Head To Head
Log In
Register
U-Know! Forum »
Wind farms v Birds
Log In to post a reply

34 messages
Topic View: Flat | Threaded
morfe
morfe
2992 posts

Re: Wind farms v Birds
Jan 28, 2004, 14:48
http://www.geocities.com/nigbarnes/

Arguments against windpower.

It makes me sad to see a master of the wind slain by an inefficient eyesore. This doesn't mean I'm not cogent of the need for energy. Just saddened. The red kite was down to 5 pairs in Wales ( in Britain there was only 12 known birds!) in 1905. It's been a labour of love to return it to 'rare' status, triumphing through DDT, constant shootings, poison-baiting and myxomatosis.

"A large turbine in Gloucestershire saves less than the amount of carbon dioxide produced by just one articulated lorry. At Nympsfield in Gloucestershire a single 500kW gearless Enercon turbine was commissioned in Dec 1996. Its annual output is about .11 million kWh (Tilting At windmills BBC2, 2.2.99). Since the turbine generates not only during the day, when it might displace oil- or coal-fired generation, but also at night when mainly nuclear and gas generation are still operating, it us logical to assume that it displaces a mix of fuels, rather than only coal or oil. Department of Trade and Industry figures indicate that the 1995 generating fuel mix produced an average of 620g of carbon dioxide per unit of electricity generated. Thus we can calculate that the Nympsfield turbine saved about 688 tonnes each year, or 0.078 tonnes per hour. An articulated lorry travelling at 50mph along a motorway produces 0.08 tonnes of carbon dioxide per hour. Given the uncontrolled growth of road traffic, the erecting of turbines is a futile exercise. How many turbines would we have to build each year merely to keep pace with traffic growth?"

Waiting for the crash....
Topic Outline:

U-Know! Forum Index