I just want to say that while there are definitely more efficient ways of harnessing renewable energy, wind turbines play an important part in preserving the environment. They gotta go somewhere.
Actually, where I think we ought to be putting wind turbines (and solar panels) is on skyscrapers. They're already sticking up in the air, they're already a hazard to birds, and they tend to be high enough to get a fair amount of wind. Sounds like a good place for a turbine to me...
I would'nt mind if they actually worked, but they don't, they don't provide power when needed, they require huge amounts of maintainance, have to be backed up with conventional generating capacity, raise the cost of electricity, without subsidies they would be a loss making venture.
Friends of mine took part in the hot windy texas 200 intercostal race (dinghy sailing) where they happened to mention 80% of the windmills they observed were not turning.
Well, burning fossil fuel is a problem.
Consider The Geysers, in Calif.
https://www.google.com/#q=the+geysers+ca
Now no-one is proposing plugging up all of the geysers in Yellowstone.
(although, as an example, I have talked about it, as here.)
However, I seriously doubt you're living your life w/o using any energy.
I do realize that there are some places where windmills would be inappropriate,
even though, personally, I rather like them.
SO, I won't propose to put them everywhere, as long as you recognize that we ought to have a diversity of energy sources.
Everything is expendable when it comes to wind power- scenery, eagles, noise disrupting the local ecology. To the simple mind, wind power is good. And that's as far as the thought process goes.
The Kennedys blocked wind Turbines because it would block their view
If you are going for pure aesthetic value, then you may be on to something that wind farms are not all that pretty to look at.
Example - https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/image...
Now, on a pure aesthetic value, is that any uglier than this? - https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/image...
There is far more going on with energy sources than just pure aesthetics, don't ya think?
Human lives are more important than your view from your luxury condo.
They are most assuredly a scenery-spoiler......not to mention the thousands of birds/bats that they kill every year in the U.S.
I heard a conversation where a guy was saying it would be OK to have 400 foot wind turbines on on the rim of the Grand Canyon, and even the top of El Capitan in Yosemite (to catch the best winds). To me, that shows a complete lack of aesthetic values even if it was legal in a national park setting.
And there are many fine scenic areas getting wind turbines just because they aren't officially designated as scenic.
What is up with "environmentalists" who show so little respect for natural landscapes in their zeal to replace fossil fuels? Global warming isn't the ONLY man-made environmental problem. I find it ironic when they say we need to "reduce our carbon footprint" by hugely increasing our landscape footprint.
No offense, but your overheard conversation sounds made up, and is ridiculous anyway because those are both national parks and there won't be wind turbines in either of those places.
Certainly there are aesthetic problems with wind turbines, as there can be with nuclear power, fossil fuels, hydroelectric and solar. There are trade-offs with every type of power. Wind power will never be the primary power source for the world, there are not enough favorable areas for wind.
If CO2 was visible, we'd have a different attitude
videos:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pla...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pla...
eagle hit
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pla...
-----
Wind farms are clusters of turbines as tall as 30-story buildings, with spinning rotors as wide as a passenger jet's wingspan. Though the blades appear to move slowly, they can reach speeds of up to 170 mph at the tips, creating tornado-like vortexes. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/03/...
Bob Sallinger with the Audubon Society of Portland said wind farms across the country have killed more than 80 eagles over the last decade.
“If you have dozens and dozens of them on the landscape it is basically a giant Cuisinart for birds,” said Sallinger. “Bald eagles took decades to recover … we almost lost them because of DDT. Golden eagles are a species biologists are concerned about because they appear to be declining.” http://www.kgw.com/news/Official-Wind--2...
A recent study by federal and state scientists found that U.S. wind turbines could kill up to 1.4 million birds of all species per year by 2030 as the wind energy industry continues to expand. http://www.ibtimes.com/should-wind-turbi...
http://silverford.com/blog//wp-content/u...
Kay Armstrong, who lives near a wind farm in Ontario, Canada, has reported that her home is now “virtually uninhabitable” due to the infrasound from the turbines disturbing her sleep and making her feel dizzy. She also says that local deer are agitated and awake all night, that birds are flying around all day rather than going to roost, and that seals in the area are suffering miscarriages. http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-Londo...
http://articles.latimes.com/2011/jun/06/...
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-...
