Wind turbine vs Duck

A place to discuss major environment issues, from the Gulf oil spill to extreme floods.

Moderators: Indaswamp, Dep6, Smackaduck

Re: Wind turbine vs Duck

Postby High Sierras » Sun Mar 03, 2013 9:35 pm

OmegaRed wrote:
High Sierras wrote:
wanapasaki wrote:Wind is VERY effective... My turbines each put out 2.2 Mega Watts. Each megawatt can supply 3,000 homes...I have 63 turbines. They are very effective...

How effective are they when the wind isn't blowing?

Nuclear works all the time, whether the sun is shining or not, whether the wind is blowing or not. That's why the US navy dropped sails (you know, the original wind power!!! :hi: )and is using nuke reactors now...it's called technology, and we need to embrace it!


Where do you dispose of the waste? I suggest starting on your property. :clapping:


I believe the volume of waste is minimal for the megawattage you get out of it. Granted, the length of time to keep it around is an issue. I thought Yucca mountain, all by itself, was supposed to be big enough to handle holding ALL of the nuke waste generated to date in the US-- from all the power plants, all the radioactive stuff from the medical industry, all the research waste, all the bomb making waste (40 years worth...), all of it. In one facility. I used to have a pdf copy of a research paper the DoD sponsored trying to find a way to mark the site of Yucca for the next 10,000 years in a way that future people wouldn't disturb what they were planning on burying there. It was actually a facinating read. How do you mark something that's buried 2,000 feet underground, in a form that people who might not even understand what english writing is, and will withstand the effects of time (ever see any artifacts that was man made after 10,000 years???), and be understood as "hey, don't dig here, really bad mojo underground here!"

One other possible solution to the waste issue, why not load it up into rockets and launch it at the sun? Celestial fireworks! OOOOH! AAAAH!
High Sierras
hunter
 
Posts: 1160
Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2012 11:34 pm
Location: above the snow line most of the year

Remove Advertisements

DuckHuntingChat.com
Advertisement

Re: Wind turbine vs Duck

Postby OmegaRed » Mon Mar 04, 2013 6:23 am

High Sierras wrote:
OmegaRed wrote:
High Sierras wrote:
wanapasaki wrote:Wind is VERY effective... My turbines each put out 2.2 Mega Watts. Each megawatt can supply 3,000 homes...I have 63 turbines. They are very effective...

How effective are they when the wind isn't blowing?

Nuclear works all the time, whether the sun is shining or not, whether the wind is blowing or not. That's why the US navy dropped sails (you know, the original wind power!!! :hi: )and is using nuke reactors now...it's called technology, and we need to embrace it!


Where do you dispose of the waste? I suggest starting on your property. :clapping:


I believe the volume of waste is minimal for the megawattage you get out of it. Granted, the length of time to keep it around is an issue. I thought Yucca mountain, all by itself, was supposed to be big enough to handle holding ALL of the nuke waste generated to date in the US-- from all the power plants, all the radioactive stuff from the medical industry, all the research waste, all the bomb making waste (40 years worth...), all of it. In one facility. I used to have a pdf copy of a research paper the DoD sponsored trying to find a way to mark the site of Yucca for the next 10,000 years in a way that future people wouldn't disturb what they were planning on burying there. It was actually a facinating read. How do you mark something that's buried 2,000 feet underground, in a form that people who might not even understand what english writing is, and will withstand the effects of time (ever see any artifacts that was man made after 10,000 years???), and be understood as "hey, don't dig here, really bad mojo underground here!"

One other possible solution to the waste issue, why not load it up into rockets and launch it at the sun? Celestial fireworks! OOOOH! AAAAH!


I'm not disagreeing, just being the devil's advocate. Gotta get rid of it somewhere, and it's much more harmful than waste created by other energy sources. Plus Yucca would have been a MAJOR threat to national security. Too bad they already spent $32 billion on it (or at least received it from companies, haven't checked in a while what he status of it all was). This doesn't touch on how we ship it there (rail or truck - again, major security risk and what happens in event of major event? Wreck,sabotage, terrorism) or geology - even though it's supposed to be stable.
OmegaRed
Fabio
 
Posts: 6120
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2012 10:38 am

Re: Wind turbine vs Duck

Postby High Sierras » Mon Mar 04, 2013 7:23 pm

OmegaRed wrote:
High Sierras wrote:
OmegaRed wrote:
High Sierras wrote:
wanapasaki wrote:Wind is VERY effective... My turbines each put out 2.2 Mega Watts. Each megawatt can supply 3,000 homes...I have 63 turbines. They are very effective...

How effective are they when the wind isn't blowing?

Nuclear works all the time, whether the sun is shining or not, whether the wind is blowing or not. That's why the US navy dropped sails (you know, the original wind power!!! :hi: )and is using nuke reactors now...it's called technology, and we need to embrace it!


Where do you dispose of the waste? I suggest starting on your property. :clapping:


I believe the volume of waste is minimal for the megawattage you get out of it. Granted, the length of time to keep it around is an issue. I thought Yucca mountain, all by itself, was supposed to be big enough to handle holding ALL of the nuke waste generated to date in the US-- from all the power plants, all the radioactive stuff from the medical industry, all the research waste, all the bomb making waste (40 years worth...), all of it. In one facility. I used to have a pdf copy of a research paper the DoD sponsored trying to find a way to mark the site of Yucca for the next 10,000 years in a way that future people wouldn't disturb what they were planning on burying there. It was actually a facinating read. How do you mark something that's buried 2,000 feet underground, in a form that people who might not even understand what english writing is, and will withstand the effects of time (ever see any artifacts that was man made after 10,000 years???), and be understood as "hey, don't dig here, really bad mojo underground here!"

One other possible solution to the waste issue, why not load it up into rockets and launch it at the sun? Celestial fireworks! OOOOH! AAAAH!

I'm not disagreeing, just being the devil's advocate. Gotta get rid of it somewhere, and it's much more harmful than waste created by other energy sources. Plus Yucca would have been a MAJOR threat to national security.

Any more than having Cheyenne mountain is a major threat to national security? Any more than having the Pentagon around? If we can protect those assets from a direct attack, why would Yucca mountain be so vulnerable? I think centeralizing the waste in one facility (instead of having it spread all over the country) is the most cost efficient way to protect it. The waste at Yucca mountain was supposed to be buried 2,700 feet below ground. No way a bunker buster type bomb could get to that. From what I've read, the waste was to be sealed into 55 gal drums, then the salt in the vein they were burying it in would slowly "fuse" back around and encapsulate it for the next 10,000 years...no direct access to the materials after the salt flowed back into the voids, without serious mining equipment. And having it out in the Nevada desert, even if it was scattered all over the ground in some kind of catastrophic accident, there's no one within 100 miles to know about it. That's why we test the big bombs out in the wastes of Nevada.
OmegaRed wrote: Too bad they already spent $32 billion on it (or at least received it from companies, haven't checked in a while what the status of it all was). This doesn't touch on how we ship it there (rail or truck - again, major security risk and what happens in event of major event? Wreck,sabotage, terrorism) or geology - even though it's supposed to be stable.

The vast majority of the industrial waste generated is solid fuel rods. The rail / trucking containers they currently haul radioactive wastes around in are tested to be slammed into a concrete wall at something like 70mph and not fail. In case of a rail accident,stand the container back up, put it back on the rails, and continue on. Shipping by rail, with armed guards on the train & maybe helecopter gunship escorts, should minimize access to terrorists/saboteurs. How does France deal with storing their waste? Isn't something like 80% of thier domestic electricity generated by nukes?
High Sierras
hunter
 
Posts: 1160
Joined: Tue Nov 13, 2012 11:34 pm
Location: above the snow line most of the year

Re: Wind turbine vs Duck

Postby dudejcb » Thu Mar 21, 2013 8:13 pm

If you think wind turbines are dangerous to ducks, look at oil sludge ponds in the pothole regions of Canada and the US. Here's an example ... http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2012/10/04/ducks-killed-in-alberta-oilsands-tailings-ponds_n_1940030.html
"Chill Dude, these guys think the public pool and playground are communist plots"s - BBD2
What's so funny 'bout peace love and understanding?
Republicans take care of big money, for big money takes care of them ~ Will Rogers
E PLURIBUS UNUM
User avatar
dudejcb
hunter
 
Posts: 6244
Joined: Thu Nov 30, 2006 8:29 am
Location: SW Idaho

Re: Wind turbine vs Duck

Postby wanapasaki » Fri Mar 22, 2013 1:16 pm

Jcb i see 100×s the amount of dead birds on the way to work on the road than i will ever find on any if our sites
Give a man a duck... Feed him for a day... Teach him to fowl hunt... Feed him for a lifetime...Teach him in your spot... Learn to hunt a different spot....
User avatar
wanapasaki
hunter
 
Posts: 2521
Joined: Wed Jun 06, 2012 6:45 am
Location: Tehachapi, CA

Re: Wind turbine vs Duck

Postby dakotashooter2 » Fri Mar 22, 2013 5:13 pm

Birds adapt to them but foul weather can screw that up and is often the cause. I hunted right across the road from a turbine field and watched the birds bob in and out without a problem in clear weather. They are probably less a problem than power lines.................................
User avatar
dakotashooter2
hunter
 
Posts: 3456
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2011 3:00 pm

Re: Wind turbine vs Duck

Postby wanapasaki » Wed Jul 17, 2013 8:05 pm

I was reading in wildfowl that the only ducks effected by turbines were drakes during the breeding season hopped up on testosterone and flying wild. So far, in a year, only 1 wild duck has been found between 50 square miles of turbines.
Give a man a duck... Feed him for a day... Teach him to fowl hunt... Feed him for a lifetime...Teach him in your spot... Learn to hunt a different spot....
User avatar
wanapasaki
hunter
 
Posts: 2521
Joined: Wed Jun 06, 2012 6:45 am
Location: Tehachapi, CA

Re: Wind turbine vs Duck

Postby Rat Creek » Fri Mar 24, 2017 2:48 pm

If wind and solar were efficient and had any ROI, it would need neither promotion nor subsidies from the taxpayers. :no:

As it is, when I see a windmill, the sound it makes is a sucking sound. And of course there is the massive amount of mining necessary to acquire the materials.

I wish it were the answer, but it is not. Just another transfer of money from the losers (taxpayers) to the winners (green fraud). :no:
Rat Creek
Rat Creek
hunter
 
Posts: 7248
Joined: Sun Aug 01, 2004 4:11 pm
Location: Overland Park, KS

Re: Wind turbine vs Duck

Postby Yuchi1 » Fri Mar 31, 2017 10:39 am

OmegaRed wrote:Many occurrences with windmills aren't related to strikes but rather hydrostatic shock. I've read bat studies where a necropsy is performed and there is liquification of organs with no visible damage to the outside of the body. There are also cases where flight is disrupted by the rotors turning, creating a void of turbulence ridden air that won't let downforce be generated. It's similar to when helicopters crash when flying into areas surrounded by walls, disrupting the air waves and not allowing lift. This is why the helicopter crashed when Seal Team 6 stormed Osama's compound.

And as far as whether it's a problem or not, I would venture to say that quantitatively, it's not out of the range of mortalities from other events (predators, chemicals, etc.) in a given population.


Infrasound contamination may well be the culprit here and it's harmful effects upon humans (as it can travel for many miles) in the region of windfarms are just now being studied. Below is an excerpt and link to just one of dozens of resource outlets on this Cold War Weapon.

..."Effects

In general high intensity infrasound of the magnitude used in weaponry kills or injures, by resonating vital organs so much that it destroys them – shakes them to destruction.

Not at all spiritual of course!……………..

As high intensity infrasonic pitches decrease, the deadly symptoms increase. Altered cardiac rhythms, with pulse rates rising to 40 percent of their rest values, are the precursors to other pre-lethal states.

Mild nausea, giddiness, skin flushing, and body tingling occur at 100 cycles per second. Vertigo, anxiety, extreme fatigue, throat pressure, and respiratory dysfunction follow.

Coughing, se­vere sternal pressure, choking, excessive salivation, extreme swallowing pains, inability to breathe, headache, and abdominal pain occur between 60 and 73 cycles per second. ‘Post exposure fatigue is marked. Certain subjects contin­ued to cough for half an hour, while many continued the skin-flush manifes­tation for up to four hours’.

Significant visual acuity decrements are noted when humans are exposed to infrasound between 43 and 73 cycles per second. Intelligibility scores for persons exposed, fall to a low of 77 percent their normal scores. ‘Spatial orientation becomes completely distorted. Muscular coordination and equilibrium falter considerably. Depressed manual dexterity and slurred speech have been noted before individuals blackout. Just before this point, a significant loss in intelligibility is noted’

Lethal infrasonic pitch lies in the 7-cycle range. Small amplitude increases affect human behaviour in this pitch range. “Intellectual activity is first inhibited, blocked, and then destroyed. As the amplitude is increased, several disconcerting responses had been noted. These responses begin as complete neurological interference. The action of the medulla is physiologically blocked, its autonomic functions cease”.
"...

http://www.allaboutheaven.org/science/2 ... ic-weapons

https://borderlandsciences.org/journal/ ... vreau.html
Last edited by Yuchi1 on Fri Mar 31, 2017 10:46 am, edited 1 time in total.
Sent from my Sumerian tablets

Jeep went to war, to make it safe for Land Rover to go to the mall.
Yuchi1
hunter
 
Posts: 2216
Joined: Wed Jan 17, 2007 9:15 pm
Location: Creek Nation of Oklahoma

Re: Wind turbine vs Duck

Postby Yuchi1 » Fri Mar 31, 2017 10:42 am

wanapasaki wrote:I was reading in wildfowl that the only ducks effected by turbines were drakes during the breeding season hopped up on testosterone and flying wild. So far, in a year, only 1 wild duck has been found between 50 square miles of turbines.


Was it a case of simply one duck the coyotes missed?
Sent from my Sumerian tablets

Jeep went to war, to make it safe for Land Rover to go to the mall.
Yuchi1
hunter
 
Posts: 2216
Joined: Wed Jan 17, 2007 9:15 pm
Location: Creek Nation of Oklahoma

Previous

Return to Major Environmental Issues

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest