EyesWideOpen wrote:
Regarding someone seeing a Wind Mill turning when THEY PERSONALLY do not feel wind is a little misleading, since that person was most likely not at the same elevation as the Wind Mill. It can be perfectly still on the ground, yet 100 feet up the wind can be felt.
FirstClassSkeptic wrote: I can get on the computer, and look up wind speeds on weatherunderground.com from various weather stations in the area, and some of them are as high, or higher, than the wind turbines. And I have seen them say, zero wind with zero gusts, and the wind mills were turning. I am not relying on human perception.
Also, I have seen things like, one wind rotor pointed west, and another right beside of it pointed north, and they both were turning. Does the wind blow in two different directions at once?
EyesWideOpen wrote:
Unless one has a Wind Instrument right in front of the windmill that is turning, it is unfair to say no wind is hitting the object.
Former Chancellor Lord Lawson yesterday led the backing for Prince Philip after he branded wind farms ‘absolutely useless’.
In a scathing attack, the Duke of Edinburgh said the turbines were ‘completely reliant on subsidies’ and ‘would never work’.
His comments are a rebuke to the Government, which is trying to increase the amount of energy generated by wind farms and other renewable technologies.
Last night Lord Lawson said the Duke was ‘spot on’ and speaking on behalf of ordinary people in fuel poverty.
Philip made the remarks to Esbjorn Wilmar, managing director of Infinergy, which is building offshore turbines around Britain.
Mr Wilmar said he introduced himself to the 90-year-old Duke at a reception and suggested he put wind turbines on royal property.
‘He said that they were absolutely useless, completely reliant on subsidies and an absolute disgrace. I was surprised by his very frank views,’ he said.
When Mr Wilmar tried to argue that onshore turbines are one of the most cost-effective forms of renewable energy, the Duke apparently replied: ‘You don’t believe in fairy tales do you?’
The second great lie about wind power is the pretence that it is not a preposterously expensive way to produce electricity. No one would dream of building wind turbines unless they were guaranteed a huge government subsidy.
This comes in the form of the Renewables Obligation Certificate subsidy scheme, paid for through household bills, whereby owners of wind turbines earn an additional £49 for every 'megawatt hour' they produce, and twice that sum for offshore turbines.
This is why so many people are now realising that the wind bonanza — almost entirely dominated in Britain by French, German, Spanish and other foreign-owned firms — is one of the greatest scams of our age.
The third great lie is that this industry is somehow making a vital contribution to 'saving the planet' by cutting our emissions of CO2 - it is not
What other industry gets a public subsidy equivalent to 100 or even 200 per cent of the value of what it produces?
Critics of wind energy are absolutely right—the entire idea of wind energy is nonsense. It’s utterly impractical and unsuitable for the production of electricity. It’s a government subsidized fraud. It’s a huge waste of resources, breathtaking in its transparent and inevitable futility, and it destroys our quality of life (and valuable habitat for wildlife) by industrializing vast tracts of land, even as it promises to save us from the sins and excesses of prior, arguably much more defensible, forms of industrialization.
Return to Nuclear Power Doubts: Nuclear Disasters? Safe Power? Is 'Nuclear Power' a Hoax?
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest