on citations or facts. Here are some FACTS for you to digest.

      http://www.awea.org/newsroom/pressreleases/release_07APR11_.cfm

      Wind power is the fastest growing form of generated electric power in the world and America’s power industry grew by 15% in 2010 and provided 26% of all new electric generating capacity in the United States. With the 5,116 MW added last year, U.S. wind installations now stand at 40,181 MW, enough to supply electricity for over 10 million American homes.

      “The American wind industry is delivering, despite competing with energy sectors that have permanent government subsidies in place,” said Denise Bode, CEO of the American Wind Energy Association (AWEA). “Wind is consistently performing,” she said, “adding 35% of all new generating capacity since 2007— that’s twice what coal and nuclear added combined.”

      In regards to PV solar electricity in Australia (not solar thermal) almost one million homes now have it installed for a population of 21 million and for solar hot water the numbers are about the same.

  58. spector567

    I understand reality very well thank you.

    However I am afraid that it appears that wind is not the cheapest way to produce energy at the present, and I am unaware of the predictions that you talk about. It would help your credibility if you could quote some reliable sources to back up your un-fettered opinions.

    Of course it may appear to be cheap to you if you and all your brother tax payers actually pay for it through your taxes.

    It is true that windpower has grown considerably in the EC but only subsidised by the tax payers and government borrowings.

    Read this academic paper about Spain.

    http://rogerfromnewzealand.files.wordpress.com/2011/07/090327-employment-public-aid-renewable.pdf

    Spain is now facing bankruptcy which has been caused by excessive government spending. A large portion of this, as you will read is on so called renewables, the policy of which has been enthusiastically embraced and encouraged by the EC.

    Wait a sec! Isnt Greece, Portugal, Ireland, Italy and the EC generally having an economic melt down of some sort right now?

    Well yes thats true, do you have any idea what is causing this?

    Well its those greedy capitalists at it again!! When will they never stop this stealing from the people!!

    Sorry can’t blame the capitalists on this one.
    This problem is caused by too much government spending and borrowing which are socialist policies in case you didn’t know!

    Makes you wonder what they are spending on.

    Give you three guesses. Might pay to read about Spain first.

    Cheers

    Roger

    http://www.rogerfromnewzealand.wordpress.com

    • Roger, are you seriously suggesting that Spain is in financial trouble because of it’s wind industry?!?
      That is one very big pancho you have woven out of very tiny piece of wool amigo.

      Can you name one form of large-scale energy generation — anywhere in the world — that did not get subsidies to get started. Or any large-scale operation that isn’t still receiving subsidies in the US?

      BTW, did you notice that wind was the most cost-effective form of renewable energy in that paper of yours?

    • Roger your missing or misunderstanding 2 very important points.

      1. Wind is the cheapest way to provide NEW generating capacity. Aka You can build a 1000kw wind farm far cheaper than you could build a a 1000kw Coal plant. I’m not talking about cheapest Per kw/h currently and this is without goverment help since they vary by location.

      2. That due to the increaed commidity prices coal prices are increasing while wind power is getting cheaper in better. By 2016 Wind will be cheaper (do you doubt this??). Power plants of any sort have a life span. You dont build the option that will be more expensive for 80%+ of it’s life.

      About goverment subsidies….. ALL POWER GENERATION CONSTRUCTION GETS SUBSADIES AND TAX BREAKS. Wind is no different in that regard.

      As to employment…… Well are you a communist??? Do you suggest that I should build a coal plant at greater long term expense to myself just so that you can have a job?

      • I am definitely suggesting the the EC’s woes are caused by excessive government borrowing and spending including “renewable energy” projects of which wind energy projects are a significant portion.

        You guys first of all should read the paper I included in my last comment, and secondly refrain from spouting out wild and unsupported statements.

        In other words come up with some proper research that supports what you are saying.
        Good luck on that.

        Cheers

        Roger

        http://www.rogerfromnewzealand.wordpress.com

      • As requested….. (I must be lucky)
        Price of new generation by source.

        http://ca.wrs.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0geu8iUet1OQVYAVMLrFAx.;_ylu=X3oDMTE1NHE4NWFtBHNlYwNzcgRwb3MDMQRjb2xvA2FjMgR2dGlkA01TWUNBMDNfNzc-/SIG=13ids5ieb/EXP=1323166484/**http%3a//www.nei.org/filefolder/WHITE_PAPER_-_Cost_of_New_Generating_Capacity_in_Perspective.pdf

        Levelized cost of power sources in 2016

        http://www.instituteforenergyresearch.org/2009/05/12/levelized-cost-of-new-generating-technologies/

        Sorry I refrained from posting the links earlier because the last time I posted links here it took 2 days for them to show up. I honestly thought you’d look things up for yourself just to prove me wrong.

        As to your article……. Why would you quote Spain??? they screwed up. they jumped on the technology way to soon way to fast. Everyone who attacks renewable jumps on Spain….. why… because it’s one of the only examples of failure and you as a anti-globalwarming, Anti-renewable blogger seeks out only those sources.

      • Roger your source are on route and are just waiting for moderation. I would have provided them to you sooner but posting any links seems to require the permission of the blog owner for me. It took a couple of days last time and I didn’t think you’d wait around for a response.

        Please enjoy the reports. As you will see Wind is one of the cheapest ways to provide new capacity and it will be one of the cheapest or almost equal in cost by 2016 without subsidies.

        Long story short my point stands.

        As to Spain….. They were stupid. the technology wasn’t read when they switched. I’d personally say that it’s only been viable for the past few years over conventional forms. Don’t attribute poor planning to good technology.

      • Another more detailed link.

        http://www.narucmeetings.org/Presentations/2008%20EMP%20Levelized%20Cost%20of%20Energy%20-%20Master%20June%202008%20%282%29.pdf

        As you can see the information varies a little probably due to the region the report was completed in but the theme and conclusions are the same.

  59. Roger, I read your paper — it was a discussion of how renewable energy projects affects jobs in comparison with general projects. Very obtuse.

    If your point to make it seem as if renewable energy is the cause of European financial troubles then how do you explain that the largest and most vibrant economy in Europe, Germany, also relies the most on renewable energy?

  60. Spector567 and Drewski,

    I cannot discuss anything with you until you see fit to come up with some support for your wild statements.
    At least you could try Wikapedia but I suggest you look for something more factual.

    567, your link did not work so I have no idea what your point is.

    Cheers

    Roger

    http://www.rogerfromnewzealand.wordpress.com

    ps this video is of some interest even if it is only marginally relevant to what we are talking about.

    • Roger — Wild claims?! That is a bit like the kettle calling the tar sands black.

      Germany is only one of 27 EU counties and its GDP was 2,852 billion dollars in 2005

      http://www.studentsoftheworld.info/infopays/rank/PNB2.html

      and Europe’s entire expenditure on renewable energy has been 35 billion euros for the past few years

      http://www.renewableenergyworld.com/rea/news/article/2011/02/european-us-renewable-energy-targets

      So, in other words Germany’s 2005 GDP alone is more than 80 times larger than today’s entire European expenditure on renewable energy.

      “Figures from the industry show that during 2010 more renewable energy power capacity was installed than ever before – a total of 22.6 GW, an increase of 31% compared with 2009 installations. ‘It is the fifth consecutive year that renewables have accounted for more than 40% of new electricity generating installations,’ said European Renewable energy Council said president Arthouros Zervos.

      Please tell me again how wind generators caused the European financial crisis.

      • Drewski,

        I think you need to study what Gross Domestic Product means in economic terms as used in your comment. A few years of economics at university level might help.
        Then you will realise that comparing GDP with expenditure on renewable energy is entirely inappropriate and meaningless.

        Why don’t you look up the tax revenue of of Germany as well as the years borrowings and then compare that with Government expenditure and subsidies, direct and indirect on renewable energy and see what sort of figures you get?

        Cheers

        Roger

        http://www.rogerfromnewzealand.wordpress.com

    • Check the other 2 that are not under moderation any more.

      Or do a Google search for “levelized cost of energy”

      You computer must not like the PDF documents because it works just fine for me.

      You might also be interested to know that the NARU is run out of Texas, hardly the most progressive place.

      • Thanks for the links,

        Although the first link triggered a warning by Yahoo so I did not persue it further, I did read the latter two very carefully.
        I also checked the references of http://www.instituteforenergyresearch.org/2009/05/12/levelized-cost-of-new-generating-technologies/ at http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/aeo/electricity_generation.html

        When read carefully, and some of the language is somewhat obscure, it appears that the levelized cost of wind is not quite what it appears.
        For instance the paragraph
        “Since the availability of wind or solar is dependent on forces outside of the operator’s control, their levelized costs are not directly comparable to those for other technologies although the average annual capacity factor may be similar. Because intermittent technologies do not provide the same contribution to system reliability as technologies that are operator controlled and dispatched, they may require additional system investment as back-up power that are not included in the levelized costs shown below.
        Source: Energy Information Administration, Annual Energy Outlook 2011, http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/aeo/electricity_generation.html

        And at http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/aeo/electricity_generation.html

        In the table below, (table1 Estimated levelized cost of new generation resources 2016) the levelized cost for each technology is evaluated based on the capacity factor indicated, which generally corresponds to the maximum availability of each technology. Simple combustion turbines (conventional or advanced technology) are typically used for peak load duty cycles, and are thus evaluated at a 30 percent capacity factor. The duty cycle for intermittent renewable resources of wind and solar is not operator controlled, but dependent on the weather or solar cycle (that is, sunrise/sunset). The availability of wind or solar will not necessarily correspond to operator dispatched duty cycles and, as a result, their levelized costs are not directly comparable to those for other technologies (even where the average annual capacity factor may be similar).
        Note “Capacity factor” in table.

        In other words, as I read it, the unreliability of wind generation (because the wind doesn’t blow all the time), appears to be accounted for in this way. Presumably if we expect to have wind substituting for our current generations, we would expect it to have a factor nearer 100 which as the site clearly says, is not accounted for in the tables shown.

        I think the best test of the effectiveness of wind energy will be if and when private enterprise get into it without the need of subsidies and governments using tax payers money to give encouragement

        Cheers

        Roger

        http://www.rogerfromnewzealand.wordpress.com

        PS I quote Spain because there is good documentation of a country that led the way in cooperating with the IPCC and the EC to its own detriment. I suspect we may see similar studies coming from other associated countries in due course.
        I also think the study is valid as it corresponds with what any economics scholar would expect given Spain’s circumstances.

      • Thankyou for reading it.
        I have a couple of comments.

        You seem to assume that people want 100% wind or solar. This of course is silly. However as it has been stated before that a certain percentage of the power grid can be changed.

        Also wind generation is largely governed by Location, location, location. I think the article is mostly speaking to that. Not all wind turbines are the same and they must be carefully placed.

        You might also be interested in looking at the operating costs of wind vs. other power sources. Long story short the O&M of wind is extremely small. Thus even if you did have to have another power plant on stadby somewhere it’d still be cheaper from a day to do stand point to use renewable since they don’t require fuel.

        Also I think the table also made it pretty clear the Wind is damn close to other technologies. when the costs are levelized even considering what you said. All energy is subsidies by the government. You just don’t want the same rules to apply to new technology as to old technology.

        Overall my point still stands. I’m not claiming that wind is the holy grail. What I’m claiming is that it is not the piece of lead you would like to think it is.

  61. one answer i found as far as wind power is i use the small wind generaters 4 to 500 watt size and so do many of the people in my area on my own place along with solar panals they work very well an you do not really notice them maybe the gov. should give those funds to private people to buy the smaller generators

  62. Roger, is your last name Pedantic by any chance? Ok lets look at European tax revenues and compare it to the amount spent on renewable energy (of which wind is only a part). In 2008, the EU tax revenues were 5,053,719,000,000 euros. the EU spent 35,000,000,000 euros on renewable energy in 2010. http://www.eds-destatis.de/de/downloads/sif/sf_08_047.pdf

    So, the the money spent on all renewable energy in 2010 was LESS THAN 0.69% of European tax revenues. And you want us to believe that is what has caused the European financial crisis?

    And you should keep in mind that the cost of fossil fuels is constantly rising and the fuel finite whereas renewable energy costs are going the other way and are essentially infinite.

    The arguments against renewable energy is so ridiculous and easily disproved you have to wonder who is pushing this BS and why are there so many ignorant and pliable Tory Aardvaarks out there in the blogosphere.

    • Drewski,

      All you are doing is quoting meaningless numbers which may help to convince your self but in fact do not prove or disprove anything.

      Where is your authority to state that fossil fuel prices are rising? Have you researched it or are you just listening to propaganda. Where is your evidence that renewables are dropping in price? Certainly they are atttracting tax payers money in the form of subsidies, but what about the cost of biofuel and the competition with arable land?

      As I have said, the best judge of economic investment is when the public invest in it without subsidy and with the expectation of a return.

      ” And you want us to believe that is what has caused the European financial crisis? ”

      Excessive government spending and borrowing has caused the European Crisis maybe you should check out what any recent spending is all about.

      Cheers

      Roger

      http://www.rogerfromnewzealand.wordpress.com

      • Fossil Fuel prices, in the form of Shale Gas are falling in America. And are now almost Half European prices, without subsidy. Buses are being run on gas in India, for a third the price of oil. ……The world is awash with shale gas.

        If renewables are economic in price, then they don’t need subsidy. If they aren’t, then they are of no use at the moment. Time will tell if the situation changes for renewables.
        Governments should not be redistributing wealth, (often from the poorest to the wealthy.) If start up investment is needed, it should be a loan, as with every other business. Subsidies are to fuel a political belief, not a business necessity.

      • There are limitations to all technology. Natural gas is no different. Specifically transportation from the many small and changing shale gas locations.

        Also shale gas is relivively new. It was not avalible or widely accepted previously. It is also a finite resource.

        Also you’ll notice that for the most part people are not arguing agaist shale gas….. They are arguing against coal.

        Shale gas could solve many problems but it should be considered as part of a balanced power generating strategy. Cost wise it will not wipeout wind power, However it could wipe out coal as a generating method.

        I’m looking forward to shale developments.

      • Actually they are, here is one quick example that I already had bookmarked: http://www.eeb.cornell.edu/howarth/Marcellus.html

      • Sherri. I didn’t think I needed to qualify “for the most part”……

        I’m sure someone is arguing against it. There are a lot of problems and risk with shale gas that should be looked at and discussed just like anything else.

  63. What a mess, those turbines are in the pictures above. What were they built for? Monuments to environment destroying folly? Clearly they haven’t been built to enhance the environment. How have they saved the environment? What’s ‘renewable’ about them?
    A blooming disaster, if that’s the end of the story, Tory?
    …..Does Hawaii have land to waste like this?…. Does Britain?

  64. Hello, Neat post. There’s a problem together with your site in internet explorer, may test this? IE still is the market chief and a big component to people will leave out your magnificent writing because of this problem.

  65. I was watching an old Magnum P I, and they were walking through wind farms, dated 1983,
    on one of the islands. But they weren’t these above, they were spindly things, but there were heaps of them. The episode was No.7 ‘Paniola’ Season Six. Try and get a DVD
    copy of that season eh?

  66. If you are fighting windmills:

    I recommend fighting the transmission lines as well:
    stoptanc.com

    check the DOE wind charts…chances are the area is not highly rated….which is a problem for the developer, supervisors, planning commission…threaten with a law suit.
    Carol Overland, a great attorney for that.

    And see what the RETI planning and projections say….they may be against this project.

    m

  67. Tory,

    Great article on abandoned wind turbines. I have a request for you. Please send me an email that I may use to connect with you.

    Thanks!

    Steve Goreham
    Executive Director
    Climate Science Coalition of America

    • Great article?!? You are joking of course.

      Aardvark pulled the figure of 14,000 abandoned wind generators out of his arse and can’t find any evidence to support it and now has even given up trying. Aardvark fails to mention that wind power is the most viable and cheapest form of new energy production in the world (small detail). To top it off, he tries to claim that there are huge numbers of bird mutilations due to wind farms. Not only are his claims absurdly exaggerated (and, of course, unsubstantiated), he fails to mention that deaths due to wind generators are but a tiny fraction of deaths due to power lines and even windows.

      Aardvark fails the sniff test and if he had any credibility, he would stop writing.

    • By the way Steve Goreham,
      Could you please state what specific science qualifications you have? I sincerely hope you are not one of those ridiculous pounces who claim to be an expert in a branch of science that you have no qualifications for. That would make you another Monckton. However, in your case I am sure that this couldn’t be true. After all, could you imagine what kind of idiot it would take to be an Executive Director of a SCIENCE coalition and NOT have any science qualifications? The guy would have to be a total fool.

      Eagerly awaiting your response.

  68. Tony Parnell

    it is shocking to see all this investment just abandoned like that. It should be handed over to the national grid so they can make use of them. Or are they really suggesting that they cost more in maintenance etc than to run these turbines!?

    See here for wind turbine considerations:

    Wind Turbine Considerations

  69. Mike Barnard

    The number of 14,000 wind turbines inactive world-wide was invented by Andrew Walden and has since been not only quoted without qualm, but also misquoted widely as applying specifically to the United States. Even in the quote provided, Mr. Walden references the entire world.

    That said, it’s still vastly wrong, by an order of magnitude. There are about 165,000 wind turbines world wide creating clean, safe, carbon-free electricity. At most 1,650 or 1% of them are likely inactive at present. Since they are dominantly older wind turbines that are inactive, this represents a maximum of about 0.5% of generating capacity.

    http://www.quora.com/How-many-permanently-inactive-wind-turbines-are-there-world-wide/answer/Mike-Barnard

  70. bushbunny I think you best read up on solar panels, on Nov 26 you said that they do not even work in cold climates….WRONG… PVs work better in cold climates, the colder they are the more output they produce, though you would not know a cold climate if you saw one, come over here where we regularly get -30 to -40C every year…

    • Sapeye I live in a cold climate and those who have them tell me they don’t work well during winter. What juice are you on. Their output isn’t that good when temps go below 25C.

    • Where do you live Alaska or the Antarctic. In Australia in the high country we get -15-20 at night. But during the day sometimes 16-20 C, and they don’t work well. Even in UK those that are attached to the grid, make no credits during winter, but who wants to spend $50,000 on that solar set up. To save the environment, from what?
      Con merchants of course.

  71. barnesr@asme.org

    Too bad this information is not truth, but twisted information to bend the truth. Just like any equipment wind turbines break down. They pose less of a hazard to the environment than a coal fired power plant. Are they the total answer? Absolutely not, but the issue that seems to be a “Not in my back yard” attitude brings to mind, if not in my back yard than in who’s? If you want the energy then there will be a price to pay, it is up to you how you want to pay that price. Will it be with you, your children’s, grandchildren’s health so that big coal, gas, and oil companies can get more of your tax dollar subsidies to pollute? Let’s make excellent choices for the future and not be brainwashed with bad information from the oil, gas, and coal industry. We need these resources to bridge the gap between now and the future energy needs, let’s not waste it. On the other hand, we need to go full throttle on renewable energy sources, find better efficiencies and smarter community planning. We also need to pressure other countries such as China, India, etc., to also make vast improvements.

  72. No problem to make these wind turbines are not only profitable, but that they provide energy for the California 100%.
    Removed and replaced by gondola sailing wind machine of my design. It is ten times cheaper and more efficient than any currently available wind machines. The patent application is completed in Moscow, after a week of my Russian aeronautical engineer, developers release an instance of the serial machine. Advertising firms vying evince a desire to sail to sew me a gift, to place their ads on them. The machine pays off in the first year of operation, on a current issue in the industrial scale, completely free!

    • California has 100% Wind powered electricity, is that what you are saying?
      Or are you saying your invention will provide the energy?

      http://www.energy.ca.gov/maps/powerplants/power_plant_statewide.html

      11.6 percent of all electricity comes from mixed renewable resources such as wind, solar, geothermal, biomass and small hydroelectric facilities. Large hydro plants generated another 9.2 percent of their electricity. The bulk is derived from nuclear and the burning of fossil fuels and gases(land fill and digester).

  73. Scrap the lot and install Thorium power stations.

    Cheaper than coal, safer than Uranium, can’t melt down. The only drawback is that Thorium fueled power stations don’t produce weapons grade plutonium or depleted Uranium for the military-industrial complex.
    The Fukashima disaster could ever have happened if they were using Thorium.

  74. Probably not as much of a problem as an old Nuclear power station.

  75. I live by Tehachapi, 14,000 non operating windmills looks about right. BTW the new ones are covering hundreds of square miles from Jawbone Cyn. to Tejon Ranch and into Mojave and West on the 58 towards Bakersfield. I am told the math works out to 17 cents a Kw for wind energy with the new technology. This is from an Edison engineer involved with all the sub station upgrades and power lines required to do something with the new energy source. The scope of land used up for these behemoths is awesome and jaw dropping. If this really does peter out like the attempt in the ’80s, the clean up will never be done. The price paid for all the land must have been astronomical. I don’t know how much land a coal fired steam turbine plant uses up, but I know the it takes pennies to make a Kw and can do it whenever it is needed. The only thing that can raise the cost would be our government. These modern plants have to be looked at by the same mentality of an individual pointing out the improvements made to a wind driven generator. The improvements made in these plants thoroughly eclipse the gains made in an old abandoned and re dug up method of generating electricity using wind and propeller driven motors.
    Randy

  76. Sorry, 1,400 looks about right. That still covers a lot of real estate.

  77. Millions of tons of concrete and mining of rare earth minerals and mountains of steel go into production of windfarms. Just how much CO2 is generated manfacturing and installing and maintaining these monstrosties? It’s a fad and it will fade. Without subsidies, they cannot function. Nobody is going to invest in something that only works 20-25% of the time and requires constant spinning reserve coal or gas fired plant to back it up. When the warranties run out and the “investors” have sucked the taxpayers dry, they are not going to pay to maintain something that cannot compete on the free market. It’s just an appeasement to the insane greenies who have more time and money than sense. They don’t care about the impact of energy prices on poor people. It’s all about them “feeling good” about themselves and sacrificing for their religion.

    • 1 – Mining of rare earth metals. Please give examples of which metals ? And quantities ? I think very little if at all. Do you mean similar metals that are in your computer that you used to write that post ?
      2 – Nowadays there are contracts and money in place to ensure when wind farms come to the end of their 20-25 year life. That all the “mountains” of metal, is taken down and recycled.
      3 – Typically it takes about 12 months for the turbines to save for how much CO2 was used in installation ect. You then have 19-24 years of green generation.
      4 – Your terminology shows that you have very little knowledge of this field. By 20-25 %, I take it you mean capacity factor, not “works”. The capacity factor of a wind farm is typically 20-30%. Coal power plants, gas, diesel ect, depending on age, contracts, and and many other factors will only operate at a similar rate. The diesel power plant 40 km from my house has not ran once over the last 12 months. FACT, how do I know, because I’m friends with the person who runs it and work in the electricity market. It is thanks to wind farms, that this diesel plant doesn’t operate often.
      5 – “When the warranties run out and the “investors” have sucked the taxpayers dry” When the warranties run out, then they will either be renewed or changed to a different contractor. Investors are investing their own much, not tax payers.
      6 – They can compete on the free market and do.
      7 – Your comments make me laugh. You have absolutely no idea of the facts.

  78. I greet thee, you anti-environmentalists! I gree thee from Bucharest! :D

    Are you serious? :D Just asking… :P Is OIL, and the constant hunt for petrol, *better* than wind turbines?! :O Smog does not kill those poor birds, right? :P Instead, as I heard it to be, it kills our lungs… our childrens lungs and does terrible damage to their eyes…
    But could you be some big oil company lackeys, by any chance? ;) Because you certainly are NOT conspirationists! :P Yeap, I would put my money on the first variant – you are an oil company lackeys! :D And, I think, this sums it up. :) So, farewell, and may you NOT end-up *underneath* one of those beloved oil pumps of yours in the far-far future, when you too are to become fossils – fossil FUEL, that is! – or… die sooner by the constant smog in your cities! :))))

    Be well! ;)

    • How do you explain Silviu how Oz (Australia not the Land of Oz) had snow a few days ago?
      Look out for colder winters in Europe and the Northern Hemisphere this winter, and don’t throw away your Ugg boots yet! It’s called the w-e-a-t-h-e-r don’t blame the oil industry.

  79. Local utility executives here say that the payoff period at current electric rates is at 100 years. Now that would probably be okay for those who actually believe the Gore prophecy (fallacy). But get this: This 100 year payoff does not include maintenance or disassemble and removal when the turbines expected lifetime is over in less than 25 years.

    We need to continue funding quantities high enough to spur competition and innovation by investors and manufacturers but we need to stop lying to the people who pay the bills. It is not right for the USA to fund the European bankruptcy panic for our tax dollars and Chinese investor aggression on a 40-year lie!

    Until energy storage makes the quantum leap in capability, Wind turbines will be nothing but an ugly, bird killing, noise polluting, enormous taxpayer deception.

  80. “Wind energy is on a path to reach “grid parity” — the point where its cost is equal to the baseline price of power on the grid — starting in 2016. In the long run, in other words, wind can be expected to thrive without the tax credit.”

    All bleeding edge technologies that have made a difference in the world were subsidized, until they could stand on their own–subsidized by University (state) research grants, Federal government grants, private corporate R&D budgets, or any other way you can imagine. To argue that “new technology” should never be subsidized is frankly, an ignorant position. Would you argue that every state-funded University in America immediately stop all medical research that does not pay for itself?

    Meanwhile, the materials in those “junk” turbines are worth enough money in scrap (especially the rare earth magnets) for all of those turbines to be immediately disassembled and recycled–the governments who’s land is blighted by those “junk” turbines need to a) declare eminent domain over those turbines; b) hold auctions and auction off the recycling rights; and, c) pay down their debts.

    wind parity quote source: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-08-21/extend-wind-power-tax-credit-now-so-it-can-die-later.html

  81. Parity is NOT just about the price but also about the quality of the energy produced. Because wind energy needs the back up of thermoelectric generation plants anyway , the comparison MUST be made ONLY on the fuel saved ,gas or coal or Uranium. There is no other way http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zZFn2I-TvjM in English don’t worry.

    • If you use wind to lift water into the pumped storage reservoirs, you’ve just drastically reduced the ongoing fossil fuel requirement and created a closed loop system that makes power while the wind blows and saves it for peak periods. Pumped storage and wind are a perfect match. Wind, solar, pumped hydro, conventional hydro, and geothermal together provide some alternatives that will only improve with age. There isn’t any one answer which excludes all others–there are dozens of answers that together, will spell progress. My 1973 Cadillac got 12 mpg highway; My 2005 DeVille gets 24 mpg highway–technologies improve over time and all new technology is bleeding edge until it becomes leading edge.

      • Sure, you can. But do you know how many TWh you can store this way? next to nothing. I’ll give a hint; http://www.decc.gov.uk/en/content/cms/meeting_energy/hydro/use/use.aspx

        “The total hydroelectric installed capacity in the UK in 2010 was approximately 1650 megawatts, which is 1.8% of the current total UK generating capacity and 18% of renewable electricity generation capacity.”

        “The UK currently generates about 1.3% (5000GKh) of its electricity from hydroelectric schemes – most of which are large-scale schemes in the Scottish Highlands. Hydroelectric energy uses proven and efficient technology; the most modern plants have energy conversion efficiencies of 90% and above. Hydro has a typical load factor of 35-40%.”

      • The European Joint Research Commission together with University College Cork are forecasting that pumped storage hydo is about to get a massive lift in Europe.

        http://setis.ec.europa.eu/newsroom-items-folder/report-pumped-hydro-energy-storage-potential-for-transformation-from-single-dams

        BTW, I’m writing from the U.S., where not only is our already-installed hydro massive, but our potential to install more is massive. Produced hydroelectricity was 282 TWh (2008). It was 8.6% of the world total hydropower. The installed capacity was 100 GW in 2007. In 2008 the United States produced total 4 344 TWh electricity (21.5% of the world total) and imported 33 TWh.

      • easier said than done Tony, we need to put the numbers down .

        http://www.eia.gov/cneaf/solar.renewables/page/hydroelec/hydroelec.html

        and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydroelectricity

        USA

        Ten of the largest hydroelectric producers as at 2009
        Annual hydroelectric production 250TWh or ~6% (=250/4300)
        Installed capacity 80GW
        Capacity factor 42 % of total (about true: 250TWH/(8760×80)=35%)

        If you increase the capacity factor of the facilities by adding more pumped storage reservoirs down the valley you’ll never ever go over 100% capacity factor (E =mgh is the ultimate limit) so wind power even with the help of PHS can not provide more than ~8% (6%/0.42-6)

  82. I see their are plebnty of people on this comment thread foisting the myth that conventional “fossil” fuels are NET “subsidized.” in the way so-called renewables are subsidized.

    Even in raw dollars the subsidies for so called renewables are greater than the so called subsidies for Fossil fuels. Remember that the so called subsidies for Fossil fuel are mostly tax “breaks.” and the subsidies for “renewable” largely consist of Direct Spending.

    If we look at the federal subsidies for fuels by the actual ratio of of energy delivered. Solar and Wind energy are absolutely off the charts in terms of their level of subsidization. Funny they’re still the most expensive forms of electrical generation.

    http://noteworthynewsandviews.tumblr.com/post/10822426317

    http://www.eia.gov/analysis/requests/subsidy/pdf/subsidy.pdf

    (see page xiv)

  83. To be honest, I think global warming is doing a lot more to birds and several other species than wind turbines. Today’s wind turbines are also being designed to move slower therefore producing less noise and less deaths (birds), according to my research.

    • Honesty is the fact that humans do control windmills and do not control global warming. Florida was underwater long before humans generated carbon emissions and it will be under water again in the future whether we stop all/some human generated carbon emissions or not.

    • Are you aware of some harm that has befallen birds that is directly attributable to global warming? Do you actually believe that wind turbines, which as of now are totally inconsequential in terms of power output, could possibly stave off global warming?

  84. Just Joe, I feed wild birds, a variety of them from the humble sparrow and starling, to the magpies, ravens,(Australian crows) kurrawongs, to the more exotic, king parrots, rozellas, grass parrots, gallahs, honey eaters, and others of the parrot family. However, we are a temperate region, and the last few days the birds do not seem to be eating as much during the day, but do eat in the cool of the evening (summer time here). I have seen a big kurrawong sitting on the roof opposite with one wing up to cool underneath. No they are sensible, and keep cool in the shade of the trees during hotter weather. They are Australian birds who have evolved during droughts and storms, and other extremes of weather. If it is cold they go inland if it is hot they tend to congregate around woodland or bush water courses. A few degrees of heat will not harm them provided they have access to water.

  85. So everybody- remember all your complaining about how ugly the wind turbines look, or when some birds get killed, when the oceans rise and your house and everything else you and your families worked so hard to obtain, when global warming raises the ocean’s levels by 15-30 feet. Then you’ll all be whining and saying “Why, OH WHY, didn’t we try to develop clean energy before this happened?” It reminds me of the gas crisis in the 70’s- we had long lines for gas and it finally dawned on everybody that “we should be developing more fuel efficient cars”- well DUH! The same thing is happening now with clean energy- don’t throw the wind industry out just because some turbines are abandoned, or underused, or whatever. When the oil runs out we will be glad we developed these technologies. And just like the Model T, look at how cars have developed, just in the last 10 years. The wind industry is just getting started, just like the Model T. We need more time to make the units safer and more productive- not just say- “let’s get rid of all the wind turbines.” Can you imagine where we would be today if everyone has said back in 1910- “those dams cars spew pollutions out the tailpipe- let’s BAN all automobiles!”

    • Steve R.
      What gas crisis in the ’70’s was that then?
      I was around in those years and there was no gas shortage, just an attempt to prop up the price by OPEC esp Saudi Arabia to wring more cash out of the West. Once North Sea oil etc started to compete with OPEC they (OPEC) had to increase production again in order to maintain their revenues. No one I know thought about making alternative cars, only complaints about the extra cost of the gas, plus the governments did a few stupid things like increasing fuel taxes and instituting carless days. etc.
      Those of us who have been around have seen this happen a couple of times already, Thats why we dont believe the current hype. Its just another method of extracting more cash from the tax payer.
      Just watch those people who at all costs, oppose drilling, fracking and nuclear power. The costs will be met by you and me and there wil be no real energy shortage.
      Cheers Roger

      http://www.rogerfromnewzealand.wordpress.com

  86. hey,would it be possible for an average guy like me to go up and start recycling these or would there be trespassing and grand theft issues?

  87. Spain’s Green Job disaster, in which for every ‘green job’ created, 2.5 normal jobs were lost and left it with 20% unemployment, and triple energy costs, are a perfect example of the benefits, of wind turbines. Juan Carlos University, concluded that the only beneficiaries, were the manufacturers and construction companies.
    There is one significant fact, proven in the British High Court, that sends the Greens running for cover. Al Gore’s reversal of the science regarding the 650,000 year old ice cores. In his film, An Inconvenient Truth, he claimed that the ice-cores showed that rising CO2 levels resulted in identical rises in global temperatures. However, when challenged in the High Court, the makers of the film and the Government’s own scientists agreed, that the cores actually show the opposite to Al Gore’s claim. They show that rises in global temperatures are followed, 800 -2,000 years later, by identical rises in CO2 levels. (It takes hundreds of years to warm the oceans and make it produce more CO2)
    The question that sends them running is this: If for the past 650,000 years CO2 levels followed 800 – 2,000 years behind global temperatures, as is now established, when did the science change? Surely, it must follow that current CO2 levels too, must be the product of global temperatures of 800 – 2,000 years ago – the medieval warm period?
    But then, logic and science have nothing to do with the commercial anthropogenic global warming corporations, does it?

    • see: http://www.breadandbutterscience.com/Weather.pdf
      A Chronological Listing of Early Weather Events, year by year from year 2 A.D. to 2010
      It’s a large download, 15.35 MB.
      Fascinating stuff.

      See also:
      A bit of news about Al Gore’s investments. Headed “Al Gore Walks Away From Green Energy”

      http://www.thestreet.com/story/11727215/1/al-gore-walks-away-from-green-energy.html

      Snippet from link:
      And if you want a piece of the natural gas pipeline game — heavily dependent on the environmentally suspect fracking — you can find that in Gore’s portfolio as well with Quanta Services(PWR_).
      ( Quanta Services (PWR)
      (Quanta Services, an S&P 500 company, is a leading provider of specialized contracting services, delivering infrastructure solutions for the electric power, natural gas and pipeline and telecommunication industries.)

  88. You really nailed it again amigo carry on the very good work I always get entertainment from your
    own blogposts! ? !

  89. jonathan jones

    This website IS a big wind-up, right? It has to be – it just isn’t possible for anyone to be so utterly deluded about so many issues at once!

    I shudder to think how much time must go into creating such a well-observed and multi-layered parody – I was completely taken in by it for a good five minutes.

    It struck me as being slightly odd that you should have included the wind turbine bird-strike issue though – since as far as I’m aware, that IS a genuine problem that is a major factor influencing the design of next-generation hardware.

    Needless to say, however, everything else on the site is painfully funny, excruciatingly embarrassing drivel.

    Superb – thanks again!!

    • As one of the ‘deluded’, I waited in vain for you to offer a solitary rebuttal of any of the articles, or comments on the site. Is it possible you have none to offer? The problem I have with, sneerers, such as yourself, is that none of you appear to have bothered to research, the ridiculous, and deliberately fabricated claims made by the UN.
      Here are four questions, for you to peruse.
      1. For 80% of its existence, the Earth has been mainly covered in ice. It thawed, and refroze constantly, long before man first appeared. How, and what caused the thaw?
      2. The 650,000 year ice-cores, and sediment studies, clearly show that rising CO2 levels follow hundreds of years behind rises in global temperature; 800 – 2,000 yrs behind, as it takes centuries to warm the oceans, causing them to produce more. How can CO2 cause rises in global temperatures that existed 800 – 2,000 yrs earlier?
      3. During it’s African Review, in Mexico, the UN expressed its dismay that the governments of the West, had failed to honour their specified pledges of financial aid, to Africa. During this review they discussed imposing a wealth redistribution tax upon the West to benefit Africa, and third world countries.
      The Tobin tax, a tax on trade, was discussed and discounted because the Governments of the West would have great difficulty in imposing a wealth redistribution tax upon their citizens, and it would be difficult to police.
      To quote, Club of Rome, the UN’s premier think tank: “The common enemy of humanity is man. In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill. All these dangers are caused by human intervention, and it is only through changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome. The real enemy then, is humanity itself.” And so the CO2 tax was born. The propaganda and the faking of of historical global temperatures began. The question is, why need to fake the science, and doctor the data?
      4. Nature produces 32/33rds of CO2, man 1/33rd, how then is Man’s meagre contribution a threat to anyone, except those profiteering from the UN’s Green Agenda?

      • rogerthesurf

        Well said Tony!

        And for Jonathan’s info, the AGW theory is being used as a smoke screen.

        The thing they are trying to take our minds off is the communist infiltration via the United Nations and the Agenda 21 protocol which most countries signed. It would to be fair to say that no one actually read it before signing or the signed something else instead)

        Why do I say communist? Well simply there is no other word for it. I have two posts here, This might only be New Zealand but this this infiltration is world wide. Make sure you read the exam exemplar at http://www.thedemiseofchristchurch.com. Also check out how our government is using a terrible earthquake as an excuse to build an agenda 21 complying city by taking the neccesary land off its legal and rightful owners and giving themselves a free hand. It will be the worlds first eco city. http://thedemiseofchristchurch.com/2012/11/29/hello-world/ Whoop de doo. Guess who is paying for this monument?

        Of course Jonathan may already be a communist and think all this is a good thing.
        Jonathan, do you know how many peopl Mao Tsetung killed in 1961 alone with his well meaning policies?

        Might pay to check your own government and see how much of it the UN is running already!.

        Cheers

        Roger

      • jonathan jones

        In all seriousness, I will say this, Tony. With respect, the problem I have with campaigns of this nature is that they seem to collect together every single aspect of an issue and squish them together into one huge conspiracy theory at which to direct their ire. In consequence, their stance frequently becomes unfocused, over-generalised and imprecise. I find it difficult to debate a subject when a participant takes such a fanatical position.

        Are corporations jumping on a perceived “green bandwagon”?
        Some, unquestionably!

        Does that mean that global warming is a fiction?
        No – it is a totally separate issue!

        Are there cases of alternative energy subsidy abuse?
        I don’t know the facts, but it wouldn’t surprise me if there were!

        Does that mean that all alternative-energy related enterprises are by definition corrupt and fallacious? No, of course not!

        Are there disadvantages to the various alternative energy devices?
        Yes, of course there are!

        Does that imply that alternative energy is a cynical leftist conspiracy, designed to skim off taxpayers’ money at the expense of the environment?
        No, clearly not!

        Are there hundreds of abandoned wind turbines in the World? Yes, there are, and there shouldn’t be, without question!

        Do they exist simply because they are wind turbines? No! The majority exist as a result of a small number of opportunistic, poorly-supervised, large-scale projects built in California with subsidies granted in response to the 1970s oil crisis. They are an ugly example of what can happen if society continues to be surprised when corporations don’t always do what it considers to be the right thing. I think most people would agree that redundant machinery of any kind ought to be removed by whoever is responsible for it, but as long as we continue to elect governments actively opposed to taking responsibility for regulating the conduct of such companies, it will keep happening. Incidentally, it might be worth also considering the number of abandoned coal mines, oil fields and fossil fuel power stations that exist around the World.

        The point I’m trying to make is that the greater issue is very complicated. It embraces politics, science, commerce and society. Much of the science is highly specialised and as such is open to misinterpretation and misrepresentation by interested parties. Any large-scale enterprise involving significant sums of money is open to irresponsible corporate and governmental practices. Similarly, any large-scale construction project is liable to impact the local population and environment to some degree or other. Such potential hazards are NOT peculiar to wind farms, solar power arrays, or any other form of alternative energy generation facility. This is not rocket science, by any stretch of the imagination.

        With regard to the basic “is global warming a reality?” debate, I’ll try to be brief.
        In my opinion, of the four previously mentioned interested parties – government; the scientific community; business and the general public – only the scientists can reasonably claim to possess any genuine objectivity and impartiality on a regular basis.

        Why? Well, political parties seek funding, politicians seek votes, and corporations typically seek financial gain. On the other hand, science, by its very definition, is based on objectivity – science is scientific! For the findings of a scientific study to have any credibility, there has to be convincing evidence of both the reliability of the source data, and the competence, aptness and professional integrity of the contributors. I’m certainly not suggesting that science never makes mistakes, any more than I’m suggesting that there have never been cases where a scientific study has modified its published findings in response to external pressure, financial or otherwise. What I will say, though, is that the scientific community is to a great extent self-moderating – it is a system based on checks and balances, in the form of rival scientists, among other things. It’s reasonable to suppose that in science, as in any discipline, there will exist varying degrees of personal ambition, and one might conclude that less-scrupulous individuals could be tempted to stray from the true path if it seemed in their personal interest to do so. I’m reliably informed, however, that a good reputation in the scientific world is, once lost, a very hard thing to reacquire. Consequently, fraudulent practice – quite apart from being unethical and contrary to the very principles of science – is a very risky proposition.

        Therefore, when considering an issue as wide-ranging as that of global warming, I tend to be highly skeptical of the opinions of politicians and corporations and rather less skeptical of the opinions of the scientific community, especially when voiced by so many highly-regarded organisations all over the World. I don’t think that any claim to have a definitive answer to the question, since there are aspects of the problem that remain speculative, no one is denying that. What seems clear, however, is that a ever-growing body of evidence points overwhelming towards there being a far greater probability that global warming is a reality than not.

        Lastly, the fourth group: the public! For what it’s worth, I’m up for discussing pretty much anything with anyone, provided that any strong opinions expressed are informed and considered. I’m wary of crusaders and cults of personality for the simple reason that too often they become driven less by a wish to explore the topic and more by a desire to promote themselves. Slanging matches based on exchanges of arbitrary, out-of-context statistics serve only to trivialise and discredit any valid arguments they may contain, and do little to further the discussion in any kind of constructive or practical way.

  90. jonathan jones

    One last thing, Tony, I strongly suspect that you have completely misinterpreted the meaning of the Club of Rome statement you quoted in your previous comment:

    “The common enemy of humanity is man. In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill. All these dangers are caused by human intervention, and it is only through changed attitudes and behavior that they can be overcome. The real enemy then, is humanity itself”

    I think it’s extremely unlikely that the terms “we” and “us” are references to themselves (the members of the think-tank). Clearly they are not saying that THEY came up with the idea of fixing on environmental issues as a common enemy: they are suggesting that WE – society in general – has done that. They are saying that the greatest challenge to genuine progress is the inertia and negativity arising from some peoples’ need for a convenient bogey-man to blame for everything that’s wrong with their own lives. My inference is that they’re saying that the biggest problem facing humanity is the destructive influence of irresponsible, pitchfork-brandishing blowhards.

    In other words, Tony, the perceived problem is people precisely like you.

    • rogerthesurf

      Jonathan,

      I think you should gather your thoughts and refrain from ad homenums.

      First of all famines are caused by governments and wars.
      Secondly and most importantly you need to realise that if the whole world tries to decrease their “carbon foot print” by the methods prescribed by the IPCC and communists(Known as Greens but too yellow to admit it), as an economist, I can tell you that there will be an economic collapse that will make the great depression seem like a birthday party.
      In other words there will be a famine in your country and mine.
      If the world is absolutely certainly about to heat up and die, famine as I describe above will be the price. If AGW is a misplaced histeria, but we try and cut our “carbon footprint” through “Green” Jobs and “Green” investments” (read governments subsidies with taxpayers money) and energy taxes/levies etc etc we will still get the famine but we will all starve in vain.

      Nothing in this is new in history for example::- China managed to starve an estimated 60 million people in 1961 during the “great leap forward” and similar numbers in subsequent years, Stalin managed similar numbers in the collectivisation of the Kulaks and Cambodia lost more than 30% of its population through similar circumstances.

      Spain, Greece and other countries in Europe are showing symptoms already. What do you think causes their problems?

      So Jonathan, are you that sure about Global Warming that you are ready to see your family and yourself die for it?

      Are you sure that you and your friends are not the problem?

      Cheers

      Roger.

      • rogerthesurf

        PS. Jonathan,

        If you want proof that the Greens are Communists, I can supply you with that too.
        All with papers from my governments website.

        Cheers

        Roger

      • Well, China opens 100GW of new power stations EVERY year (1 or 2 every week) mainly coal power stations. 100GW is what a country like Britain installed in 100 years of industrialization. Go figure what in practice we can do to curb CO2 emissions, the answer is nothing.

      • Peggy Balfour

        You know the rules of economics and commerce ” Who ever produces the most power , wins”

  91. That “over 14,000 turbines were simply abandoned” link to the “Zimbio” website – The Page was deleted by some green mummer, but still it can be read at the “internet Archive – Ha !

    http://alturl.com/ah2a2

    • Yes, and when you read it you can see that it is complete fluff. ranting and raving by anti-wind people who have no basis for the claim of all those abandoned turbines. You would think that with that many out there, someone would be able to point to at least a few of them, but they can’t, because they don’t exist.

  92. Central Indiana is presently the target of the wind farm madness. I was told the base for one of the monsters they plan to build here uses 500 cubic yards of concrete. I did the numbers and that stuff will weigh two million pounds! There is absolutely nothing green about dumping essentially solid rock into a hole in otherwise high quality farm land, and it will never be removed if the wind farm goes under, as it will.

    • The criminal misrepresentation of those promoting wind turbines and wind-farms, should result in prosecutions for fraud – but it wont happen, because those charged with protecting us from scams like these, are no longer independent, but owned by government.

      The problem is this: every time we vote we are giving our consent to be governed by the winning political party’s policies. There is no opt out clause, allowing us to say, I do not agree with this, or that, and so we are made to comply, by use of force.

      Governments, here in the UK, regardless of party, are all led by members of the Bilderberg Group, as they are in America. The Bilderberg Group, are the corporate architects of the EU, the European Headquarters of the UN’s, One World Government, whose stated aim is de-industrialisation, and the removal of private ownership, of houses and land.

      Commies, to put it bluntly.

      The only method of restoring our freedoms and liberties, and our Constitutions, is to withdraw our consent to be Governed, other than by our Constitutional Laws, by using the only real power left to us – refusing to vote.

      • rogerthesurf

        Tony,
        I agree with everything you say.

        A similar thrust is also coming through the UN via UN Agenda 21 in conjunction with the Club of Rome.

        In my country Agenda 21 directives have entered our legislation, local government and our education system.

        Club of Rome papers and members talk about the reduction of world population to between 500 million to one billion and this is consistant with their intentions for the world economy. Take energy and private ownership of land out of the economy and the above is about the population that the world will support.

        Check out my blog at http://www.thedemiseofchristchurch.com and check out some of the links there. Esp the exam exemplar posted there.

        Cheers

        Roger

  93. Could somebody provide with a list of abandoned wind farms? I’d appreciate to update the database of our research centre.
    Thanks!
    Please send it to edpes2006 at gmail dot com

  94. E così c’è posto anche per voi, pensa un po. Queste stesse cose vengono raccontate anche in Italia. Chissà se vi siete accorti del disastro di Fukushima.

  95. There is absolutely no truth to this. Try checking the reference that “proves” the 14,000 number, and you’ll see that there is NO documentation, NO reference to a reliable source. There may be as many as 2,000 “abandoned” turbines worldwide, but most of them are in the process of being repowered. All of the claims in this article are grossly exaggerated by the author, who apparently has a large investment in the oil and gas industries.

    • Gaudencio Labrador

      Dear Earthling: Absolustely, as man is an earthling, sinful by birth having the seed of satan in his gen, lives happily by misleding people. Satan, being the powerful god of the world, who cannot create anything, has the job to put the world in confusion — make man further commit sin. It is not climate change, but actually, we should be solving the brain damage being done by the pollution due to poisonous chemicals brought about by he fossil fuel.
      brought about by the fossil fuel. It is by satan’s misleding that impowers the oil cartel to dictate the government officials to require the narrow blades adapted in the construction of windmills to disable the windmills

      • As the IPPC have admitted, Climate Change Policy, is not about the climate but, global wealth redistribution, from the West to Africa, via CO2 emission taxes, I’m amzed we still allw the fraud to continue.

  96. Tory,
    You may be interested in this article here. What is the NET output of a wind powered generator?

    http://www.aweo.org/windconsumption.html

    Quite revealing I think

    Cheers

    Roger

  97. In reality it is very effortless to create a college term paper composing service. We are at this juncture and we are always made to give the best ascertain about . We will address you how to compose a time span paper. Cheerfulness with us and visit our website for your revise period paper and its creating inclines.

  98. If Michael did all those things tabloids, TV programs, diverse pastors told he did, when did he ever have the time to make pieces of music and melodies, rendezvous with his other friends, proceed on tours ?It all seems comic if it weren´t so sad that it almost and eventually did decimate his life.

  99. Frozen treats spent extending component principal function is always to completing good frozen treats poured out their design,
    good-looking, spent extending your ointment to control 2 major
    manage pieces, you are consistently rotating electric motor travel Hua – Tou turn,
    expended extending the actual lotion, the other can be a travel to tug Hua – Tou accomplish lifting
    activity part of home manufacturers, primarily may be the hardware Webcam structure,
    while design and style should be altered, and then alter distinct forms associated with physical
    Camera, this can tremendously effect your machine manufacturing productivity.
    The body muscle will shrink and the subcutaneous fat will increase.
    Mars in the first house gives a male a natural sexiness that is always being emitted like a pheromone on overdrive, regardless if said male is wearing periwinkle or is lifting the toilet seat to….

  100. To add to this calamity will be the millions of solar panels lying in landfill heaps as their useful lifespan runs out.

  101. Woah! I’m really digging the template/theme of this blog.

    It’s simple, yet effective. A lot of times it’s very difficult to get that “perfect balance” between superb usability and appearance.
    I must say you have done a fantastic job with this.
    Additionally, the blog loads extremely fast for me on Internet explorer.
    Superb Blog!

    • Australia is striking against AGW. The lower house has just passed the repeal of the carbon tax, and mining tax. It should pass the senate too. When Gore came here it snowed like mad in Canberra.

  102. It is often difficult to acquire new clients, you
    must get checked out the appropriate professionals. Angie’s
    list will let you entertain such embarrassing condition. The state,
    and click on this list of potential candidates, talk to and
    from my common soles might add some minor cooking.
    We have the better correct the initially time. You may go way over and go
    work on historic chimneys was performed safely and efficiently installed concrete paving remains working
    on How to do.

  103. Wind turbines are a waste of resources. They won’t solve the climate crisis and they can’t power a global civilisation, as fossil fuels have done. Quite the predicament.

  104. I totally agree on what you are saying. I work in the transports sector . The cost to move a windmill is 50% of the cost to make it. With Government substites of 50% for wind tech aka green technology it’s mostly pays for the transport and installing of large wind mills. The wind farms in OR/WA free spin since there not hooked into power grid. Because the unions blocked the usage of the wind mills on those wind farms. Like you say green tech is the next bubble..

  1. Pingback: preparing to abandon ship… | pindanpost

  2. Pingback: ΝΕΟ 1821: στις ΠΛΑΤΕΙΕΣ να βγάλουμε αντικατοχική βουλή με ΕΝΙΑΙΟ ψηφοδέλτιο! « Συμφιλιωτική Αυτάρκεια

  3. Pingback: 14,000 abandoned monuments to Green stupidity | JunkScience.com

  4. Pingback: ‘Scuse Me – Clean Up Your Greenie Mess Please. « Greenhouse Bullcrap

  5. Pingback: Wind farms useless! |

  6. Pingback: An Ill Wind Blows For Wind Farms « Barnaby Is Right

  7. Pingback: 14000 Abandoned Wind Turbines In The USA | The Curmudgeon Babbles On …

  8. Pingback: Wind Farm Grave Yards | EPA Abuse

  9. Pingback: Moonbattery » Our Headstone: 14,000 Dead Windmills

  10. Pingback: The USA: Land of the14,000 Dead Windmills « Mayrant&rave

  11. Pingback: Wind Farm Grave Yards « Mb50's "Liquid Mud" Blog

  12. Pingback: The Next Environmental Crisis: Abandoned Wind Farms - Waznmentobe

  13. Pingback: ‘Green’ debacle: Tens of thousands of abandoned wind turbines now litter American landscape | Dark Politricks

  14. Pingback: ‘Green’ debacle: Tens of thousands of abandoned wind turbines now litter American landscape | TaJnB | TheAverageJoeNewsBlogg

  15. Pingback: ‘Green’ debacle: Tens of thousands of abandoned wind turbines now litter American landscape :: Government Corruption News

  16. Pingback: 14000 Abandoned Wind Turbines In The USA | Are We Aware Yet? Political News Blog-Current News Political News Blog

  17. Pingback: US Has Endless Fields of Abandoned and Rusting Wind Turbines | Earth's Energy

  18. Pingback: 14000 abandoned wind turbines in the USA..Duke of Edinburgh: They are “absolutely useless” « Follow The Money

  19. Pingback: 14000 Abandoned Wind Turbines In The USA - PECAN Group

  20. Pingback: Hour of the Time » News 11/27/11 – Updated 1903 hrs. Eastern

  21. Pingback: Wind Turbines & “Green” Subsidies Under Fire – The New American | Pet, pet, and pet cute!

  22. Pingback: Off Topic Links of Interest « American Expat in Chiang Mai

  23. Pingback: Innenansichten » Blog Archive » 14000 Windräder stehen still

  24. Pingback: Neue Energie-/Umwelttechnik - Seite 31 - Aktienboard

  25. Pingback: USA: Tausende stillgelegte Windkraftanlagen verschandeln die Landschaft | - Eine kritische Auseinandersetzung mit Windenergie in der Schweiz

  26. Pingback: Links to articles for December 2011 | Conscious Media Network

  27. Pingback: The Slow Winding Down of the Windpower Idea. « American Elephants

  28. Pingback: Too windy for wind generators .. « Anti Oligarch

  29. Pingback: Photos And Videos of Abandoned Wind And Solar Farms « Grantcoulson's Blog

  30. Pingback: Britain 3421 Wind Turbines Installed, 1500 Accidents In 5 Years « Tory Aardvark

  31. Pingback: 450+ Conspiracy Research Links November 2011 | WhyNotNews.eu

  32. Pingback: ‘Green’ debacle: Tens of thousands of abandoned wind turbines now litter American landscape | Protect Important Bird Areas (IBAs)

  33. Pingback: ‘Green’ debacle: Tens of thousands of abandoned wind turbines now litter American landscape | Independent News Hub

  34. Pingback: Solar – Germany’s €100 Billion Money Pit « Tory Aardvark

  35. Pingback: USA : 14000 Eoliennes Abandonnées | Operation Tea For Two

  36. Pingback: USA : 14000 Eoliennes Abandonnées | LA FIN DES SECRETS ET DES MENSONGES

  37. Pingback: USA : 14 000 éoliennes abandonnées | Collectif Allier Citoyen

  38. Pingback: Wind Farms – Will Be Seen As A Monument To Green Stupidity « Tory Aardvark

  39. Pingback: ΑΠΕ το μεγαλείο σας ! « Κένταυρος Χείρων

  40. Pingback: Δεδομένα και επιπτώσεις από τις α/γ από όλο τον κόσμο « Βόρειο Αιγαίο SOS

  41. Pingback: George Osborne demands massive cuts to windfarm subsidies

  42. Pingback: 14000 US Turbines Abandoned | Swere Valley Environmental Protection Group

  43. Pingback: Energy-In-Depth: Tweeting at the Wind

  44. Pingback: De l’argent contre du vent ! | ENKI PTAH SATYA – Blog de soutien de notre dieu créateur

  45. Pingback: Where do Unsubsidized Wind Turbines Go to Die? « Is it 2012 in Nevada County Yet?

  46. Pingback: The Problem With “Green” Energy | Rod D. Martin

  47. Pingback: More wind energy myths debunked: Madigan claims put to the test : Renew Economy

  48. Pingback: 14000 Abandoned Wind Turbines In The USA « newburghwindfarm

  49. Pingback: The Environmentalist’s Folly: Outsmarting Progress | K Street Financial

  50. Pingback: - Enemy of the State

  51. Pingback: End the wind Production Tax Credit

  52. Pingback: Blowhards & Coruptocrats Blowin’ (your money) in the Wind Tax Credits at US Action News

  53. Pingback: Renewable Energy: Still Breaking Wind | Green Energy Investing

  54. Pingback: Renewable Energy: Still Breaking Wind | The News Channel

  55. Pingback: Can Green Energy Save The Planet From Climate Change? « orach24463

  56. Pingback: Emission Trading - Page 173

  57. Pingback: Newsletter From the Climate Realists, No. 2 For 2013 | NORTHLAND NEW ZEALAND CHEMTRAILS WATCH

  58. Pingback: Solar Panels Are Full Of Carcinogens | Tory Aardvark

  59. Pingback: Green Energy Is Bad For Humans And Other Living Things | Power To The People

  60. Pingback: Anti-wind lobbyists claim more than 1 in 20 wind turbines permanently inactive. They’re wrong, as usual | barnard on wind

  61. Pingback: Wind Turbines: Dirty Power – Dirty Money | Power To The People

  62. Pingback: Abandoned turbines: Another Madigan wind energy myth debunked : Renew Economy

  63. Pingback: 14,000 Idle Wind Turbines a Testament to Failed Energy Policies

  64. Pingback: Spotlight Info Better Computer Models Needed For Mega Wind Farms Mit Technology Review | Spotlight Info

  65. Pingback: Wind Turbines, Energy or Tall Obsolescence | SwittersB & Fly Fishing

  66. Pingback: 14000 Abandoned Wind Turbines In The USA « Newsbeat1

  67. Pingback: The Great Green Scheme Scam | Dear Dirty America

  68. Pingback: Wind Farms Kill At Least 67 Eagles in Five Years= Violation of Federal Law. Now what? - Page 7

  69. Pingback: Le grand mensonge : 14.000 éoliènnes abandonnées aux USA. | Archives Millénaires Dissidentes

  70. Pingback: #Agenda21-14000 Abandoned Wind Turbines In The USA | Tory Aardvark | Defending Sanity in the Uppity Down World

  71. Pingback: get ready for high electric bills Indiana!!!!!!!!!!!! - Page 6

  72. Pingback: Australia To Dump 1 Million Tons Of Waste Onto Great Barrier Reef

  73. Pingback: Wind Turbine Ohio Ballot

  74. Pingback: Wind Turbines Ohio Battles

  75. Pingback: Wind Turbine Reveiws 2011

  76. Pingback: Wind Turbine Farms Locations

  77. Pingback: Wind Turbine Operators Salaries

  78. Pingback: Wind Turbine Problems 2010

  79. Pingback: Wind Turbines Ohio 2011

  80. Pingback: Cartoon Wind Turbine Images

  81. Pingback: Wind Turbine Fire Germany

  82. Pingback: Wind Turbine Farms Usa

  83. Pingback: Wind Turbine Pictures Cartoon

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 3,002 other followers

%d bloggers like this: