“an estimated annual emission of microplastics of approx. 62 kg per year per turbine.”
2 Likes
Here I believe a relevant question is what exactly are we seeing in the video?
Are these cases shown in the video enough proof that wind-power itself is a failed concept?
Do these cases represent the overall performance and reliability of wind turbines?
Questions like how many failed turbines, how large a percentage of failures are there, and what are the various variables related to this and reasons for various failures.
Also of course other mechanical equipment experience mechanical and other failures all the time.
I believe that one would need to compare the pollution/waste emitted from the building/transportation/use of coal/oil/nuclear-power generation and compare that to the one time decommissioning of wind-turbine materials in a neat pile somewhere after 15-25, or more years of service. Smarter materials that can be recycled better are probably being developed too.
I prompted an AI to do some quick calculations which I have not verified but will do so later today and look into this more properly:-
- Wind Turbine:
- Decommissioning Waste: 150-200 tons (if not recycled).
- CO2 Emissions: Virtually none from operation, minor from manufacturing and installation.
- Coal Power Plant:
- Total Coal Used: 75,000 tons.
- CO2 Emissions: 150,000 tons.
- Other Pollutants: Significant amounts of SO2, NOx, particulate matter, etc.
"The pollution created by generating the same amount of electricity (150 GWh) with a coal power plant is vastly greater than the material waste from a decommission
ed wind turbine. Specifically, a coal power plant would produce around 150,000 tons of CO2 and other pollutants, compared to the 150-200 tons of physical waste (assuming no recycling) from a wind turbine. This illustrates a stark difference in the environmental impact between renewable and fossil fuel-based energy generation."
I believe that I rather have a junkyard of decommissioned wind turbines near me than an ashpond:
Plant food. A by-product of photosynthesis is oxygen. Can you ask your AI what is the critical low level of CO2 for the extinction of life? My keyboard is not working right now so I am limited in replies.
For this argument we could ignore co2 and only include things like sulphur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, particulate matter and coal ash and I believe the amount and damage of these is much worse than the scrapped wind turbine parts lying neatly in a pile somewhere or buried.
You could be right on that, However they are an eyesore and kill birds and bats.
The ones I've seen here in Finland have been placed very well and they are actually quite useful and even quite dear landmarks when I navigate the archipelago. Yes, I also believe they can be eyesores when placed badly.
This would have to be looked into and put into perspective, for instance do they kill more birds and bats than for instance cats do.
Found an article. It seems to miss the coal-ash though.
So, is the approach taken in the video posted by @ThePrisoner ThePrisoner no good? I would say so.
whataboutism:
what·about·ism ˌ(h)wä-tə-ˈbau̇-ˌti-zəm
ˌ(h)wə-
plural whataboutisms
: the act or practice of responding to an accusation of wrongdoing by claiming that an offense committed by another is similar or worse
The exchange is indicative of a rhetorical strategy known as whataboutism, which occurs when officials implicated in wrongdoing whip out a counter-example of a similar abuse from the accusing country, with the goal of undermining the legitimacy of the criticism itself.—
Olga Khazan
By whataboutism I mean the way any discussion can be short-circuited by saying "but what about x???" where x is usually something that's not really equivalent but is close enough to turn the conversation into mush.—
Touré
also : the response itself
They accomplish it by muddying the waters and distracting from international criticisms with whataboutisms such as telling the world that there's nothing exceptional about America. —
Alex Zeldin
called also (chiefly British) whataboutery
That dutch style (?) windmill is "foreign" to me and doesn't really appeal to me as I've grown up looking at Scandinavian style ones. And I see one right outside my window right now.
Which brings me the insight that if someone grew up relatively close to a modern wind turbine that person would probably be accustomed to it and form an attachment to it...
Did I claim that?
I also said "This would have to be looked into and put into perspective" which I believe are tell-tale signs that I didn't merely try to deflect with "whataboutism"
What method of generating electricity do you recommend instead of wind?
These look like positive developments:-
https://stateofgreen.com/en/news/decommissioned-wind-turbine-blades-spun-into-recyclable-buildings/
https://windcycle.energy/advancements-in-wind-turbine-technology/
“Experiment Gets An F-Minus”: Nantucket Residents Fume Over Broken Wind Turbine Blade Polluting Beaches
“The great Nantucket experiment gets an F-minus,” Kevin O’Leary, chairman of O’Leary Ventures, told Bloomberg, referring to the offshore turbine failure that resulted in broken fiberglass littering the pristine beaches of Nantucket last month. The turbine is part of the offshore Vineyard Wind project.
O’Leary continued, “It’s not a golden example of success in wind turbines, that’s for sure.”
The federal government ordered Vineyard Wind’s project south of Nantucket last month to halt construction and electricity generation following the blade malfunction.
The company managing the project determined the turbine blade failure was due to a “manufacturing deviation,” adding that before energy can be produced, all blades across the project will be inspected with ultrasound technology and drones, reported local media CapeCod.
Continued at link...