Skip to comments.Public gasps at Lake Michigan wind farm images
Posted on 12/16/2009 1:07:52 PM PST by reaganrevolutionin2010
A collective gasp was heard when computer enhanced photographs depicting numerous wind turbine generators were shown in Lake Michigan off Pentwater harbor and Little Point Sable at informational meeting in Scottville Tuesday night.
The photos were included as part of the public presentation before a full house at West Shore Community College by wind farm developer Scandia Wind LLC.
Its (Lake Michigan) more beautiful without them. Even I recognize that, said Harald Dirdal, a project manager with Havgul Clean Energy of Norway.
Scandia Wind LLC is exploring the possibility of constructing an estimated $3 billion, 1,000 megawatt wind farm in Lake Michigan over a 100 square mile area from the Ludington Pumped Storage facility to Silver Lake.
(Excerpt) Read more at oceanaheraldjournal.com ...
Having spent a great deal of professionsl time at LPS, Pentwater, Ludington and the entire west coast, I’m all for the spinners being put in!
I would bet that the ones most aghast at the prospect voted for Opossum.
Just like California. While I think windmills are not economical, this particular opposition to them shows what I call “California Thinking.” It can be summed up by the attitude of:
“We want electricity, but we don’t want anything that actually generates electricity anywhere near us. We expect that infinite quantities of electricity will be made in ‘some other place’ without any harm to any living thing and will be transported at no cost to our electric outlets.”
Why can’t they just bury them underground like electric cables?
Hell, put them all in Washington, D.C.
There's enough wind there to power the world!
Taking into account all of the costs (startup, decommission, fuel, etc.)
Natural Gas is ....... 3.4 - 4.5 cents/kW-hour
Nuclear is ..............4.0 - 5.5 cents/kW-hour
Offshore Wind is......6.0 - 15. cents/kW-hour
The first two are assumed to run at 8,000 hours per year.
Wind power at 2200 hours per year.
In 2002, the worlds largest offshore wind farm was built off the Danish west coast into the North Sea.It was used for illustration in an article discussing the wind farm planned for Lake Michigan.
And the fact that they provide virtually zero benefit just compounds the stupidity of the decision, no? http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fpcomment/archive/2009/04/08/wind-power-is-a-complete-disaster.aspx
Well actually that’s the thinking of every state, not just CA. The people in CA want electricity by any means, wind, solar, coal etc. but the minority special interest groups have our elected officials bent over the money barrel and control everything.
Greenies live in gentrified urban spaces, shower infrequently and hate cars, houses, suburbs and open spaces. Don’t let them ruin everyone’s lives.
Other than that, what's to lose?
The general idea is: put the turbines “out there” (where the conservatives live), and send the power “in here” (cities, where the liberals live)....
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 worlds 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 powers 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 Denmarks largest energy utilities) tells us that wind turbines do not reduce carbon dioxide emissions. The German experience is no different. Der Spiegel reports that Germanys CO2 emissions havent 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 Ontarios 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.Wind power is a complete disaster (Denmark relevant)
It always amazes me how libs, who live in a urban concrete jungle the furthest they could from nature, can tell the rest of us who decide to live closer to God how to live.
Arrogance beyond imagination.
To top it off liberals in NY and London frequently poke each other in the ribs and joke about how far removed they are from anything but buildings, asphalt and concrete. They treat parks as if grass and trees are alien species.
I’m in favor of starting near the Navy Pier and giving those living along Lake Shore drive a good view.
Yup, that would be ugly.
Inefficient, no. Inconsistent, yes. Ugly, hell no.
Of course, they're essentially worthless for large scale reliable power generation. But they're pretty.
Where do you get this idea?
Yes they are, individually. Just like cars are essentially worthless for large scale reliable transportation, individually.
I don't care if you have a hundred windmills or a thousand, they are still not reliable for large scale power generation.
They only work when the wind blows.
The wind is ALWAYS blowing somewhere.
A thousand is small potatos. In Iowa we have nearly 3000 with more coming. 10,000 seems reasonable for a state of 56,000 square miles.
Typical power loss for long distance transmission is 50%.
So instead of a 1,000 windmills, you have 500.
"The Spanish professor is puzzled. Why, Gabriel Calzada wonders, is the U.S. president recommending that America emulate the Spanish model for creating "green jobs" in "alternative energy" even though Spain's unemployment rate is 18.1% more than double the European Union average partly because of spending on such jobs?"
Of copurse we would have to open Yucca Mountain depository and wake up the guy in the white house.
And yes, ugly as hell, which is why people gasped at the virtual model when it was revealed. I've seen these things on the ridges of Maui, the deserts of Texas, and they just make the landscape ugly.
Why do you think the Kennedy's wouldn't let them in their private view, cause they were pretty?
As many as you have, you save nothing because you have to have a power plant on back up, running all the time because of the inconsistency. This is such a dumb waste of resources.
IT would be fine, if they actually produced enough electricity... but they don’t... the best thing would be nuclear.
So instead of a 1,000 windmills, you have 500.
You are sadly mistaken.
"Scientist calls nation's biggest solar plant a toy
Researcher's report claims advocates inflating numbers to hide cost"
Wind power has about an 80 percent approval rating by those near windfarms.
You are sadly mistaken.
There was a woman on Dennis Prager about 4 months ago. She has written a pro-nuclear energy book and debunks the feasibility of solar and windmill farms. She used to be an anti-nuke fanatic. He said he would post her book title on his site, but I never saw it. Can’t remember her name.
Actually, it’s those who think windpower is feasible without storage that are sadly mistaken.........cause it’s a simple matter that when the wind does not blow, people don’t turn off their electrical usage. You may want to live like a luddite, but most of us don’t.
Soon the country will get 3 percent of it’s power from wind, then 4, then 5...
So why are we doing something this stupid? Does it somehow make you feel better?
They are against windmills, hydro power, coal, atomic energy, geothermal power, and probably solar panels next.
This wind business is an absolute con. There are MASSIVE fields of natural gas underneath the eastern seaboard. The consters have infiltrated the Dept of energy and have bought enough congresscritters to force us to pay for their machinations.
Backup is accomplished with hydro which can often be switched on and off in a heartbeat, natural gas which also can also be turned on rapidly and coal which has many levels of backup. So you're wrong.
You know absolutely nothing about this stuff do you?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.