Davin News Server

On Sat, 6 Sep 2025 10:10:30 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

>On 2025-09-06 07:15, NoBody wrote:
>> On Fri, 5 Sep 2025 15:56:11 -0700, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> On 2025-09-05 15:32, AlleyCat wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, 5 Sep 2025 12:41:16 -0700,  Alan says...
>>>>
>>>>>> How are rural WINDMILLS any different from rural oil wells and gas
>>>>>> wells and cell towers and powerline towers? Funny conservatives
>>>>>> don't complain about THOSE.
>>>>>
>>>>> Why would I care that other people also use the language poorly
>>>>
>>>> YOU WERE WRONG.
>>>>
>>>> "Windmill" is a perfectly accepted term for them.
>>>>
>>>> It's no one fault you're too much an ego-maniacal narcissist to admit it.
>>> Putting back all the refutations you snippped.
>>>
>>>> They each consume 10'000 liters (more than 2600 gallons) of crude
>>>> oil based lubricants per year.
>>> No. They don't.
>>>
>>> (And I refuted this in detail in another post)
>>>
>> 
>> Put it right here as that post does not show in my list.
>> Will you do it?
>> Of course you won't.
>
>"'How much lubricant does a 2 MW wind turbine use in a year?
>
>A typical 2 MW wind turbine uses approximately 80 gallons (about 300 
>liters) of lubricating oil per year for maintenance and operational 
>efficiency. This figure includes oil used in the gearbox, yaw and pitch 
>systems, braking systems, and other components requiring lubrication.'

Source?

>
>So you were only wrong by a factor of 33, Loser!"
>

And you're confusing me with Alleycat again.

Damn you're dumb.

>In message: <109clc9$1ri16$14@dont-email.me>
>
>> 
>>>>
>>>> When outdated, the wind turbines are being buried deep in forests,
>>>> out of public view, due to the high costs associated with> recycling
>>> them.
>>>>
>>>> A windmill could spin until it falls apart and it will NEVER, EVER
>>>> generate as much energy as it was used in building it.
>>>
>>> Sorry, but that's just false.
>>>
>>> A 2 MW wind turbine generates generates 2 MWh of electricity every hour
>>> the wind is blowing. It takes about 3,300 - 4,100 MWh of energy to build
>>> one.
>> 
>> "every hour the wind is blowing".  How often does the wind
>> consistently blow.
>
>In some places (like where they put wind farms), it's certainly blowing 
>a good percentage of the time.

Data required to support your claim.

You are absolutely *terrible* at this.

>
>> 
>>>
>>> So 1,650 - 2,050 hours of wind will pay that off.
>> 
>> Show your work.
>
>Why should I? Did Loser show any of his?

Laughter!

I'm talking to YOU.  It appears you can't lead by example.

>
>> 
>>>
>>> A year has 8,766 hours.
>> 
>> Can't address the waste windmills produce I see.
>
>Show that they produce more waste than building any other kind of 
>electrical generation.

If that's what you believe, then support it.

>
>Did anyone present figures for how much lubricant per MW-hr a gas 
>turbine plant uses; or a coal plant? And so on.
>

Waiting on your data.

>I already presented my source for the capital and running costs of 
>various forms of electricity, and no one has produced anything of any 
>authority to refute it:
>
><https://www.lazard.com/media/eijnqja3/lazards-lcoeplus-june-2025.pdf>
>

Only trouble is I didn't ask anything about that.

Duh.

>> 
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Wind turbines Don't last forever. The metal towers can be recycled
>>>> normally, but the blades, a mixture of fiberglass, wood, and
>>>> plastic, cannot.
>>>
>>> Also false.
>>>
>> 
>> Tell us the what the "truth" is then.
>
>I've been doing that.
>

You've thrown stuff against the wall hoping that they will stick.  It
doesn't work that way.  Cite your claims please.

>> 
>> Laughter!
>> 
>>>> In the US, the cheapest option is to send fiberglass blades to
>>>> landfills, which has caused some controversy. Just
>>>> one blade is about as long as the wingspan of a large commercial jet
>>>> like a Boeing 747. And that's just on land. Offshore turbine
>>>> blades can be twice as long.
>>>
>>> And you think they're impossible to cut into pieces?
>> 
>> ""The blades are kind of a dud because they have no value," he said.
>> 
>> Decommissioned blades are also notoriously difficult and expensive to
>> transport. They can be anywhere from 100 to 300 feet long and need to
>> be cut up onsite before getting trucked away on specialized equipment
>> — which costs money — to the landfill.
>
>Decommissioning ANY power plant costs money, doofus.

Your dodge is noted.  Changing turbine blades is not "decomissioning".

>
>> 
>> Once there, Van Vleet said, the size of the blades can put landfills
>> in a tough spot.
>
>Because they can't be cut into pieces?

Ask Van Vleet as he seems to have more credibility than *you*.

>
>> 
>> "If you're a small utility or municipality and all of a sudden
>> hundreds of blades start coming to your landfill, you don't want to
>> use up your capacity for your local municipal trash for wind turbine
>> blades," he said, adding that permits for more landfill space add
>> another layer of expenses."
>> 
>> https://www.npr.org/2019/09/10/759376113/unfurling-the-waste-problem-caused-by-wind-energy
>
>'Tackling wind turbine blade waste with innovative shredding solutions
>
>EDGE’s HS750 shredder revolutionizes the recycling and repurposing of 
>decommissioned turbine blades'
>
><https://www.recyclingproductnews.com/article/42374/tackling-wind-turbine-blade-waste-with-innovative-shredding-solutions>
>
>It's not like they're all being replaced every year, doofus. Wind 
>turbines have lifespans of 20 years or more.

Uncited.  And you dodged what NPR said.

>
>The largest wind farm in the US is the Alta Wind Energy Center in 
>Tehachapi Pass, Kern County, California.
>

Uncited.

>The wind there blows something like 2,600 to 3,000 hours of the year, so 
>assuming the above figures for payback are accurate, it will take a 
>little more than a year to pay back the capital cost of building it.
>

Uncited.

>Even assuming that the figures weren't as good when it was first 
>constructed in 2010, it has obviously paid back the entire cost of 
>building it many times over.

Uncited speculation.

You cannot be taken seriously.