106 years to gain 0.7 deg C. 2 years to lose it.
Wind turbines do not reduce irrelevant carbon dioxide emissions, do not reduce the need for proper energy sources and are merely a heavy burden on taxpayers. The UK government needs to be weaned off their incompetent ideas for energy source replacement that fails badly in every respect, and the accompanying massive subsidies that add enormously to the cost of living. Green taxes twist the knife.
It is sad reflection that the UK media has been so quiet about the diabolical scheme to extensively deface the countryside and coastal waters with wind farms. The said energy source is of more benefit to society turned off as then there are no maintenance, repair or staff costs and all there is to pay is the deceptive manufacturer's cost and profit loss and investors' interest that has to cost us less than paying the increased electricity rates. Our investment (well over 100% for offshore) earns no benefit, private investors get that. Money for nothing for the investors and manufacturers and ongoing expense for us for less than nothing. Practice has proven what many on Internet have been saying for years and worse. Wind energy is a white elephant that is little more than a monument to the success in lobbying and browbeating of an over vocal undereducated few environmental activists, the green agenda smitten, profiteers and other unworthies in the EC and here. And a demonstration of malfeasance by the Brown government in failing to do a proper cost-benefit analysis before committing our cash to a black hole, thus letting us down as is their custom.
A friend related the experience of a couple of pensioners in their 70s. £10,000 for a turbine. Electricity is turned off for much of the day to recharge the storage batteries. Most of the time the energy is at such a low level that mains power has to be turned on again. The actual end product is that there has been a very small reduction in their power bill. They were sold a pup in a "London Bridge" con just like governments that the manufacturers deceived to get approval. Wind turbines don't deliver the goods as promised. The media is even more to blame for failing their readership yet again in their support for the boondoggle. Exceptions being the Telegraph's occasional and Canada's Financial Post's regular articles highlighting contrarian science and opinion, there are few others.
Wind power is a complete disaster April 08, 2009, by Financial Post Editor Michael J. Trebilcock
There is no evidence that industrial wind power is likely to have a significant impact on carbon emissions. The European experience is instructive. Denmark, the world’s most wind-intensive nation, with more than 6,000 turbines generating 19% of its electricity, has yet to close a single fossil-fuel plant. It requires 50% more coal-generated electricity to cover wind power’s unpredictability, and pollution and carbon dioxide emissions have risen (by 36% in 2006 alone).
Flemming Nissen, the head of development at West Danish generating company ELSAM (one of Denmark’s largest energy utilities) tells us that “wind turbines do not reduce carbon dioxide emissions.” The German experience is no different. Der Spiegel reports that “Germany’s CO2 emissions haven’t been reduced by even a single gram,” and additional coal- and gas-fired plants have been constructed to ensure reliable delivery.
Indeed, recent academic research shows that wind power may actually increase greenhouse gas emissions in some cases, depending on the carbon-intensity of back-up generation required because of its intermittent character. On the negative side of the environmental ledger are adverse impacts of industrial wind turbines on birdlife and other forms of wildlife, farm animals, wetlands and viewsheds.
Industrial wind power is not a viable economic alternative to other energy conservation options. Again, the Danish experience is instructive. Its electricity generation costs are the highest in Europe (15¢/kwh compared to Ontario’s current rate of about 6¢). Niels Gram of the Danish Federation of Industries says, “windmills are a mistake and economically make no sense.” Aase Madsen , the Chair of Energy Policy in the Danish Parliament, calls it “a terribly expensive disaster.”more
In the comments to the above article: by danno1
It's one world. One planet Earth, in which massive amounts of steel production and follow-on foundry work is required to manufacture commercial wind towers. Over one hundred thousand 400-feet tall wind towers are destined for North America in the next 20 years. Those 100,000 400-feet tall wind towers are primarily manufactured in China (with some also manufactured in Vietnam and India). Why primarily manufactured in China?
China, being a non-democratically controlled nation, hides from the World, the unrestricted massive polluting that results from the manufacturing of wind power equipment in China.
Multinational companies manufacturing wind power equipment primarily in China (and also in Vietnam and India), are heavily polluting the Earth's atmosphere with massive amounts of carbon dioxide and other nasty pollutants [CO2 is not a pollutant], out of sight of North American citizenry and media cameras, in order to manufacture well over 100,000 of these steel behemoths in the next 20 years. Huge quantities of cheap dirty burning soft coal is the massive air polluting energy source being used in China (and also in Vietnam and India) to manufacture that steel.
The same source, dirty burning coal, produces, with major negative atmospheric carbon emissions consequences, even more steel to manufacture the huge fleet of ocean going vessels required to transport over 100,000 wind towers to North America in the next 20 years.
That same fleet of diesel-powered ships daily pollute our Earth's atmosphere with the carbon and other diesel fuel pollutants expended in transporting the wind towers from Asia to North America.
The wind power industry states wind tower obsolescence in 20 years, [Germany is reviewing this estimate in the light of extensive mechanical failure] making for a never ending repetitive cycle of heavily polluting Asian manufacturing and remanufacturing of well over 400,000 gigantic wind towers in a 100 year period for North American use.
Ironically, as destined for North America, the planned massive production numbers of Asian made huge wind towers primarily manufactured in China, will give tens of thousands more Chinese jobs (mining jobs, steelmill jobs, foundry jobs, transport jobs, etc.) and resultingly make many tens of thousands more Chinese workers richer, allowing them to buy hundreds of thousands more highly polluting gas fueled cars (absent the atmospheric emission restrictions of the West), in what is soon to be the world's largest car purchasing market (China).
For a number of reasons, but primarily to route wind generated electricity great distances (to connect over 19,000 wind generation towers to distant cities), the massive numbers of wind generation towers planned for North America require at least 19,000 miles (or more) of much higher voltage power lines -- all of which will be manufactured by the heavily polluting and carbon-emitting coal-powered copper smelters and steel mills of China.
And 19,000 miles (or more) of new Chinese manufactured higher voltage powerlines, require tens of thousands of new huge steel towers to erect that 19,000 miles (or more)of higher voltage powerline. While North Americans fancifully pretend that atmospheric carbon emissions are reduced on our planet Earth by the wind power industry, the wind industry and its lobbied and paid-off governments of the World hide from the world the wind industry's prolific "Anti-Green" and "Anti-Planet" carbon polluting on an enormous scale to manufacture its wind power equipment. The steel mills of China, to massively manufacture wind power equipment, are polluting our Earth's atmosphere with far more carbon pollution than coast-to-coast 400-foot windtowers would ever eliminate in North America.
What it comes down to is this. By 2050 at a cost of trillions, even had Kyoto farce 1 been 100% successful, a reduction in temperature of around 0.05 deg C is what would have been achieved. If the temperatures are still falling, that would be an addition to cooling. What in fact is happening is that instead of upgrading proven tech, new "green" tech (that isn't green by any measure) is being introduced by idiots that only increase the burdens on us and on nature. Through the "wisdom" of the EU passed to us by Brown and company, CO2 levels are still rising at an increasing rate, the energy cost increases and green taxes are doing sweet fanny adams except to make us poorer.
Samples of government inspired disharmony from a site that cares! Biofuel is worse.
All Fool's Day, April 1:
Wind farm signals poor TV receptionSkoulding gets a knock back from planners over 2nd Whitemoor turbine
Wind turbine scheme unveiled
Over 100 turn up to object to wind farm New plan submitted for wind turbines
Turbine facing thumbs-down from planners
Wind farms have their place: at sea
Group formed to fight huge wind mast plan
Statkraft buys half UK wind project for $741 million
Developer denies 'collusion' over wind farm plans
MP calls for new rules to prevent wind farm plans
Residents will fight Severn Trent Hammerwich wind turbine plan — Councillor
Enjoy Tennyson's new turbine trail!
Wind turbine plan needs looking at
Masts approved by Wychavon after long debate
Wind farms have their place: at sea
'Wind farm is using us as guinea pigs'; Hundreds pack out public meeting to protest at plans
Yet more wind farms 'will be a blight on tourist trail'
Too many wind farms
Wind farm 'fascism' attacked
Protesters run up £40k legal bill Wind farm D-Day looms
Windfarms: You have no option
'Save our only nightjars' plea
A blight on landscape
… but offshore farm hits more turbulence
Turbine bid back…
Appeal against Sixpenny wind farm rejection
Super turbine plans get go-ahead
UK hopes Europe can save offshore wind farm
Suffolk turbines go-ahead sparks anger
Battle vow over new Tees windfarm bid
Wind farms could blight tourist trail
Cllr Skoulding's wind turbine application is turned down by planning committee
Extension to wind farm public consultation
Doubts raised over turbine plan
Rising costs threaten wind farms
Fresh storm looming over wind turbines
Energy firm lodges wind farm appeal
Ice risk for Olympic turbine
Wind tests on site
Reeves Hill wind farm decision months away
Fiasco of wind farm energy production
Big response on moor wind farm
Energy company outlines thinking behind wind farm
Monstrous turbines: detrimental effect for little gain
Windfarm firm to appeal over Cumwhinton turbines plans
Wind firm's meeting anger
Public consultation on wind turbines extended
More object to wind turbines
Wind turbines appeal 'unlikely'
Residents fear for safety on new service road
Judge rules against village wind turbine plans
We shall continue wind farm fight
Villagers win wind-farm battle
Anti-turbines campaign’s fund nets £80,000
Recent items in the Telegraph:
UFO turbine mystery: the theories in fulll January 9 Even aliens hate them.
[Town house] Wind turbines like David Cameron's 'don't provide much electricity' Jan 13
'Environmental revolution' promised by David Cameron Jan 17
Plans for thousands of wind turbines and tidal barrage threatened by costs Jan 26
Crown Estate did not tell locals about huge off-shore windfarm Feb 20
Cold winds blow for future of green energy Mar 13
Why should we pay for the beliefs of others? Mar 14
Ed Miliband says opposing windfarms is 'socially unacceptable' ... Mar 23
More wind farms can be built in UK without harming wildlife - RSPB ... Mar 23
Can Ed Miliband stop the lights going out? Mar 23
Wind farm plans in doubt after investor cuts programme Mar 25
Turning the lights out is an attack on civilisation Mar 25
The Government is naive to support environmentally flawed wind ... Mar 26
Call to upgrade [by £5 billion] national grid amid warnings of 'clean energy ... April 3
Gordon Brown shows how green he really is April 6
European Investment Bank could help fund London Array wind farm ... April 8
Turbines don't just blow they suck as well. And what is the premise that our suffering is based on? Human CO2 emissions at 3-4% of all emissions drive warming. That is an outright lie. CO2 in the air amounts to 1 in ~3,000 molecules. Take the Arctic - Link
Listen to a commonsense view - Link (video)
The climate change by human gas emission is baseless nonsense found only in computer models that are programmed by agenda driven incompetents to demonstrate planet warming by a heating agent, they failed badly to show the cyclic cooling we are now seeing. Temperature variation IS cyclic, in the short term dependent on the mood of major ocean oscillations such as El Nino and La Nina (ENSO) that can dominate climate for periods up to 2 years, the PDO (found in 1996) that enhances or reduces ENSO effects by itself and when synchronised with the likes of the AMO dominates climate for periods measured in decades, perhaps longer. (Ocean cloud production is dominated by these factors.) And of course solar emissions and the Sun's distance that is strongly influenced by Jupiter and Saturn play a huge role.
Longer term cycles of which there are many (and definitely more yet to be discovered) are due to factors such as the degree of axis tilt that dictates such as the extent of sea ice that reflects away warming sunlight, continental movement for whatever reason you care to support, plate tectonics or planet growth. Tectonic and volcanic activity play a major part, a super volcano can trigger a period of glacial advance. Ongoing heightened sea floor activity such as has been seen in recent years can warm the oceans, make them more acidic and raise CO2 levels. Embarrassingly little is known of that last topic. Termites produce more CO2 than humans. We really are insignificant.
The previous interglacial that lasted around 12,000 years saw temperatures perhaps 12 deg C more than now and sea levels around 25 feet higher than now. We will be fortunate to avoid those levels but we probably have far too few trees to be that lucky. Forests are a major air conditioner in that they control water vapour levels in their vicinity and hence cloud formation and precipitation.
We are a tiny factor in the climate's daily activities, far too insignificant to matter and hugely irrelevant to the longer term cycles such as interglacial and glacial periods of the current ice age we are in, the former lasting around 10,000 to 30,000 years, the latter around 70,000 to 90,000. To assume we can control the climate with CO2 is unfounded, unproven blind arrogance with much evidence to the contrary. Assumption is the sum of evidence.
Warming and cooling alarmists are akin to idiots watching the air get warmer as the Sun rises and panicking "we're all going to fry", then other idiots watching the air get cooler as the Sun sets and panicking "we're all going to freeze". We experience planet cycles on a daily basis. Some cycles take very much longer than humans have been around. We may yet see a drop into glaciation, cyclically due anytime between now and 2,000 years hence, and fools want to enhance the risk. Warmer is much friendlier to all life than cooler.
We are in fact warming in an orderly fashion, 0.5 - 1 deg C net per century on average as we continue to emerge from the last glacial period and the Little Ice Age, appropriate to the planet's position in its orbit, its attitude to the Sun and other factors. That's how it was and how it will continue due to factors that make us as important to the climate as King Canute was to the tide. The UN IPCC and EC are biased, environmentally harmful politicos who have an agenda other than saving the planet. (Do you think they know human CO2 is insignificant?) That is why nothing more than hand waving, costly white elephants and useless rhetoric at expensive 5 star junkets is all they have accomplished. (By the way each junket generates in excess of 13,000 tons of carbon, - much from hot air?)
Consumers beware the costly spin of wind turbines Link
More horror stories Link
India's wind power boom is failing to deliver Link
Report blows hole in wind power plan Link
A Huge Hole in the Climate Change Science Link
U.N. 'Climate Change' Plan Would Likely Shift Trillions to Form New World Economy Link
Even doubling or tripling the amount of co2 will have little impact on temps Link
The Skeptic's Handbook Home, Link (pdf), Desmog
It’s Official: Oceans Caused Droughts Link
Antarctic Sea Ice Up Over 43% Since 1980, Where Is The Media? Link
The Basic Science Of Carbon Link
Carbon cycle modelling and the residence time of natural and anthropogenic atmospheric CO2: on the construction of the "Greenhouse Effect Global Warming" dogma. Link
Introducting A New Political Party Link
Biofuel balls-up Link
Synchronized chaos and climate change Link
A new dynamical mechanism for major climate shifts Link
Can El Nino Events Explain All of the Global Warming Since 1976?
Part 1 Link
Part 2 Link
Adjusting Temperatures for the ENSO and the AMO Link
El Niño and Global Temperature Link
ENSO forecasts based on solar model Link
What the CCSP Extremes Report Really Says Link
Where are the eggs that were in this basket? Link
Job Losses From Obama Green Stimulus Foreseen in Spanish Study Link
The green agenda Link
Environmentalism is facism Link