Short Movie "BLOWN AWAY" destroys the Clean Wind Power MYTH

[Melensdad]

Free short movie, which undertaken after the Billy Bob Thornton show LANDMAN, to see if his statements are true.

This is the X post. But the entire short film, only 24 minutes long, literally exposes and destroys the clean energy narrative.

While I personally think it makes sense to have "clean energy" on private property, self financed by the owner, as a back up source or for a remote cabin or similar application, the giant projects, funded by taxpayers, via energy subsidies and tax policies, have proven to be a debacle in nations around the world. No reason to think we do it better.

But watch the short flick and make up your own mind.

 

[FTG-05]

It's always been a scam.

 

[loboloco]

I have a friend that has both wind and hydro to power his house and buildings. His set up is unique though. He has an old style windmill that pumps water into a huge reservoir and then uses the gravity drop through pipes to run a turbine. He also has a creek running through his property that he has a turbine on a small damn in.

 

[FrancSevin]

I have a friend that has both wind and hydro to power his house and buildings. His set up is unique though. He has an old style windmill that pumps water into a huge reservoir and then uses the gravity drop through pipes to run a turbine. He also has a creek running through his property that he has a turbine on a small damn in.

Those are great applications of the current technologies. It works on small scaleups like a farm or ranchette. It does not work to power high density population cities and towns.

 

[bczoom]

Loved the video but he neglected to mention that each of those windmills will not generate enough electricity in its service life than the power and resources that it took to make them.

 

[mbsieg]

Loved the video but he neglected to mention that each of those windmills will not generate enough electricity in its service life than the power and resources that it took to make them.

You may want to fact check that

 

[FrancSevin]

You may want to fact check that

Why don't YOU do that for the rest of us Green Energy skeptics
With all due respect, make a case, not a statement

 

[FrancSevin]

Power from wind costs twice as much as that of natural gas and other resources. This if you include capital cost. further, Windmills have a short service life of about 25 years. Hydro dams can last for decades or more. Coal fired or NG fired plants also last for decades. T Boone Pickens shut down his massive NG/Wind farm project because the cost yield were so bad, even with gubmit subsidies.

Billionaire Pickens Shelves Massive Wind Farm Project in Texas

e360.yale.edu

According to Jerry Taylor, senior fellow at the Cato Institute, using wind to generate most of the nation's electricity would undoubtedly result in higher retail electric rates because wind power is twice as expensive as natural gas-fired generation "and probably more if you take out the subsidies."<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pickens_Plan#cite_note-Platts20080710-19"><span>[</span>19<span>]</span></a> However, the American Wind Energy Association points out that the cost of wind power has dropped by more than 90% in the last 20 years and expects the cost to continue to decline as the industry matures. In contrast, the cost of natural gas is expected to rise. Moreover, the effects on the environment and public health for natural gas are estimated to cost some 0.5 to 2.0 cents per kWh.<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pickens_Plan#cite_note-30"><span>[</span>30<span>]</span></a> Similar costs from wind are marginal.

 

[Melensdad]

Power from wind costs twice as much as that of natural gas and other resources. . . .

But wind is free!?!

Just like sunshine!!!

Wind and solar both have their places. Remote locations, locations where grid availability does not exist, etc.

Large scale wind generation (and solar) leads to higher prices for electricity.

Higher prices for electricity leads to hardship for low/middle class people.

Hardship for people leads making uncomfortable choice like heat or food.

We also know that higher energy prices equate to job losses as manufacturing tends to move toward lower energy cost locations. Which also leads to hardship for low/middle class people.

 

[FrancSevin]

But wind is free!?!

Just like sunshine!!!

Wind and solar both have their places. Remote locations, locations where grid availability does not exist, etc.

Large scale wind generation (and solar) leads to higher prices for electricity.

Higher prices for electricity leads to hardship for low/middle class people.

Hardship for people leads making uncomfortable choice like heat or food.

We also know that higher energy prices equate to job losses as manufacturing tends to move toward lower energy cost locations. Which also leads to hardship for low/middle class people.

These "costs" are seldom if ever considered in the equations. They represent the needs of the people who should be the priority. Especially in a self-governing nation such as the USA purports to be.
Are we no longer such?

In truth all forms of energy are "free" Even coal and NG. But like Solar and wind, and Hydro, there is a cost to acquiring and harnessing the resource. As for the pollution arguments Solar and Wind apparatus is likely the most environmentally unfriendly.

 

[mbsieg]

Why don't YOU do that for the rest of us Green Energy skeptics
With all due respect, make a case, not a statement

I don't believe it's my job to do anything for you. I replied to a statement with a statement. Fact, check it or not doesn't matter to me either way.

 

[FrancSevin]

I don't believe it's my job to do anything for you. I replied to a statement with a statement. Fact, check it or not doesn't matter to me either way.

Then I have no reason to believe your reasoning. You simply make statements. But won't back them up.
We are supposed to just believe because you said so?
You offer nothing of value to the Forum
Great attitude dude!
Lame!

BTW, I did fact check. The cost of windmills does not meet or compete because they do not produce more energy in operation than they cost in resources to manufacture and install.
Actually, this is old news here.
Where have you been?

It is no one's "job" to do anything here. But members should contribute to the forum discussion not just carp away at others. That adds no value to the discussion.

Speaking of value, since most wind turbines produce at bout 35% of capacity a 4 Megawatt system produces $245,280 of saleable current in a year. They last 25 years at best. That's $6,132,000

T Boone Pickens was paying about $6,000,000 per unit on his NG/Wind farm in Texas which he abandoned because it was not cost effective. This before maintenance costs.
You may also remember that Texas power grid went down and out because the wind farms failed to produce one cold winter.

I used the biggest megawatt units for this comparison. They would generate the most saleable power.
So yes, they do cost more in dollars than they generate in power. And actually T Boones idea of combining wind and NG seemed to make real sense until he actually applied his money and efforts to a realization of the concept. He claims the effort costs him $20 Billion in losses.

Other operations may have done better however, most have huge government subsidies. Where I come from, that's called cheating.