RunRyder RC
WATCH
 3 pages [ <<    <     1     ( 2 )     3     NEXT    >> ] 2333 views POST REPLY
HomeAircraftHelicopterHelicopter Main Discussion › Flying site doomed by windturbines !! UK
03-13-2010 05:26 PM  8 years agoPost 21
Jlerch

rrApprentice

Parrish, Florida

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

there is no skirting the fact that fossil fuels are a limmited resource that is in decline.
That fact may not be entirely accurate, some hydrocarbon fuels are very likely abiogenic in origin. It is highly probable that these hydrocarbons are constantly being created in the Earth's lower crust and upper mantle. Saying the Earth will run out of hydrocarbon fuel might be similar to saying "The Earth will run out of Lava"

Another example, the vast oceans of liquid hydrocarbons (ethane and methane) on the surface of Saturn's moon Titan are not of a biological origin.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abioge...rgument_against

http://www.mitosyfraudes.org/Ingles2/FossilFuels.html

http://www.rense.com/general58/biot.htm

Also, while on the topic, Thorium nuclear power seems rather promising.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thorium_fuel_cycle

Your mileage may vary...

James Lerch - Tampa Bay FL

PM  EMAIL  HOMEPAGE  Attn:RR  Quote
03-13-2010 08:12 PM  8 years agoPost 22
Terrabit

rrElite Veteran

Seattle, WA - USA

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

The thorium fuel cycle sounds interesting. But I don't think you'll find much support in the scientific community for the abiogenic petrolium hypothesis. This is not a new idea. I don't believe that the US would be spending $590,752,500,000 a year (19.5m bbl/day, $83/bbl) for oil if there were a viable alternative to conventional sources.

PM  EMAIL  Attn:RR  Quote
03-13-2010 10:57 PM  8 years agoPost 23
helicopter nut

rrNovice

pleasanton, ca usa

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

The thorium fuel cycle sounds interesting. But I don't think you'll find much support in the scientific community for the abiogenic petrolium hypothesis. This is not a new idea. I don't believe that the US would be spending $590,752,500,000 a year (19.5m bbl/day, $83/bbl) for oil if there were a viable alternative to conventional sources.
I rest my case. If we had a good alternative we would certainly use it. It is never a great idea to send money to a culture in which many want to see you dead. The best we can do for now is to be efficient and work hard to find a viable alternate if it exists.

Lord hear our silent prayers to Thee
For those who fly from ships at sea.

PM  EMAIL  Attn:RR  Quote
03-14-2010 12:21 AM  8 years agoPost 24
Yug

rrMaster

UK. Herts

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

There are plenty of viable alternatives but it seems many of us are not prepared to pay the true costs. Humans have become cheapskates, expecting too much for too little.

Vegetable rights and Peace

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
03-14-2010 12:40 AM  8 years agoPost 25
Gyronut

rrProfessor

Martinsville In.

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

The only real 'green' choice is actually nuclear power .
Hey Nivlek...

Have you heard of radio active waste..???

Rick

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
03-14-2010 12:43 AM  8 years agoPost 26
helibeast

rrApprentice

Mn

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

I don't believe that the US would be spending $590,752,500,000 a year (19.5m bbl/day, $83/bbl) for oil if there were a viable alternative to conventional sources.
The US needs to keep oil the #1 energy source, our currency depends on it so it can maintain its value.

Champion,Magic,MiniBoy,Xcell60+50,Intrepid,Intrepid Gas,Baron30,Whisper,300X,mCPXv1v2,Concept,Nexus

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
03-14-2010 09:23 AM  8 years agoPost 27
nivlek

rrProfessor

Norfolk England

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Have you heard of radio active waste..???
Yes , but nuclear power produces far less carbon emmissions , allegedly the cause of 'global warming '. Oh no ,it's not called 'global warming' now , it's called 'climate change' these days , just to encompass all possible eventualities .

All the wind turbines in the world wouldn't replace one nuclear power station , and the increased level of radio active waste from one more nuclear power station isn't here nor there .

How many wind turbines would you need to run a factory making wind turbines ?

At the end of the day , it gets dark .

PM  EMAIL  Attn:RR  Quote
03-14-2010 11:55 AM  8 years agoPost 28
shawmcky

rrElite Veteran

Isle of Wight,United Kingdom

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Wind turbine factory recently closed here with many locals losing their jobs.
Now have been given another huge government grant and retain an R&D department after closing the main factory,have chinese factories building the turbine to save production costs here(Is China not a significant polluter,seems ironic)Seems like another way of getting goverment money and outsourcing it to boot,someone is having a laugh are they not?

Team- unbiased opinion.K.I.S.S principle upheld here

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
03-14-2010 03:52 PM  8 years agoPost 29
hootowl

rrProfessor

Garnet Valley, Pa.

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

A nuclear powered sub can run for 20 years on 8 lbs of fuel.

Your flying site may be dear to you but energy is more dear is it not?

Wolves don't lose sleep over the opinions of sheep

PM  EMAIL  HOMEPAGE  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
03-14-2010 06:42 PM  8 years agoPost 30
Terrabit

rrElite Veteran

Seattle, WA - USA

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

The US needs to keep oil the #1 energy source, our currency depends on it so it can maintain its value.
This is absurd. The value of the dollar is determined by the open market activities of the fed and international currency exchange rates.

PM  EMAIL  Attn:RR  Quote
03-14-2010 07:13 PM  8 years agoPost 31
helicopter nut

rrNovice

pleasanton, ca usa

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

+1 there!

If we could get out from under oil we would do it in a heartbeat!

Lord hear our silent prayers to Thee
For those who fly from ships at sea.

PM  EMAIL  Attn:RR  Quote
03-15-2010 01:48 AM  8 years agoPost 32
Yug

rrMaster

UK. Herts

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

If we could get out from under oil we would do it in a heartbeat
But our governments won't allow this because they're all greedy bastards.

Vegetable rights and Peace

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
03-15-2010 03:15 AM  8 years agoPost 33
Taipan

rrElite Veteran

Sydney, Australia

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

It can't be a very good flying field if it's windy enough for a wind farm!

Yesterday on the way back from a fun fly we passed a new wind farm near Canberra. Each turbine is massive.

I was thinking that to generate electricity, some of the wind energy has to be converted into so. That means the wind would be slightly less after passing through the turbines which one would argue is messing around with the environment as usual.

I learnt that solar panels in space generate like 10 times more power than on the ground due to zero atmosphere. Why don't we all hook up any extension leads we have & connect to the panels?

The sun has all the energy we need. Thing is can't be good for the earth to pump more energy into it.

Btw there are proposals of beaming energy from orbiting solar panels to the ground as microwaves but the receiver has to be huge, a kilometre in diameter or so. And then there is the danger if the microwave transmitter focuses on towns etc. Crispy!

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
03-16-2010 03:47 AM  8 years agoPost 34
jschenck

rrProfessor

La Vista, NE.

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

This is kind of an interesting discussion - wind farms seem to be a farce from my perspective. I moved to the Plesanton/Dublin CA. area in 1992 and drove through the Altamont pass many times. It was an old dilapidated wind farm 20 years ago. 1/2 the turbines weren't even operational. It was because the project didn't create enough energy to be monetarily self sustaining even though it's located in a geographically ideal location for a wind farm (other than all those pesky Raptors).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Altamont_Pass_Wind_Farm

So what do we do, dump more money into wind farms. I'm truly stunned at the colossal size of the wind turbines that have popped up in Nebraska and Iowa in the last few years. The cost of each one of them is staggering any they are bringing them in on trains. I can't help but wonder (out loud here) if this money would yield better results for future generations if it were spent on technologies that could produce higher density energy source.

and don't get me started on corn based ethanol

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
03-16-2010 05:08 AM  8 years agoPost 35
helibeast

rrApprentice

Mn

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

This is absurd. The value of the dollar is determined by the open market activities of the fed and international currency exchange rates.
The reality is that the strength of the dollar since 1945 rests on being the international reserve currency for global oil transactions (i.e., "petro-dollar". The U.S. prints hundreds of billions of these fiat petro-dollars, which are then used by nation states to purchase oil and energy from OPEC producers (except Venezuela). These petro-dollars are then re-cycled from OPEC back into the U.S. via Treasury Bills or other dollar-denominated assets such as U.S. stocks, real estate, etc. The recycling of petro-dollars is the price the U.S. has extracted since 1973 from oil-producing countries for U.S. tolerance of the oil-exporting cartel.

Champion,Magic,MiniBoy,Xcell60+50,Intrepid,Intrepid Gas,Baron30,Whisper,300X,mCPXv1v2,Concept,Nexus

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
03-16-2010 06:41 AM  8 years agoPost 36
Terrabit

rrElite Veteran

Seattle, WA - USA

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

"Petrodollar" is a somewhat dated term used to describe money received by OPEC nations in payment for petroleum. But the price of petroleum does not dictate the value of the dollar. There are other influences, fear being a big one (think hysteria ... like runs on banks), that affect currencies. But "ceteris paribus" (all things being equal) the value of the dollar, as well as most other currencies, is determined by international exchange rates and the sale and purchase of government treasury bonds.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monetary_theory
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equation_of_exchange

PM  EMAIL  Attn:RR  Quote
03-16-2010 06:48 AM  8 years agoPost 37
helibeast

rrApprentice

Mn

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Perhaps I should have used the word
Stability instead of value. This was my intent.

Champion,Magic,MiniBoy,Xcell60+50,Intrepid,Intrepid Gas,Baron30,Whisper,300X,mCPXv1v2,Concept,Nexus

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
03-16-2010 06:55 AM  8 years agoPost 38
Terrabit

rrElite Veteran

Seattle, WA - USA

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

It's all good! I have a final on this stuff next week. I'm suposed to be writing a paper on it right now!!! At any rate, it's pretty fresh in my mind. Sorry if I got carried away. I do that sometimes.

Peace!

PM  EMAIL  Attn:RR  Quote
03-17-2010 02:44 PM  8 years agoPost 39
TachyonDriver

rrKey Veteran

Chipping, Lancs, UK

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

A couple of observations I want to throw into the fray:-

Wind has energy. When the winds blows against the wind turbine, some of that energy is used up in trying to turn the blades isn't it? (Newtons Laws etc.) Now, imagine a colossal wind farm, far bigger than anything before, biblical even etc. etc. Obviously it's cost effective because it's "green" LOL. Anyway, could the wind actually be dissipated by the act of turning all those blades? Could we stop wind on the Earth? We know that the planet would be a different place without any wind - huge, icy polar and red hot equatorial regions - that would be a heck of a climate change wouldn't it?

Nuclear power - yes, we get radioactive waste. However, how about disposing of all that nasty crap, and tons of garbage too, with cheap, RELIABLE! one shot launch vehicles amied at our very own massive ball of nuclear fire 93 million miles away?

Tach.

Little Spinning Bundle of Joy® DON'T DISS THE DINO!!

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
03-17-2010 02:59 PM  8 years agoPost 40
Taipan

rrElite Veteran

Sydney, Australia

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

I also thought about disposing nuke waste that way, problem like you said is the reliability of launch vehicles!

Anyone seen Superman IV? When he collects all the nuke missiles & chucks them in a gigantic net then flings them into the sun? Only if it were that easy!

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
WATCH
 3 pages [ <<    <     1     ( 2 )     3     NEXT    >> ] 2333 views POST REPLY
HomeAircraftHelicopterHelicopter Main Discussion › Flying site doomed by windturbines !! UK
 Print TOPIC  Make Suggestion 

 8  Topic Subscribe

Tuesday, September 25 - 4:03 pm - Copyright © 2000-2018 RunRyder   EMAILEnable Cookies

The RC discussion world needs to consolidate. RR is now one choice for that. Its software is cutting edge. It hosts on-topic advertising. Help RR increase traffic buy making suggestions, posting in RR's new areas (sites) and by spreading the word.

The RunRyder Difference

• Category system to allow Rep/Vendor postings.
• Classifieds with sold (hidden) category.
• Classifieds with separate view new.
• Answer PMs offsite via email reply.
• Member gallery photos with advanced scripting.
• Gallery photo viewer integrated into postings.
• Highly refined search with advanced back end.
• Hosts its own high end fast response servers.
• Hosts thousands of HD event coverage videos.
• Rewrote entire code base with latest technology.
• No off-topic (annoying) click bait advertising.
Login Here
 New Subscriptions 
 Buddies Online