howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#1
Brian Dixon
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
#2
blowing in the wind my friend.prince philip turns out to be nick named windy miller.
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
#3
We need a new design of wind turbine, the present models are not economically viable in terms of rendition of energy for money spent on building them.
They are too massive and fragile.
Guest 651- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 5,673
#4
Need Mr Dyson to come up with the bladeless wind turbine !
Been nice knowing you :)
Guest 725- Registered: 7 Oct 2011
- Posts: 1,418
#5
Indeed the best type of turbine in use at the moment has three big cooling towers and have a big fire and it uses something children today may not be familiar with which is known as coal.
It's great. It provides constant electricity whatever the weather and even works at night which is a bonus. It provides jobs, real jobs, for those who work in the industry and not those pretend jobs they make up in fairyland servicing wind farms and putting unsightly solar panels on rich people's houses.
Unfortunately, socialists and hippies and even some conservatives think that these coal powered turbines are a very, very bad thing and if we keep on using them the world will die and millions of animals will perish in great pain and the sea will come over all our houses and God will kill us all and and and and
and everything.
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
#6
I remember coal. You paid for 20 bags and got 17.
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
Guest 643- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 1,321
#7
Well irrespective of cost etc, aesthetically I think they are beautiful, specially when you compare them with some of todays so called art! On a nice sunny day with a good breeze they remind us that we can use what we have naturally. Sorry chaps
There's always a little truth behind every "Just kidding", a little emotion behind every "I don't care" and a little pain behind every "I'm ok".
Guest 663- Registered: 20 Mar 2008
- Posts: 1,136
#8
Some pretty scary pictures on the link Howard, but when you look towards Ramsgate and see them on the horizon they almost look like statues in the see, they my be called wind turbines just not gale force turbines.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#9
this will please philip, the problem is that it is taken from his least favourite newspaper.
a good read it shows how we are in favour of wind turbines as long as they are nowhere near where we live.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/mar/01/local-opposition-onshore-windfarms-tripledGuest 725- Registered: 7 Oct 2011
- Posts: 1,418
#10
Usual Marxist daily fluff piece. Rather like the climate science they are so obsessed with what they have done here is to deliberately set up a survey in order to try to prove their prejudice. It's easily done but no doubt the useful idiots who support the English edition of Pravda will consider it as yet more proof that those who actually know a little about science and question the false notions put forward by charlatans should be silenced for the great socialist good.
I wouldn't trust Ipsos mori or Yougov to tell me what day it was. They would swear blind it was Sunday when it was really Wednesday. Of course Cameron, who is a big fan of focus group and opinion poll politics, will no doubt read this survey and order more offshore farms being the clot he most certainly is.
Two points of note:
Firstly what people forget is that wind turbines have nothing to do with heating our homes. The idea is that they produce electricity (rarely) and not one fossil fuel power plant has shut down in the world to make way for wind power.
Secondly, as I suggested in an earlier post, keep an eye on the price of carbon in the next budget statement. Now this really will be a jobs killer.
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
#11
Philip, you proved the point of the contrary!
"keep an eye on the price of carbon in the next budget statement. Now this really will be a jobs killer."
The price of carbon, presumably you refer to petrol, goes up and up, and will go up even more.
And this is not the fault of wind-turbine technology.
Guest 725- Registered: 7 Oct 2011
- Posts: 1,418
#12
Sorry Alexander I should have written the carbon price floor which is a completely different thing to the price of petrol. Completely different. Google it and discover the delicious con this particular tax is. It's ten times worse than stamp duty. No a million.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#13
Guest 725- Registered: 7 Oct 2011
- Posts: 1,418
#14
Does anyone get the feeling that the national trust are collectively in need of medical help in the head department? What an odd bunch they are.
I remember a few years ago they gave their employees a day off in order that they could spend time at home making their house, erm you know, carbon neutral. This would consist of replacing rising sea levels and polar bear murdering light bulbs and going to the diy shop in order to buy insulation for the loft. No doubt on the way they could stock up in the nearest health shop and buy a years supply of tofu burgers and environmentally sound muesli.
So the National trust is complaining about wind farms on their land. Out of place they say amongst other reasons.
Which brings me back to my original question. Are they all mad, deluded or merely terminally stupid? I pose this one after reading their propaganda from their website below.
Or maybe they just don't do irony?
http://www.nationaltrust.org.uk/what-we-do/big-issues/energy-and-climate-change/howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#15
Guest 725- Registered: 7 Oct 2011
- Posts: 1,418
#16
Yes indeed Howard but what you fail to realise is that it's important to build as many wind turbines as we can, as speedily as we can because women are the real victims in this debate.
Climate change affects women much more than men. How do we know that? Well, erm, because some member of the european parliament has told us so. Read on:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/9215757/Climate-change-is-a-feminist-issue-claims-MEP.html#17
#7
Guest 675- Registered: 30 Jun 2008
- Posts: 1,610
#18
Where to start. To my misfortune I have had direct dealings with all the national newspapers and the Sun and Star live up to the worst imaginings of how they behave (and share information with the Times), The Telegraph boasts the laziest forms of journalism with The Express hoping to attain the depths of the Sun. The Mirror has the most lurid imagination and twists everything as far left as it can. Of them all only the Guardian (with the exception of the Labour apologist rantings of Polly Toynbee) had the least bias and the most neutral reporting. The Mail would rather talk about aliens operating from secret bases to force socialism on the world through secret societies than cover the news.
The wonderfully polluting coal does indeed create jobs but then so does open cast mining and sending children up chimneys.
As an island nation we are desperate for coastal defences and yet the alternate power source with the least spent on it is tidal power.
Wind farms, while not perfect (new studies do show that they are not as dangerous to birds as has been thought) do offer some of the solutions and also offer jobs in manufacturing and construction.
Politics, it seems to me, for years, or all too long, has been concerned with right or left instead of right or wrong.
Richard Armour
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
#19
The Crown Estate brings in 34 million £ a year to the house of Windsor.
They are all in it together!
This does not include their private estates.
Guest 725- Registered: 7 Oct 2011
- Posts: 1,418
#20
Funny thing about the Guardian. It gets a lot of it's profits by way of, wait for it, Auto trader which is part of the group. So on the one hand the Guardian, that unbiased journal which features renowned centrists such as Tuscan Pol or Polly Toynbee, Sixth form columnist Owen Jones and a whole host of other left wing luminaries are in the pay of big oil, or big car if you wish.
So the leftovers, sorry lefties on the one hand preach from the gospel of climate alarmism where coal is bad and wind is good and Mother earth weeps for the climate and we must all stop flying and driving and the rest of their rot and yet profit from the evil automobile engine.
You couldn't make it up - actually you could if you work for the Guardian. Is it any wonder that their readership figures have plummeted over the past few years?
Criticise other journals of course but the Guardian and Independent are known in the industry as the kings of copy and paste journalism.
Oh and Johann Hari used to write for the Indy until he was, er, found out about his reporting methods.
Check the science. Wind is rubbish and creates more carbon dioxide (if your'e really worried about such things) and tidal is the biggest pipe dream since carbon capture and storage.