ADVERTISEMENT

Windmills and solar panels an environmental disaster?

We live on a small hillside with often strong winds, more often steady winds. The problem is that trees above us on neighboring properties slow the winds enough to make our ground not “windy” enough to justify a small turbine.
Dang, I wish we could, I wish we could.
I'd still look into it. We had trees around our house, but the winds would come down the hill through the back yard. And, then of course, August in the NE, no wind at all unless there's a storm.
 
  • Like
Reactions: billanole
So I did a little more research, as I remember very well when Ted Kennedy opposed wind turbines, and I found this. It gives a little history.

It is true that Yacht Clubs were all initially opposed, and one of the arguments was that it would interfere with their racing. Wealthy homeowners were concerned about the "view".

Generate the juice locally, as cleanly as possible. Kudos to Barnstable for negotiating new utility upgrades in conjunction with the needed line installations.
We got to work together, people.
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: fsufool and bcherod
The American Bird Conservancy estimates that well over half a million birds of all sizes and species die each year as a result of the wind turbines AND the utility lines used to carry the power they generate.
Out west they tend to inflict casualties on the larger birds including the California Condor.
I wish they would develop and install something around the blades that would protect the birds, like the blades of a fan.
I've been a Larry Bird fan (no blades) for many years! He migrated from Indiana to Boston and then nested back in his hometown of French Licker. He's by far, the greatest Bird that I have ever seen. Was there in 1985 in Nawlins when he scored 60 points. And I'm all in for protecting all birds. He was/is the best trash talker the league as ever seen and was Mr. Clutch when you needed a bucket. :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: billanole
I've been a Larry Bird fan (no blades) for many years! He migrated from Indiana to Boston and then nested back in his hometown of French Licker. He's by far, the greatest Bird that I have ever seen. Was there in 1985 in Nawlins when he scored 60 points. And I'm all in for protecting all birds. He was/is the best trash talker the league as ever seen and was Mr. Clutch when you needed a bucket. :)
The Bird.
In my lifetime, he was second only to a kid from a few houses down that was one of our crew. Big Bird Albert Phillips was my hero, only to get stopped by the ‘Rona.
RIP Big Bird Albert.
Carry on, apologies for the hijack.
 
  • Like
Reactions: goldmom
Nope! As long as there is water to the level at the top of the glass it will not over flow.

When you build a city below sea level what do you expect will happen?

I am not for oil or coal fired power plants as I stated above.. New nuclear is likely the best choice.

Actually, on the assumption that warming continues there will more plant growth in places like Greenland. More warming more evaporation and rainfall.
Enjoy your life. Living in fear is not a good way to live.

Matter can change form through physical and chemical changes, but through any of these changes matter is conserved. The same amount of matter exists before and after the change—none is created or destroyed. This concept is called the Law of Conservation of Mass.
 
  • Like
Reactions: billanole
I'm more interested in knowing how whales and porpoises fly into the turbine blades.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: bcherod
I'm more interested in knowing how whales and porpoises fly into the turbine blades.
They get caught up with the sharks.

53bc51856bb3f7e764fba6a0
 
Where is this happening in Miami?
I'm not sure, because I don't know Miami that well, I read several articles, and I believe one was from the Miami Herald that I can no longer access. The article that I read involved a trailer park that was becoming waterfront property, thus the owner of the land, tripled the land rental, thus causing people to have to move, even if they owned their trailers and had lived there for years.

But, here's an article on the rising waters.

 
Nope! As long as there is water to the level at the top of the glass it will not over flow.

When you build a city below sea level what do you expect will happen?

I am not for oil or coal fired power plants as I stated above.. New nuclear is likely the best choice.

Actually, on the assumption that warming continues there will more plant growth in places like Greenland. More warming more evaporation and rainfall.
Enjoy your life. Living in fear is not a good way to live.

Matter can change form through physical and chemical changes, but through any of these changes matter is conserved. The same amount of matter exists before and after the change—none is created or destroyed. This concept is called the Law of Conservation of Mass.
Unfortunately, icebergs and glaciers contain a lot of water that’s above sea level. Bears no resemblance to ice cubes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bcherod
Sea levels were 80 meters higher 100,000 years ago, and about 12,000 years ago they rose about 45 meters. The polar ice cap completely melted during that time and temperatures were 4-8 degrees higher. 1500 years ago, temperatures were higher than they are now. The 1300s saw warming befire a fierce cooling that ended about 1850. Temperatures and sea levels rise and fall, sometimes at rapid rates. Bottom line, people are probably living where they shouldn’t be.
 
According to Solar.com a 7.6 kWh system would set you back between 10 and 13k after tax incentives. This would pay for itself in 7 or so years depending on usage and returns from the power company. You can get no or low cost solar but some companies have different terms on payments and returns from the power company.

A neighbor of mine paid a company 478 a month for 10 years. They did keep the tax credit but not the returns from the power company. Got to do a lot of research.

Also important is how efficient your house is. The more efficient the higher returns you see and you pay the panels off quicker.
so, you throw around the terms “after tax credit”. That is implying that there is not a cost to the tax credit. Just get the government to pay for it and all will be good. NOT
 
so, you throw around the terms “after tax credit”. That is implying that there is not a cost to the tax credit. Just get the government to pay for it and all will be good. NOT
No the cost listed is after tax credits so the cost outlay would be higher than 12k initially.
 
According to Solar.com a 7.6 kWh system would set you back between 10 and 13k after tax incentives. This would pay for itself in 7 or so years depending on usage and returns from the power company. You can get no or low cost solar but some companies have different terms on payments and returns from the power company.

A neighbor of mine paid a company 478 a month for 10 years. They did keep the tax credit but not the returns from the power company. Got to do a lot of research.

Also important is how efficient your house is. The more efficient the higher returns you see and you pay the panels off quicker.
so, you throw around the terms “after tax credit”. That is implying that there is not a cost to the tax credit. Just get the government to pay for it
No the cost listed is after tax credits so the cost outlay would be higher than 12k initially.
my point being is that someone is subsidizing the credit. It’s not the government (just us other citizens paying for the subsidy). Just print more money as the solution
 
so, you throw around the terms “after tax credit”. That is implying that there is not a cost to the tax credit. Just get the government to pay for it

my point being is that someone is subsidizing the credit. It’s not the government (just us other citizens paying for the subsidy). Just print more money as the solution
That is correct. I wasn’t pushing anything just stating the posted costs and available programs. The post was in response to another about low costs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 74Seminole
??

I was a advocate of electric cars, solar panels and wind farms until one considers the toxic waste produced over time. Small windmills for individual homes and same with solar panels seem like the best choice environmentally.

Oh and for a completely frozen glass of water to the brim the water level would go down after melting. Frozen water less dense.
 
Unfortunately, icebergs and glaciers contain a lot of water that’s above sea level. Bears no resemblance to ice cubes.
Ice is ice? Glaciers are land locked and would raise water levels when melted.
 
I'm not sure, because I don't know Miami that well, I read several articles, and I believe one was from the Miami Herald that I can no longer access. The article that I read involved a trailer park that was becoming waterfront property, thus the owner of the land, tripled the land rental, thus causing people to have to move, even if they owned their trailers and had lived there for years.

But, here's an article on the rising waters.

6-8 inches in over 70 years is a lot different 6-8 feet!

reality

Ocean front property Maine. 1 house away from Edgewater drive Dunedin clear view of Caladesi island. Little if any change in sea level in almost 70 years for both.
 
Last edited:
??

I was a advocate of electric cars, solar panels and wind farms until one considers the toxic waste produced over time. Small windmills for individual homes and same with solar panels seem like the best choice environmentally.

Oh and for a completely frozen glass of water to the brim the water level would go down after melting. Frozen water less dense.
Until the battery and range issues for electric cars are sorted out I'm going to pass. However, I am a fan of utilizing existing sources to power, heat and cool your home. The thing is it needs to start with efficiency. Lower the electric bills first by making your home more efficient. That will get more in your pocket when you go solar.
 
Until the battery and range issues for electric cars are sorted out I'm going to pass. However, I am a fan of utilizing existing sources to power, heat and cool your home. The thing is it needs to start with efficiency. Lower the electric bills first by making your home more efficient. That will get more in your pocket when you go solar.
Agree
Insulated my home electric bill $125-150 a month from Oct to June. Solar too expensive. I'll be dead before I break even.
 
Agree
Insulated my home electric bill $125-150 a month from Oct to June. Solar too expensive. I'll be dead before I break even.
If your like me and use an average of 750kwh a month over the last year that's about $150 a month on average. A 7.6kwh system can produce 29kwh per day which would easily cover your monthly usage. At this rate it would pay for itself in 7 years. This doesn't include any net metering or other incentives. Careful though there are some rip offs out there.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bcherod
That was my point. Ice that’s below the surface shouldn’t raise levels.

I can't count the number of times I left a beer in the freezer overnight and the the can leaked .and I had beer slush in my freezer. Seems like water expands as it gets warmer. At least in some situations.

Just because it's the same substance doesn't mean it's density can't vary.
 
I can't count the number of times I left a beer in the freezer overnight and the the can leaked .and I had beer slush in my freezer. Seems like water expands as it gets warmer. At least in some situations.

Just because it's the same substance doesn't mean it's density can't vary.
Water expands when it freezes. Ice has more volume (takes up more space) than water but has less density (floats).

 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: trunole1
If your like me and use an average of 750kwh a month over the last year that's about $150 a month on average. A 7.6kwh system can produce 29kwh per day which would easily cover your monthly usage. At this rate it would pay for itself in 7 years. This doesn't include any net metering or other incentives. Careful though there are some rip offs out there.
7 YEARS. I read that solar panels have to be replaced every 10 years. Of course google says 25-30 years, What is the truth? Anyone have a solar powered home over 10 years?
 
7 YEARS. I read that solar panels have to be replaced every 10 years. Of course google says 25-30 years, What is the truth? Anyone have a solar powered home over 10 years?
Any easy way to tell is from the warranty. Most solar manufacturers warranty is 25 years so the 25-30 years is probably about right.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bcherod
Any easy way to tell is from the warranty. Most solar manufacturers warranty is 25 years so the 25-30 years is probably about right.

With over 500 going belly up the last 8 years as you have suggested extrema due diligence required. Solar company 25 years old would be a good idea IMHO.
 
  • Like
Reactions: billanole
Another aspect of the so called green energy movement is the batteries required to store this energy. This issue isn't mentioned because of the vast resources required to produce a single EV battery. All batteries for this purpose are a type of lithium battery. The average EV battery requires 17lbs of Lithium, 77lbs of Nickle, 44lbs of Manganese and 30lbs of cobalt. As you can imagine sourcing these materials isn't the same as recycling plastic or copper which is also used in EV batteries.

 
Hey there, I'm new to this forum, but I couldn't help but chime in on this topic. It's a bummer that they can cause harm to birds and bats, and even contribute to population declines. As for solar energy, I had no idea about the hazardous waste it produces. But have you heard about ground level solar panels? They're a newer technology that doesn't require massive land areas like traditional solar farms. Overall, I think it's important to weigh the pros and cons of any energy source and continue to strive for more sustainable solutions.
 
Last edited:
Hey there, I'm new to this forum, but I couldn't help but chime in on this topic. It's a bummer that they can cause harm to birds and bats, and even contribute to population declines. As for solar energy, I had no idea about the hazardous waste it produces. But have you heard about ground level solar panels? They're a newer technology that doesn't require massive land areas like traditional solar farms. Overall, I think it's important to weigh the pros and cons of any energy source and continue to strive for more sustainable solutions.
I don't see a difference.
 
I don't see a difference.
The I-10 corridor between Jax and Tally is filling up with enormous acreage on both sides full of solar collection panels- owned by FPL, Duke Energy or Southern Companies. They’ve replaced agricultural plantings.
 
Last edited:
  • Sad
Reactions: trunole1
LOL........China sources its electricity from coal and is building more coal fired plants.
China is a worldwide leader in moving away from fossils, while still building coal plants to serve immediate needs.
They are near dominant in electrics and battery production for transport currently.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT