Wind Farms cause global warming

Discuss life, the universe, and everything with other members of this site. Get to know your fellow polywell enthusiasts.

Moderators: tonybarry, MSimon

pbelter
Posts: 184
Joined: Thu Oct 09, 2008 2:52 am

Wind Farms cause global warming

Postby pbelter » Tue May 01, 2012 5:52 am

Looks like the wind farms raise the temperature of the surrounding area

Wind turbines can modify the local climate by warming the atmosphere, according to a study that revealed an increase in temperature of 0.72 degrees over a region of Texas where four large wind farms have been built.


Well, I guess solar panels contribute to global warming too since they are black so they absorb more heat that would otherwise be reflected.

Heh, looks like the warmistas have cornered themselves. No mater what kind of energy is produced it is bad for the environment. The fact is that according to this line of thinking all human activity is bad and harmful.

choff
Posts: 2431
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2007 5:02 am
Location: Vancouver, Canada

Postby choff » Tue May 01, 2012 7:31 am

Since the warmistas are the NWO Agenda 21 types they'll then proclaim the only solution is to reduce humanities carbon footprint, humanity being made up of carbon unit's and all. I wonder how many birds will be killed by windfarms before they finally give up on them.
CHoff

DeltaV
Posts: 2245
Joined: Mon Oct 12, 2009 5:05 am

Postby DeltaV » Tue May 01, 2012 1:59 pm

Only one solution*, in their minds:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgia_Guidestones
Maintain humanity under 500,000,000 in perpetual balance with nature.

*As in "Final Solution".

choff
Posts: 2431
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2007 5:02 am
Location: Vancouver, Canada

Postby choff » Tue May 01, 2012 2:10 pm

Yeah, some scientist got a cheer from his pals when he said that AIDS was too slow, Ebola would work way better.
CHoff

tomclarke
Posts: 1683
Joined: Sun Oct 05, 2008 4:52 pm
Location: London
Contact:

Re: Wind Farms cause global warming

Postby tomclarke » Tue May 01, 2012 3:48 pm

pbelter wrote:Looks like the wind farms raise the temperature of the surrounding area

Wind turbines can modify the local climate by warming the atmosphere, according to a study that revealed an increase in temperature of 0.72 degrees over a region of Texas where four large wind farms have been built.


Well, I guess solar panels contribute to global warming too since they are black so they absorb more heat that would otherwise be reflected.

Heh, looks like the warmistas have cornered themselves. No mater what kind of energy is produced it is bad for the environment. The fact is that according to this line of thinking all human activity is bad and harmful.


Luckily the climate scientists are a bit more careful with cause and effect than either reporters or AGW skeptics.

Making the local ground atmosphere warmer by mixing layers of air does not necessarily contribute to global warming. In fact it possibly reduces it (by reducing overall insulation) given that this effect appears to be more important at night than in the day. But either way, no climate scientists, as opposed to idiot AGW skecptic, would confuse local temperatures with global and hence draw this conclusion.

PV cells do tend to decrease the albedo of the earth (depending on whether they are mounted on roofs that are normally black anyway). The effect is much smaller than the CO2 they replace. It has been suggested that we should all paint our roofs in cities white. This would reduce urban heat island (normally 1-3C) by about 1/3 and hence save CO2 emissions from air conditioning both locally (cooler roof) and due to urban heat island reduction if carried out everywhere. Again this effect is much larger than the direct effect of albedo change.
In a 2001 federal study, the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBNL) measured and calculated the reduction in peak energy demand associated with a cool roof’s surface reflectance.[14] LBNL found that, compared to the original black rubber roofing membrane on the Texas retail building studied, a retrofitted vinyl membrane delivered an average decrease of 24 °C (43 °F) in surface temperature, an 11% decrease in aggregate air conditioning energy consumption, and a corresponding 14% drop in peak hour demand. The average daily summertime temperature of the black roof surface was 75 °C (167 °F), but once retrofitted with a white reflective surface, it measured 52 °C (126 °F). Without considering any tax benefits or other utility charges, annual energy expenditures were reduced by $7,200 or $0.07/square feet.

Instruments measured weather conditions on the roof, temperatures inside the building and throughout the roof layers, and air conditioning and total building power consumption. Measurements were taken with the original black rubber roofing membrane and then after replacement with a white vinyl roof with the same insulation and HVAC systems in place.

CKay
Posts: 282
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2011 11:13 am

Re: Wind Farms cause global warming

Postby CKay » Tue May 01, 2012 3:57 pm

pbelter wrote:Wind Farms cause global warming


Looks like the wind farms raise the temperature of the surrounding area


Unless by surrounding area they mean across the entire planet, this isn't global warming.

CKay
Posts: 282
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2011 11:13 am

Postby CKay » Tue May 01, 2012 4:04 pm

choff wrote:Since the warmistas are the NWO Agenda 21 types they'll then proclaim the only solution is to reduce humanities carbon footprint, humanity being made up of carbon unit's and all.

What a load of bollox!

I believe the evidence for AGW is overwhelming, but I wouldn't for one minute advocate culling humans back to some 'manageable' level.

seedload
Posts: 1062
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2008 8:16 pm

Re: Wind Farms cause global warming

Postby seedload » Tue May 01, 2012 5:10 pm

tomclarke wrote:Luckily the climate scientists are a bit more careful with cause and effect than either reporters or AGW skeptics.


I agree that this is a pretty ridiculous conclusion from an insignificant bit of data, but I don't agree that this instance says anything about "climate scientists" universal care on the issue of cause and effect nor does it warrant your lumping of all AGW skeptics together into a giant pool irrational supporters any contrary claim.

Regards
Stick the thing in a tub of water! Sheesh!

tomclarke
Posts: 1683
Joined: Sun Oct 05, 2008 4:52 pm
Location: London
Contact:

Re: Wind Farms cause global warming

Postby tomclarke » Tue May 01, 2012 7:11 pm

seedload wrote:
tomclarke wrote:Luckily the climate scientists are a bit more careful with cause and effect than either reporters or AGW skeptics.


I agree that this is a pretty ridiculous conclusion from an insignificant bit of data, but I don't agree that this instance says anything about "climate scientists" universal care on the issue of cause and effect nor does it warrant your lumping of all AGW skeptics together into a giant pool irrational supporters any contrary claim.

Regards


It is never good to generalise, I was a bit annoyed by the tone of the previous posts, which generalised in a much worse way. I apologise.

In the case of climate scientists the observation is tautologous. Somone who is not very careful about subtleties of cause and effect cannot be a good climate scientist. So I don't apologise for that.

I gave an example of one AGW skeptic (Roger Pielke Sr.) who in spite have having been a good scientists regularly posts very ill-considered (that is a polite way of saying abbviously rubbish) anti-AGW. The link deconstructs one of his posts, and a set of 7 additional comments trying to save face when it is critiqued.
.
I can find other similar, from other skeptics, but certainly not all are the same, some just are sold on their own private theory (e.g. Svensmark).

choff
Posts: 2431
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2007 5:02 am
Location: Vancouver, Canada

Postby choff » Wed May 02, 2012 12:48 am

How do they explain the Medieval warming period or the mini ice age of the sixteenth century. Funny how Greenland got it's name.
CHoff

choff
Posts: 2431
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2007 5:02 am
Location: Vancouver, Canada

Postby choff » Wed May 02, 2012 1:25 am

You can check out some of the quotes from the leaders of the green movement yourself. Some of them view depopulation with a sense of urgency.

http://www.green-agenda.com/
CHoff

Roger
Posts: 788
Joined: Fri Jul 06, 2007 2:03 am
Location: Metro NY

Postby Roger » Wed May 02, 2012 4:18 am

Plus large scale deployment of wind turbines could alter Earths orbit......
I like the p-B11 resonance peak at 50 KV acceleration. In2 years we'll know.

pbelter
Posts: 184
Joined: Thu Oct 09, 2008 2:52 am

Postby pbelter » Wed May 02, 2012 4:45 am

choff wrote:Yeah, some scientist got a cheer from his pals when he said that AIDS was too slow, Ebola would work way better.


There is a great book by Bob Zubrin about this way of thinking:

Merchants of Despair: Radical Environmentalists, Criminal Pseudo-Scientists, and the Fatal Cult of Antihumanism

This is the same Bob Zubrin from the Mars society. The book has plenty of examples from recent history that explain this line of thinking and the reasoning behind it.

Here is an example:

My own doubts came when DDT was introduced for civilian use. In Guyana within 2 years it had almost eliminated malaria, but at the same time the birth rate had doubled. So my chief quarrel with DDT in hindsight is that it has greatly added to the population problem.
-- Alexander King, cofounder of the Club of Rome, 1990


This comes from the profound belief humanity is vermin and can do no good. Zubrin traces this belief back back to Malthus and documents how it evolved politically into eugenics movement thru national socialism culminating in the current radical environmentalism. This is well documented in his book with facts, dates and quotes. I.e. the first Green party has been founded and chaired by August Haussleiter a former SS officer and a Hitler loyalist who stood behind his master as early as the Beer Hall Putch of 1923.


Personally, I am a great believer in scientific method. To me the 2 of the most important aspect of it are the concept of a "control group" and the principle of the "Ockham razor". If proponents of a hypothesis are unwilling to verify it by comparing their results to a control group it is probably untrue. If on top of that if one of many explanations of a phenomena is promoted with disregard to its probability the whole thing is probably hoax or just simply fraud.

Lets take a look at the hypothesis of AGW.
To establish if global warming is caused by our civilization lets take a look at the temperature variations of other planets, preferably Mars, being climatically closest to Earth. I was waiting for a long time for somebody to do that and I found the guy. His name is Khabibullo Abdusamatov and he is the supervisor of the Russian section of the International Space Station and the head of Space research laboratory at the prestigious Saint Petersburg-based Pulkovo Observatory, Russian Academy of Sciences.
Abdusamatov did extensive studies on the solar cycles and studied the Martian polar caps to see if they change over time as temperatures on Earth warm. To me this is as close o the control group as we can get without producing a parallel Earth. Guess what, he found that the Martial caps did erode when the observed temperatures on Earth increased. Little that was published of his work outside of Russia, was ridiculed by the proponents of AGW. For me a control group is all I need. On top of that Ockham razor says that if something happened repeatedly (like i.e. the medieval warming) in the past and is happening today, and now a factor exist that did not exist in the past, that factor is most likely irrelevant.

On the other hand Bob Zubrin in his book is convinced that AGW is real:

Going from 315 ppm of atmospheric CO2 in 1958 to 375 ppm today, we increased the total mass of carbon in the atmosphere from 630 gigatones (Gt) to 750 Gt. [..] In fact the the actual amount of fossil fuels used worldwide over that period was around 250 Gt.[..] Human industrial CO2 may be having modest effect on climate but they have positive effect on plant growth worldwide; one study has shown 14 percent increase in plant growth in the us in second half of the twentieth century


Burning natural gas and recycling the resulting CO2 thru the greenhouse is a well known and widely popular method of increasing greenhouse crop in Holland.
Now, having more green plants is bad for the planet ?!?

No matter what excuse, to the Malthusians humanity can do no good, we will run out of resources and pollute the planet, etc. Amen.
Each decade for the last coupe of centuries they are proven wrong. Yet they persevere...

pbelter
Posts: 184
Joined: Thu Oct 09, 2008 2:52 am

Postby pbelter » Wed May 02, 2012 6:10 am

choff wrote:You can check out some of the quotes from the leaders of the green movement yourself. Some of them view depopulation with a sense of urgency.

http://www.green-agenda.com/


Choff,

Thanks for this great link. My favorite is:


It doesn't matter what is true,
it only matters what people believe is true."
- Paul Watson,
co-founder of Greenpeace


Having grown up in a socialist regime in Eastern Europe I can fully appreciate it meaning. Indoctrination from cradle to grave was the way the government pushed its agenda.
I live in the US now but I see things are not going very well here either. Friedrich von Hayek who escaped the national socialist regime mentioned that one who lived in a totalitarian country can easily notice notice a birth of totalitarianism.

AGW is a great platform to promote agenda of total control and the indoctrination is omnipresent.
Things are not going well here in the US.

The current president mentioned during his campaign that under his plan the energy prices will necessarily skyrocket

Here is video where he says that:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BqHL404zhcU

According to this graph

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-HoYR9V7YUro/T1TLl0vmIKI/AAAAAAAAFB8/-nw5KXykOnk/s1600/real-gasoline-pump-prices-and-unemployment-rate-us-jan-1976-feb-2012.png

energy prices and unemployment rates are very closely correlated.

What the president is really saying is that under his plan the unemployment rates will necessarily skyrocket.

He was true to his word and kept his promise.

Now, to whom all the helpless unemployed people are going to turn for help? Of course, the Government, so lets grow it to "help" even more people.
Constitution stands in the way? Well, it is just a set of guidelines, times have changed we cannot take it literally...

"We are on the verge of a global transformation.
All we need is the right major crisis..."
- David Rockefeller,
Club of Rome executive member

tomclarke
Posts: 1683
Joined: Sun Oct 05, 2008 4:52 pm
Location: London
Contact:

Postby tomclarke » Wed May 02, 2012 6:39 am

choff wrote:You can check out some of the quotes from the leaders of the green movement yourself. Some of them view depopulation with a sense of urgency.

http://www.green-agenda.com/


Your comments were about climate scientists. Not leaders of the green movement.

Still, I am interested, what population would you see as comfortable for the earth?


Return to “General”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: MSN [Bot] and 2 guests