General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsRESIDENTS OF OCOTILLO AND BOULEVARD SPEAK OUT, SHARE SAFETY FEARS AFTER TURBINE BLADE FALLS
Fortunately nobody was hurt by this accident, though Miachela’s younger brother, Albert added, “It’s scary, the blade of the wind turbine could have landed in a house.” The boy said he also said gets constant headaches that make it hard to do his homework since the turbines were installed.
Donna Tisdale chairs the planning group in Boulevard, where several new wind projects are proposed. Her planning group has opposed them, but San Diego Supervisors on Wednesday approved a wind ordinance that would allow such projects in East County.
http://www.eastcountymagazine.org/node/13257
Photo of the full tower
Corrected link
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Scuba
(53,475 posts)No wind turbine induced headaches either, I bet, except those caused by hate of any energy source not made from dead dinosaurs.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Both paved roads and Interstate Eight are less than a mile from towers.
And infrasound is causing issues with residents that live around these things around the world, not just Ocotillo
I am not even going to go into this project is in the wrong place, with marginal winds, and six months from having gone "live" and they are having some serious issues. Two of the turbines already had serious oil leaks, and guess what? The one Miriam ran, that is very green and healthy and I promise, not based on oil products...oil...and the engine at the bottom of each uses magic powder, not oil.
Like you, until I started looking deeply into this, I thought they were green and with no issues.
And I have not even gone into displacement of a sheep species that is in dager of going extinct and in the endangered species list, or raptor deaths.
ladjf
(17,320 posts)nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)I take it, like me you live in a city right? Who cares about those people right?
ladjf
(17,320 posts)at the current location?
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)ladjf
(17,320 posts)I did a quick search in the INTERNET for wind turbine related human fatalities and could only find
one case, a sky diver, of course, flew into a turbine and was killed.
http://www.digtheheat.com/Wind/wind_prosandcons.html
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Marginal wind generation
Bottom of a valley with three mountain ranges around
All 112 turbines sit iddly for a good number of days.
Like the other facilities in the county it was failed to produce the energy promised by the utility...as in well under promises made.
As in they will not release all their wind data...since they know they only presented the windiest days in the year to get approval.
Let's not even go into habitat destruction and species in the protected lists are impacted..
MNBrewer
(8,462 posts)Unlike the woo.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Oh yes
http://climatide.wgbh.org/2011/03/why-not-to-dismiss-health-impacts-of-wind-turbines/
Go argue with PBS on the woo
Health effects are starting to show up, whether you like it or not.
MNBrewer
(8,462 posts)It's an article, by a science editor on a Public TV station web site.
Don't act like this is some kind of vetted, peer reviewed, results laden scientific study.
The author even said this in the comments below the article:
"The repercussions of fossil-fuel-based energy production for human health, the environment, and climate are enormous, and well documented. Wind energy has a lower carbon footprint and, in many cases, wind turbines seem not to be problematic for their nearest neighbors. However, in other cases, health problems are being reported. My argument is simply that, based on the lack of scientific evidence to directly confirm or disprove these claims, it's too early to dismiss them."
Lack of evidence. Get it? LACK. She thinks there is a lack of evidence. The author of the article you cite... that one.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Scientific enquiry get tiresome.
Yes, that is a PUBLIC STATION get it?
Have a good day
MNBrewer
(8,462 posts)published on a public tv station's website. Hardly PBS's scientific viewpoint.
Kali
(56,829 posts)by an amateur "journalist" on a small-circulation local "paper" - the only other links I have seen in this train wreck of a thread (or most of the other posts I have ever looked at from this OP)
trollish threads on DU probably makes the vast majority of circulation stats for the East County "Magazine"
Liberty Belle
(9,707 posts)1. California Native American Heritage Commission declared this a sacred site and ruled the BLM was wrong to approve this; they want the CA Attorney General to file suit and have them torn down. This has been called "Valley of the Dead" by the tribes here for 10,000 years and had both federal and state protections for cultural resources that the BLM ignored: http://www.eastcountymagazine.org/node/13103
2. Developer lied about proximity to a major earthquake fault (it's on top of one of most active faults in CA) and failed to provide seismic engineering reports; seismic experts say ground could liquify here and turbines could fall over: http://www.eastcountymagazine.org/node/9303
3. Many harmful impacts to Anza Borrego Desert State PArk that shares a 5-mile border with site; whistleblower and former Superintendent revealed Park employees were muzzled from speaking the truth so those impacts were never included in BLM's EIR for project: http://www.eastcountymagazine.org/node/9161
4. It's also in a federal floodplain where major floods have occurred before. Developer illegally diverted drainage and flooded entire town with flammable chemical used for dust suprression. WIthout the chemical town was turned into a dust bowl. Photos and details here: http://www.eastcountymagazine.org/node/10510
5. WAY too close to homes. Most experts now agree turbines should be at least 1 to 1.5 miles from homes. Some homes are surrounded on 3 sides here, less than a half mile away. With noise, infrasound and stray voltage issues this is a nightmare.
In nearby Campo, homes around same distance have stray voltage 1,000 times normal in people's homes and there is a cancer cluster there. I'm on late for appointment now, can post links later or check East County Magazine's many stories on the plight of Manzanita Indian tribal members there who are very, very ill and a wind developer that refuses to correct what multiple experts who measured have confirmed is a serious and imminent health threat. A half mile is dangerous even for blades thrown off and also ice hurled off blades. In Europe a man was cut in half by ice thrown off a blade.
Bonus answer: 6. Property was removed as critical bighorn sheep habitat even though it is; photos of bighorn on site taken after project approval resulted in Secretary Salazar issuing take permits allowing the developer to kill them.
NYC_SKP
(68,644 posts)nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)And as I said, they are so grand, I want a major one on La Jolla Shores.
I promise, the winds are there.
jpak
(41,780 posts)n/t
woo woo woo woo woo woo woo woo
Love it
Gonna fly a mile it was insinuated, a whole mile. woo woo. 
Liberty Belle
(9,707 posts)Hikers etc this could have been a death. In Bouelvard nearby a blade flew 3/4 of a mile; that could take out a house here.
Codeine
(25,586 posts)That seems fairly absurd from a physics standpoint.
baldguy
(36,649 posts)Scuba
(53,475 posts)... a broken blade will not fly, just fall.
I've never heard of anyone claiming the turbines made them ill except for a couple people who fought them before they were installed five years ago. Those two are now claiming all kinds of illnesses that are "turbine caused".
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)And you have never heard does not mean it has not happened.
Depending in the wind, I'll be kind it was 25, they fall, or fly upwards to a mile.
Anyway, go hug a turbine. There are solutions that involve wind that are not industrial. And roof top solar and distributive should be a much higher part of the basket. It is not because it goes against the distribution model utilities use.
MNBrewer
(8,462 posts)Got any physics to back that up? I really don't believe that for one second.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Go hug a turbine
MNBrewer
(8,462 posts)and no, i don't have the physics, but it was YOU who said the blades can be tossed a mile up, so it seems like the onus is on you to demonstrate the veracity of YOUR statement, not for me to justify my disbelief of it.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)It's a utility though, they are not that safe...this comes from the industry itself.
Have a good day
MNBrewer
(8,462 posts)nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Industry talking points.
(And given most of these are starting to get fenced off)
MNBrewer
(8,462 posts)Where do you get all this bs crapola? Whose money is paying for the sources you cite?
I only have a PhD from UC Berkeley, so what do I know, right?
Rex
(65,616 posts)And a 100 professions.
pintobean
(18,101 posts)is 40 degrees from being right. 
Junkdrawer
(27,993 posts)Kali
(56,829 posts)off to iggy with you! 
Rex
(65,616 posts)The trait of not being able to handle criticism in any way, shape or form - reminds me of some other people who share the same trait. 
Kali
(56,829 posts)a simple question asking for more info will get you on The List.
Rex
(65,616 posts)around us little people.
GoneOffShore
(18,021 posts)Self
Chan790
(20,176 posts)I can settle this by telling you the minimum initial-velocity the turbine blade would have had to be moving to travel a horizontal range of 2200m...which is one mile. (I don't have the physics either but I have an online trajectory solver and it has the physics and does the computations for me.) http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/traj.html#tra4
v0=R√g/2h
Virtually every other vector in this equation is either known or a constant. There are further factors to consider such as the weight of the blade and the blade has drag as it travels through the air (physics is so much easier in a vacuum)...but all those only act to reduce the range of the blade requiring yet-higher initial velocities...and I suspect that even in ideal circumstance in a vacuum we're nowhere near the needed v0 to propel the blade 2200m.
range (R) is 2200m.
gravitational constant (g) is 9.8m/s2
height (h) is what I just asked you for.
Solving for v0 in m/s
As an example, if the turbine were 200m tall, the blade would have needed an initial velocity along its trajectory of 344.35m/s to travel the needed distance. That's 770MPH.
Hong Kong Cavalier
(4,607 posts)*Adds a dash of Michael Bay™ to the formula*
There. Now the turbine will fly a mile...
...and destroy twelve houses, three Autobots, the Chrysler Building, and Bruce Willis along the way.
FSogol
(47,623 posts)
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)On some of that. Also I guess I have imagined those pesky fires. I just physically cover them.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wind_turbine
Plugging that in gives you 544.47m/s. Plugging that into google's converter yields 1217.94MPH. Also known as a little under Mach 2.
MattBaggins
(7,948 posts)
muriel_volestrangler
(106,212 posts)"High efficiency 3-blade-turbines have tip speed/wind speed ratios of 6 to 7"
So the centre of gravity of a blade (half way along, roughly) is travelling about 3.5 times wind speed. Call wind speed 15 m/s (34mph), that's 52.5 m/s. If it breaks when travelling upwards at 45 degrees (the angle for maximum range), then the vertical and horizontal components of velocity are 52.5 divided by the square root of 2 - 37 m/s. Every second it's in the air, its vertical velocity decreases by 9.8m/s - so it's in the air for (37/9.8)*2=7.5 seconds (times two because it goes up until its vertical velocity is 0, then comes down, in the same time). Horizontal velocity (all ignoring air resistance) in that time is 7.5*37=275m. Which is less than a fifth of a mile.
In practice, a rotating blade has air resistance, and its aerofoil shape will cause it to tumble and fall short anyway.
Rise Rebel Resist
(88 posts)Buzz Clik
(38,437 posts)... the initial velocity necessary to launch a windmill blade one mile. I'm sure it would be more than can be generated by a windmill.
Someone already did the calculations. I don't think they spin that fast, but maybe this was a special one.
Buzz Clik
(38,437 posts)
Gravitycollapse
(8,155 posts)Kali
(56,829 posts)7. You go argue with PBS who ran this
View profile
http://climatide.wgbh.org/2011/03/why-not-to-dismiss-health-impacts-of-wind-turbines/
And you have never heard does not mean it has not happened.
Depending in the wind, I'll be kind it was 25, they fall, or fly upwards to a mile.
Anyway, go hug a turbine. There are solutions that involve wind that are not industrial. And roof top solar and distributive should be a much higher part of the basket. It is not because it goes against the distribution model utilities use.
Depending in the wind, I'll be kind it was 25, they fall, or fly upwards to a mile.
maddezmom
(135,060 posts)What she is trying to say here.
Kali
(56,829 posts)
maybe in a tornado or a hurricane?
somehow I think all the other shit flying around during one of those events would negate the risk of broken wind turbine blades
Jamastiene
(38,206 posts)mph? kmh?
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)Kali
(56,829 posts)but MAYBE, POSSIBLY... it is a number of people? the post she was replying to mentioned a couple that claimed to have been made ill.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022857460#post6
Rex
(65,616 posts)is my best guess.
maddezmom
(135,060 posts)winter is coming
(11,785 posts)That wouldn't even carry off an empty trashcan.
Rex
(65,616 posts)nt.
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)I saw it on SyFy last week.
I'm sure turbine blades do come off from time to time, but unless they're ultralightweight, they won't be traveling a mile unless a tornado picks 'em up.
SidDithers
(44,333 posts)
Sid
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)Rex
(65,616 posts)Obviously wind turbines are radioactive and attract death stars from distant galaxies! How could you not know that?!! 
SidDithers
(44,333 posts)
Sid
Rex
(65,616 posts)I feel so noobish. 
greytdemocrat
(3,300 posts)They have one of those near St.Louis!!!! DOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOM!!!!
pintobean
(18,101 posts)It's pretty damn close to the interstate and there are businesses and homes very close by. Hell, it's only a few miles from Lambert International Airport. A flying blade could take down a 747 before it wipes out a bunch of homes, not to mention the damage a crashed jumbo jet would do.
whistler162
(11,155 posts)
dlwickham
(3,316 posts)ala chicken little
Whisp
(24,096 posts)airliners that fly only a mile up - unless there is an airport very close by! yeh, that's the ticket!
omg lolz.
Liberty Belle
(9,707 posts)The danger is clear and real. Look at the facts. Also it fell on a trail used by off-roaders. There are campgrounds even closer than homes. And this is public land - the public is allowed and encouraged to go walking and hiking between turbines, and often does. I personally have stood directly under one, even touched one, on this very site.
NYC_SKP
(68,644 posts)zerosumgame0005
(207 posts)is right next to the tower! It barely went 50 feet
titaniumsalute
(4,742 posts)They pose some danger to falling on houses, crowded streets, buildings, etc. They give off large amounts of RF. But I'd assume you'd agree that overall they'll probably stay and not change.
Wind turbines, like anything else, has pros and cons.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)I would have less issues with it. They are producing far less power than promised, as in half.
Winds are marginal, best case.
obliviously
(1,635 posts)Liberty Belle
(9,707 posts)Kali
(56,829 posts)and aren't you affiliated with this publication as well?
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)Seriously?
Kali
(56,829 posts)and that magazine was the source of the conversation. It was about EIS matters and big horn sheep. I seem to recall a problem documenting assertions in that thread as well. Somehow it seemed this was the publisher or editor, I can't remember which. Maybe another reporter - with a genuine press card too!
kiva
(4,373 posts)and also the author of one of the pieces. http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2869214 ...something that I thing she should make clear when she drops these bits of information into threads.
Kali
(56,829 posts)
this shit belongs in creative speculation, not gd
kiva
(4,373 posts)you're right, but I'm not sure that's it's really creative enough...I mean, you'd think she could fit zombies in there somewhere.
NYC_SKP
(68,644 posts)I have warned them that it's a crap RW misinformation site, but it seems to be a primary source to the editor.
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Industrial_Wind_Action_Group
MineralMan
(151,269 posts)Hmm...
SidDithers
(44,333 posts)Liberty Belle is the editor of East County Magazine.
Seems so obvious now.
Sid
NYC_SKP
(68,644 posts)Science disagrees with your assertion that a blade flew anything like that distance.
I would LOVE to see the source of that claim.
Got anythin?
Brother Buzz
(39,900 posts)prototype wind turbine blades were prone to fatiguing and routinely failing; literally exploding. Of course, they were smaller designs and were turning much, much faster. I could believe one of those early blades could be flung quite a distance, but implying a 50 meter blade could fly 3/4 of a mile is disingenuous; apples and oranges.
Brickbat
(19,339 posts)model pending investigation to determine that they are safe to operate."
This is what's known as "burying the lede." This is where your story should have started. I've been looking for Siemens' statement in other sources, and can't find it. Do you have a link? I'm interested in what they said.
(Pelley's assertion that the blades are 108 meters seemed high (and that would be 354 feet, not 308); other reports are saying the blade that fell was 173 feet. You might want to check that and see which is correct.)
Rex
(65,616 posts)nt.
Brickbat
(19,339 posts)That way, I'm never disappointed.
Codeine
(25,586 posts)Perhaps she was confusing the span of the entire turbine blade assembly with blade length, in which case 108m seems reasonable with an allowance made for the hub. Of course only one blade fell, so yeah -- that's just a nudge shy of 174 feet.
Brickbat
(19,339 posts)It's just the basic errors like that one that make it impossible to take anything in these articles seriously.
Vinnie From Indy
(10,820 posts)The pearl clutching, ALL CAPS headline is funny to me. Even funnier are the people desperately trying to slow down the emergence of the new era of renewable energy at the behest of the oil industry.
LOL!
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Last edited Fri May 17, 2013, 12:55 PM - Edit history (1)
The caps is the paper style sheet, I suggest you do research on who owns, ultimately, many of these projects around the world...it is not your local friendly company....but big energy...yup, Shelll, chevron, BP...
And by the way, why is it that these same companies, and in this case my local utility, are fighting rooftop solar? Those are questions those who are willing to sacrifice people in the back country, so they get their morning coffee...don't want to ask.
muriel_volestrangler
(106,212 posts)You are allowed to make things more readable here.
Floyd_Gondolli
(1,277 posts)A few weeks ago we were going to war with North Korea. It was a done deal. Now it's wind turbine blades.
Whisp
(24,096 posts)I'm sure I am missing a lot more.
snooper2
(30,151 posts)LOL
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Or could not get beyond the first three paragraphs?
snooper2
(30,151 posts) nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Sorry.
We thought starting with the kids was a good lead, because we have quoted Donna so many times, regular readers might go, here we go again
Whisp
(24,096 posts)Have you checked her out for any connections to traditional Energy people that you should be aware of? That would be the first thing an investigative should look into - who exactly are you getting this particular information from?
I'm supposing she is claiming that wind turbs are dangerous.
Brickbat
(19,339 posts)By putting the most important information at the top of the story, you'll get more people to read it. It's journalism 101. Kids generally don't make good ledes.
Never, ever lead with kids. Unless the story is about kids. Which this one is not.
piratefish08
(3,133 posts)if not, it sill seems like a safer option than the alternative when it breaks.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)We already have initial work up into a cancer cluster in Campo, locally.
MNBrewer
(8,462 posts)Bad juju?
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)For the moment they got a cluster. That is what we call science...we got the initial question, and yes, it started after that field went live.
You might want to read this from PBS though
http://climatide.wgbh.org/2011/03/why-not-to-dismiss-health-impacts-of-wind-turbines/
We are starting to see reports like that one.
And not just in the US
SidDithers
(44,333 posts)
Sid
MNBrewer
(8,462 posts)Where's the actual science? So and so believes, so and so thinks, so and so is concerned about...
Nothing but Woo.
SidDithers
(44,333 posts)Sid
MNBrewer
(8,462 posts)SidDithers
(44,333 posts)there are hundreds of us on the "iggy list". The Friday night parties are off the hook.
Sid
MNBrewer
(8,462 posts)Funny thing is, I think I used to like lots of her posts at one time. Has something happened?
Rex
(65,616 posts)She exposed herself for what she really is imo.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)
HappyMe
(20,277 posts)about being on the 'iggy' list in a Very Special Behind The Music. It was touching.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)And they imagined the cluster near Campo?
Noted. If it's something I don't want to hear about, it's woo
maddezmom
(135,060 posts)winter is coming
(11,785 posts)nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)It is like in very early stages like most reported clusters around wind mills.
Why I said ten years. It will take at least five just to get this nailed down.
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)It's entirely possible the research will eventually show there is no cluster, or that the suspected cause is attributable to something else entirely, such as water contamination.
Don't confuse "hypothesis" with "conclusion". It's bad science and bad reporting.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)For more on this issue, see our series The Falmouth Experience: The Trouble with One Town’s Turbine.
http://climatide.wgbh.org/2011/03/why-not-to-dismiss-health-impacts-of-wind-turbines/
For the record, we are just begining to see these articles.
SidDithers
(44,333 posts)which makes her an expert on cancer clusters related to wind farms.
Sid
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)affected, what their symptoms are, when they began, and at what distances and sound levels they occur."
That is science-speak for "We can't prove shit, but think there may be something here." This might be something, and or it might be that people are uncomfortable with wind turbines for other reasons and are falsely attributing their ills to the turbines. That makes it a matter for scientific study, not sensationalistic "OMG, turbines are killing us!" stories.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)I am sorry if you can't accept that.
That is also science speak we did not have a year or so ago.
That is also science speak to we are starting to admit we might have an issue, sorry f this does not conform to they are great and with zero effects corporate shill speech.
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)Sorry if you can't accept that.
"Just starting the research" is science-speak for "I'm interested in this issue and someone was willing to fund me". It doesn't mean that the funding agency has a belief about which conclusion (hypothesis proven or disproven) is more likely to result. All it means is that the funding agency thinks it's a question worth looking into. Since the answer could affect public health and how/where we place turbines, it's worth investigating, but don't read that as any evidence that there's actually a problem. Maybe there is. Maybe there isn't. We won't know for years.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)It's science, so we won't have nothing for five years at least.
Inconvenient I know. In the meantime, repeat AWEA talking points, since they have no vested interest at all.
For that matter Shell and BP have non at stake here
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)You make yourself look foolish when you offer up the fact that someone's studying the issue as evidence that there's something there. That's not the way science works.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)That is not only a personal attack, but a red herring. Attacking the person not ideas. Which is exactly what you just did.
I do get it how science works. I also get how the ignore list works. You are welcome to it.
Good bye.
pecwae
(8,021 posts)You didn't really say that "I got some understanding of science, unlike you" is a personal attack, did you?
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)And it was an observation based on your posts in this thread, not a personal attack. You seem to lack a clear understanding of the difference between hypothesis and conclusion, and attach too much importance to the fact that a possibility is being researched. Someone who understands science would know better.
I'm not sure you understand how the ignore list works, either. I think it was intended to be a condiment, not an entree.
Progressive dog
(7,603 posts)It has nothing to do with wind turbines, and any one who claims it does doesn't have a clue about how science works.
Why would a real scientist even suspect that a wind turbine would cause a cancer cluster? Would they ignore things that are known to cause cancer like radiation, pollutants etc.. and jump right to something that no one but a non-scientist would ever think of accusing?
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Research is starting.
When it starts they have to ask what are the causes. It could be a myriad of things in the environment. But you got my number, we should never, ever, in our wildest imagination do the actual research since it will take time.
and we all know we have never, ever, in the history of research found ill effects from things we thought were benign, like ever. Progressive dog
(7,603 posts)probably more like a trillion to one. Cancer involves genetic changes, exactly what mechanism for genetic change could come from wind turbines? The obvious scientific answer is none. That is why, if any so-called scientist tries to blame wind turbines for a cancer cluster, they will be laughed at, and rightly so.
Imagination is neither reality nor science.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)To come in.
Free clue it's not the wind that might be the causative element here it is related to the blades...highly unlikely in my opinion, but I will wait for them to actually like shit, look at it under the scientific microscope. Lord knows I have been wrong in the past and that one made sense.
What we know is, for the moment, is there is a cluster...as to the why? We have no conclusive evidence yet.
But hey, you too will tell me I got no clue how this shit works. So preemptively, I think the iggy last will get another member.
God bye.
Progressive dog
(7,603 posts)The research will not look at wind turbines, if in fact statistics show the probability of a cancer cluster. There is no scientific reason to associate wind turbines with cancer.
Rex
(65,616 posts)As you can see, this is only a one way conversation.
muriel_volestrangler
(106,212 posts)Please, don't link to satire sites like that. If you want to prove a point, then cite something that is from real life, with people who know what they're talking about.
MineralMan
(151,269 posts)I can see the mouse pointer hovering now. One click and you're finished. You'll just disappear: Poof! Like that.
maddezmom
(135,060 posts)Instead of links to other areas of the country.
MNBrewer
(8,462 posts)but that's as far as I could get.
maddezmom
(135,060 posts)piratefish08
(3,133 posts)nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Or blade less turbines that are more efficient, have less issues and could even work as roof top wind.
http://www.eastcountymagazine.org/node/13250
There are alternatives, not the ones large utilities want you to know off, since that fully moves us away from centralized energy generation and into distributive models. Go read what has already hapened to German utilities and why our utilities will do all to keep it centralized.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)or are you only interested in electricity during the daytime?
MineralMan
(151,269 posts)And it's not for nothing, either.
Seriously. You don't get cancer from a stiff breeze, rotating blades, or even dead bats.
Holy crap. When the bs flows ... stand on a chair.
jpak
(41,780 posts)Neither can radio frequency radiation (from power lines or smartmeters).
Ionizing radiation and short wavelength UV radiation - yes.
Acoustic energy from wind turbines - no.
maddezmom
(135,060 posts)Do you have a link?
MNBrewer
(8,462 posts)
Apophis
(1,407 posts)
Where's the science to back this claim up?
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)The mechanism is the question at the moment.
You continue to laugh chuckles.
Apophis
(1,407 posts)nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Again, the question is the actual cause. . Unlike you, they got the data and are asking the right questions, cause you know what chuckles, that's how science works.
Go read this, PBS running this counterpoint to AWEA was surprising honestly.
http://climatide.wgbh.org/2011/03/why-not-to-dismiss-health-impacts-of-wind-turbines/
Read what they gotta say on them chuckles.
MNBrewer
(8,462 posts)You'll need better data to support your assertion that there is such a thing.
maddezmom
(135,060 posts)spamming the thread with it. 
Apophis
(1,407 posts)I'm looking for peer-reviewed science articles.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)And we should not look at anything because according to you it is woo
MNBrewer
(8,462 posts)there is no cluster.
MNBrewer
(8,462 posts)there are cases of cancer that people irrationally link to wind farms. Cancer clusters are provable. No such clusters have been proven, even based on the links you've provided.
Buzz Clik
(38,437 posts)nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)The cause still needs to be determined...why we call it science
Fyi...the suggested mechanism...not wind fyi...makes litgle sense to me but i will wait for tje research
Regardless, they have issues but this is a sacred cow. Why the expected...even predictable, reaction
Buzz Clik
(38,437 posts)I've got no dog in this race, but damn. Throwing a turbine blade one mile? Cancer from windmills?
It's hard to let this stuff pass.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Last edited Fri May 17, 2013, 06:08 PM - Edit history (1)
I know people are dense. We still have a cluster
..but maybe it be best we ignored it. And blades have cut into vehicles accidents do happen
Do whstevet you want...ignore it...these systems...and it is these particular systems sre not that green
There is much newer wind tech that likely is...and it is not centralized...key point
maddezmom
(135,060 posts)Buzz Clik
(38,437 posts)nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)It is in the Manzanita tribe area in Campo, it is near a Windfarm, it is under investigation as to actual cause. If I could look into the future and read the future peer reviewed article I could tell you. Alas...I lack that ability, perhaps you do.
I also told you what activists suspect makes no sense to me. (And it is NOT WIND)
But once again....even ....more....slowly....it....will...take....five...to...ten years...for ....us...to....find...out.
One posibility that make sense, roundup, which is being used by the utility to keep sites clear...but...once....again....we....don't...know....more....than...we...got...people...sick...in...a.........cancer...cluster.
Slow....enough....I...gotta....wonder.
Buzz Clik
(38,437 posts)Seems premature to be making alarming claims.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)What we have.
It is not the only cluster or reported issue around the world. If it was...then you'd have a point.
As I said, ten years max...and the problem is poisoning the well.
These farms are not green. It has none to do with wind, but the actual underlying technology
And yes...if you want to sacrifice your back country to ultimately Shell Oil, be my guest. (Highly invested in wind, and it is just one of the big energy companies involved)
MNBrewer
(8,462 posts) winter is coming
(11,785 posts)Rex
(65,616 posts)She is a pretend reporter, so it is no wonder so many people are calling her on her lies. She could get a job at CNN.
Buzz Clik
(38,437 posts)I am on the verge of temporarily putting her on ignore to save myself the heartburn.
Rex
(65,616 posts)She doesn't have the ability to debate.
maddezmom
(135,060 posts)The link you provided up thread says something entirely different....and it was full of woo. At least this makes some sense.
Response to nadinbrzezinski (Reply #15)
CBGLuthier This message was self-deleted by its author.
Matariki
(18,775 posts)"We already have initial work up into a cancer cluster in Campo, locally."
Sorry, can't decode your sentence. Not to be snarky Nadin, but you have a tendency to write in clipped sentences which are sometimes hard to decipher. Are you saying that wind turbines are causing cancer, because that really doesn't make any sense. If you are saying that can you provide some links or something because I'm very interested.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)In this county It is not the only one
The causes are yet to be determined...not wind before another poster assumes
We are seeing other health effectd around the world
In ten years we will things due to these systems that will surprise people the bad side....better systems with no blades will not be deployed since the well will be poluted
backscatter712
(26,357 posts)
paper towel for the keyboard, please!
FSogol
(47,623 posts) backscatter712
(26,357 posts)Progressive dog
(7,603 posts)Cool, make a great horror movie. And then those damn turbines, that they put where there's no wind, could tear their blades off and throw them at the houses a mile away. Well, maybe not.
LondonReign2
(5,213 posts)Seriously? We're arguing AGAINST wind power now?
Hong Kong Cavalier
(4,607 posts)
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)I DON'T MEAN THE TURBINE BLADE I MEAN THE FUSILLADE OF CAPITAL LETTERS
backscatter712
(26,357 posts)These are the same kinds of nutters who whine and claim that wi-fi makes them sick - they're hypochondriacs. Either that or they have a hidden agenda - probably a case of NIMBY-itis.
Wind power is a huge improvement in terms of environmental and health impacts compared to fossil fuels.
As far as physical danger? As long as you don't build the turbine right over a house, there's no problem. The blade fell very close to the turbine. Granted, there should be some engineering analysis to make sure this doesn't happen again, but I'm not seeing immediate danger to life and limb.
The article looks like it was written by teabaggers.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)As long as you get electricity who the frack cares right?
Go read ths.
http://climatide.wgbh.org/2011/03/why-not-to-dismiss-health-impacts-of-wind-turbines/
I guess PBS is also silly
MNBrewer
(8,462 posts)
Canuckistanian
(42,290 posts)It's a fallacy called "Argument from Authority"
Read up on it:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)And has absolutely no issues...none...at all...and all claims of failures and fires are the figment of our collective imaginations. There is more, bird deaths are not happening, just ask CWEA, or AWEA...
They will tell you all this is a plot....by people who hate wind and want to stop them. Do me a favor, avoid looking for pictures of burning turbines, for example.
And people near these plants, they are plants, are also imagining it...all of it. Worst, somebody is paying them...
Cause we know wind is as pure as a baby's bottom.
Oh wait, bird take permits are issued...contrary to the industry's talking points... As in for real, as in required by American Federal and State law...I suspect Canadian as well.
We know there are some issues.
And some of us are not ostriches and will not hide head in sand.
Are these cleaner than oh coal? Yes... Safer than Nuclear? Sure.
But they are not pure.
Is power produced by these more expensive, so far yes...just don't ask the industry. In fact, locally, three times more expensive.
I linked to the PBS page for one simple reason you will and have missed, since wind is pure. Over the last two years we are seeing a move away from absolute denial there might be an effect to human health (birds been known for a decade or more) to maybe we are having issues and gee, we need to do this thing called public health and yes, science.
maddezmom
(135,060 posts)Canuckistanian
(42,290 posts)But I'm not seeing the supposed "major harm" wind power is causing. And your arguments of "cancer clusters" "Ear toxicity" and the dangers of "deadly breaking blades" are starting to sound like fear mongering.
Look at countries like Denmark who have had concentrated wind power for DECADES. Where are the massive deaths there? Where are the "cancer clusters"?
As far as I'm concerned, unless there's more definitive proof other than a couple of websites and blogs, I'm not convinced.
There are thousands of installed wind turbine farms around the world, most around for more than ten years. If these "harmful effects" are real, medical epidemiologists would have already recognized the danger and alerted the public by now.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)CSU San Marcos locally is imagining the cancer cluster with the Manzanita tribe (which needs repeating has none to do with wind, and if I am right will have to do with what is done at the facility, not wind at all)
Look, you think it is pure as a baby's bottom...and a couple of blogs include a medical journal. It also includes news sites.
You also think birds don't die...so we all imagined the bird take permits under CEQUA in Federal court no less?
I never thought you were that closed minded. Have a good day.
I am not worked up, I just hate pile ons, but sacred cows do make the best hamburger. This is a sacred cow, pass the relish.
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)So, you're being "piled on" by people whose posts you can't even see? Or is it just that putting someone on ignore doesn't prevent them from calling bullshit on your arguments?
JaneyVee
(19,877 posts)could be worse:
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Just a matter of time.
Turbines have started fires.
And you know what? Cedar was started by Utility lines.
MNBrewer
(8,462 posts)it's the way it has been for millennia and the plants and animals native to the region have evolved to deal with and even REQUIRE it. So if it causes a huge fire, great! It's good for the ecology of the area.
Rex
(65,616 posts)Sadly this is what I have come to expect from the OP. Sad.
MineralMan
(151,269 posts)the tower? If so, I'm not seeing who was at risk when this happened.
Rex
(65,616 posts)Ya this is the biggest pile of crap I've seen posted on woo science in a long time.
MineralMan
(151,269 posts)could cause damage. That's why they build these wind fields away from town, among other reasons. However, in the instant case, that turbine blade ended up landing right next to the tower. Since the only thing around there is scrubby brush and ocotilla, I can't see that it harmed much of anything at all. It might have crushed a lizard or something, I suppose.
Wind turbines are a viable means of generating electricity. They're less polluting than most means of doing so. I like them. They can put one in my backyard, if they'd like, as long as I get some royalties.
But this article is not really about any real risks of the things. It's a "I don't like that big twirly thing" article.
Rex
(65,616 posts)Ya the 13 year old thinks they are 'ickky' and 'gross' so who cares about the rest! Ban them!!!
MineralMan
(151,269 posts)People scare me. Capital letters I can deal with. Whirly, spinny things don't scare me. People scare me, though, sometimes.
CreekDog
(46,192 posts)the help make the title upper case.
but not much else.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)I have told you this before. NEWSPAPER STYLE SHEET.
CreekDog
(46,192 posts)doesn't the style manual tell you to employ proper usage too?
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)But hey, my ignore list can use another resident.
Have a long damn fracking life. Good bye
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)You can take 30 seconds to override your "newspaper style sheet" before posting things here.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Issues media cards through San Diego Police to discussion forums? Who knew?
And they also issue media parking placards to discussion forums? Yup, got both...and one says independent, the other East County Magazine.
I am sure this will come as a shock to the Department, as well as my editor that ECM is a discussion forum.
It is the style sheet of the paper, I copy and paste, per terms on DU, from an actual paper. In case you wonder that is also my actual NEWS STORY.
It is part of the ever diminishing independent media people here complaint does not exist, and it is nipping at the heels of the local paper of record. So keep not supporting your indie media, and then go complaint
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)you've got 30 seconds to retype the title to conform with netiquette. And if it's your NEWS STORY, you should have the source file, which means you don't even have to retype--just select the paragraph and choose/create a different style.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Per DU terms of service
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)I'm unaware of any constraint to post the titles of news stories in their original font style.
edited to add a link to the TOS: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=termsofservice
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Even if you do not like it.
It's LBN and it stands to reason that a paper is quoted exactly as it runs.
You don't like it, no need to read it.
Petty...to say the least, but it IS DU
maddezmom
(135,060 posts)
Ptah
(34,122 posts)
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Easy, don't read them. Petty
Ptah
(34,122 posts)nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)If this bothers you so much.
I suspect it's not the caps though...unless it's a sacred cow, none complaints.
Sacred cows are tasty though.
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)Go look at LBN. Dozens of titles from newspaper articles in mixed case. Not one of them has been locked for failure to use NEWSPAPER STYLE SHEET.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Don't like it, put me on ignore, that way you will not have to read it.
Petty, petty, petty.
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Sorry.
Have a good day
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)And I've seen others complain in the past about all caps.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)maddezmom
(135,060 posts)Lemon squeezy.
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=easy%20peasy
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)winter is coming
(11,785 posts)particularly bad because the title was so long it was two full lines of LOOK AND ME, MY POST IS SO IMPORTANT THAT YOU MUST READ IT NOW! NOW!! NOW, I SAY! TAKE ME SERIOUSLY, PEOPLE, I'M USING CAPS! REEEEEEAD MEEEEE!
Using all caps has been considered poor netiquette for decades, unless you're someone who's visually impaired and actually needs to use all caps to see what the heck they're posting.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)you have not complained to the OP of the thread.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022871021
Now I know I am nit picking but you did make a big thing about it here. So I have to ask you are you being fair to Nadin?
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)One line of shouting is something I try to overlook, or I'll hide the thread if it keeps popping up. I personally find two full lines to be obnoxious. YMMV.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)winter is coming
(11,785 posts)If the all caps appears to have been used as an attention-getting device, I'm more likely to complain. And if the person says, "I don't care, I want to use all caps," I'll probably write them off as a clueless noob or a crank, but I won't pursue the matter further. The reason the issue got so much airplay with Nadin is that she made a serious of specious claims as to why she couldn't change the case rather than simply admitting she didn't want to.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)to make sure she is being treated fairly. You response "I find it annoying to see OP titles in all caps because it's like shouting." seems to point that you don't like it at all. I just figured since you made a huge issue of it with Nadin you would be consistent with others.
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)If I had "made Nadin my cause", I'd be showing up in every single thread where she posts to say something critical.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)All I am saying is that you made a big deal of the caps and not in another thread. I just hope you treat Nadin fairly as you would other posters.
Occulus
(20,599 posts)The second 'i' is lower case.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)Occulus
(20,599 posts)hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)the only one.
uppityperson
(116,020 posts)maddezmom
(135,060 posts) winter is coming
(11,785 posts)maddezmom
(135,060 posts)Rex
(65,616 posts)No such thing, nice try.
MineralMan
(151,269 posts)To the "iggy" list you go...
maddezmom
(135,060 posts) CreekDog
(46,192 posts)
j/k
uppityperson
(116,020 posts)And why continue with the insults?
Whisp
(24,096 posts)
You really have some nerve calling anyone dim. Really.
greyl
(23,024 posts)Whoever posted it to the eastcounty site entered it using all caps.
It is not a style sheet issue at all.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Just been writing for a while for the paper. So I guess I am not familiar with the style sheet I use regularly when at work.
You are coreect of course and I am wrong as to the news paper style sheet.
This one actually takes the cake.
greyl
(23,024 posts)you can look at the code and see for yourself.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)We are talking two different languages.
You are talking cascading style sheet. I am talking submission sheet
You know publications have a submission style sheet. They include things like single, double space...where you put an adress or not...how many spaces between lines to go, center a headline or not.
They have little to do with CSS. That comes later. and way after submission.
For the record, when submitting fiction some magazines want you to use all caps for the tittle, a few don't. They all insist on monotype, such as courier, or courier new. Why submission guidelines matter.
No wonder we were talking across each other. I have not looked under the hood to see the CSS at the site. I leave that to the web designer. If this was mine, which is not, I would not use all caps on the H1. This is not my decision. In fact, way above my pay grade
Apophis
(1,407 posts)These people are bitching about nothing.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)I don't care about others...
Got it
Floyd_Gondolli
(1,277 posts)Is something a high school journalist would do.
Totally bush league.
Brickbat
(19,339 posts)
SidDithers
(44,333 posts)
Sid
byeya
(2,842 posts)despite the occasional collapse, brake failure, and loss of vanes are much better for you and me and the environment than coal, nuke, or hydro.
I think solar is best all around and is getting more efficient and it doesn't kill birds.
Excellent article on an overlooked subject.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Wind turbines that are smaller, more efficient, and excellent for distributive energy production. AWEA just does not care for them. They are fully invested in industrial generation...that is centralized. Many of these projects are also owned by big oil.
byeya
(2,842 posts)because they can set prices to their liking.
The power companies have always fought home generated power that can feed into the grid and give money to the home owner.
jeff47
(26,549 posts)They're more efficient at small scales.
The designs have not "scaled up" well. Which means putting one on everyone's house.
If you are concerned about spinning windmills producing projectiles, why do you want to put one on every single house?
If you are concerned about headaches and other medical complaints from windmills, why do you want to move them closer to people? Or is the cause of those medical issues so magical that it only comes from large windmills owned by large companies?
jeff47
(26,549 posts)Solar's wonderful....during the day.
Night means energy storage. And batteries are awful things that are far more dangerous than most realize. Especially when brought up to electric-grid-scale.
Orrex
(67,111 posts)hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)This was was low, that took other turbines down. It was down for months and they had to replace assemblies. As far as failures are concerned, this was on the low end.
What worries residents is the project went "live" six months ago.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)things in the mountains near LA. I remember thinking it was majestic but I was worried one was going to come off and kill us.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)At a place that makes sense, like the Tejon Pass...(wind) some, lots of federal money, but not the right location.
Some will never be placed, since people who are well connected will say NYET, la Jolla comes to mind
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)Doubt it will go anywhere.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)I actually asked at an AWEA conference, why not La Jolla Shores where there is wind all the time? Or Mission Bay Park? (That one has a good explanation actually, ocean rise). All I got was crickets.
MindPilot
(12,693 posts)Not only are both those places very densely populated and some of the most expensive real estate on the planet, they are places where people fly things like kites, hang gliders, and hot air balloons.
Sheepshank
(12,504 posts)unlikley to be developed for houseing is he best place for a turbine.
Why is the OP's insistence on making this wind energy an issue, just cracking me up?
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Will upload the photo with housing in the foreground. I took this from Imperial S-2. There were homes on both sides of me...don't you love a zoom?
And if they are so great...these industrial fields, I got an excellent place, that actually has the winds (and connections) the La Jolla hills overlooking the Pacific.
Brickbat
(19,339 posts)Shoot the photo to tell the story. If you have to explain that there are houses there, then what's the point of the photo?
Lady Freedom Returns
(14,198 posts)The others could be with the editor. She got claim to the story, but some publications have a thing about the photos.
They buy and keep the best. They in turn own it.
If that is the way her publication works, then they got the very best. It can, in many places, be a very touchy thing if she posts the photos with the story if they did buy them. But she can use the others they did not.
This is to say if this is her publishers way of doing things. But I am not sure, neither are you.
pintobean
(18,101 posts)Codeine
(25,586 posts)Got that pic?
maddezmom
(135,060 posts)Wind turbines are owned by big oil, cause cancer and can travel a mile and scare children.
SidDithers
(44,333 posts)WIND TURBINES ARE OWNED BY BIG OIL, CAUSE CANCER AND CAN TRAVEL A MILE AND SCARE CHILDREN.
Fixed.
Sid
Sheepshank
(12,504 posts)the turbines must have fanned the Santa Ana winds that annually burn down 1/2 of Ca.
Whisp
(24,096 posts)If you ain't scared, it is because you are paying attention.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)
From the same S-2, Imperial Cpunty Road 200 feet from the other photo.
Brother Buzz
(39,900 posts)To give it a bit more perspective, those wind turbines are over half again as tall as the The Queen Mary II
codemoguy
(36 posts)nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)And in this case, destruction of cultural assets for the local Kumeyaii tribe that has lived round these parts for over 10K years. Some of these sites, proposed or built, are over sacred burial grounds.
Kali
(56,829 posts)Junkdrawer
(27,993 posts)Now I'm sure
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)News stories? Is that the number you got?
nt.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)
hunter
(40,691 posts)Fossil fuel and nuclear power giants like General Electric and Siemens use wind power to blow the stink away from their dirtier business.
The natural gas industry loves wind because it's irregular and has to be backed up by expensive new natural gas fired power plants.
For a company like GE or Siemens, it's a three-for one deal. They get to sell wind turbines, gas turbines, and a whole lot of new distribution equipment to handle the fluctuating output of the wind farms.
In short, it's a scam.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)We got two peaker plants not approved in San Diego, it was a fight.
They also produce, when they do, very expensive power.
But read the thread, some folks have bought the AWEA corporate material, line, hook, sinker.
I used to think they were great and the future, they are not
Kali
(56,829 posts)they just think you are trolling DU with your hair-on-fire all-caps "nooz" "stories" and condescending attitude to anybody that asks YOU an inconvenient question or tries to explain something YOU clearly do not understand.
not even being willing to alter your subject line font pretty much captures the whole picture
SidDithers
(44,333 posts)
Sid
Rex
(65,616 posts)by any stretch of the imagination. I don't know about her other 50 professional jobs, but journalism ain't one of them. This OP would be right at home in the American Spectator or Weekly Standard.
Brother Buzz
(39,900 posts)Perhaps you haven't read her updated résume:
•••••
And you are claiming things I have not said I have done.
Fr example, I never claimed to be a trauma surgeon, you did.
I never claimed to be a ballistics expert, though extremely familiar due to shoo outs, you did.
I was an EMT-P and trained many EMT-11 to use American classifications.
You are claiming I am a nuclear physicist, I am not.
I was a first responder, trained in confined space, not in hazmat, became familiar with hazmat due to nature of the job, you are claiming more
I was an instructor, was behind the formation of a a school, you got a problem with that?
I ran my own gaming company for a while, you got trouble with that?
I am a,axed at how many things you have said I do
I am a reporter at present, with media card and everything.
My sister is a registered dietitian...amazing.
My husband is a postal worker, and I fully support the postal service
I am a published author, like it or not.
I also hold a masters in history.
Chiefly I see you are having the same issue a kid had in college...mostly envy. You too can learn shit. You might have heard if these things called books...read them from time to time before burning them. In the words of a famous American Historian, you must be an anti intellectual.
I won't bother with the rest of the things you chose to misrepresent or push, for your own desires. Welcome to my ignore list by the way, with the bullies and gun nuts.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=2738204
maddezmom
(135,060 posts)Just send in your $$$
http://uspressassociation.org/page.php?7
Last edited Fri May 17, 2013, 11:07 PM - Edit history (1)
Do you frequently talk about things you don't know much about? I've been a member of the US Press Association for over 5 years. I'd say that for $20 a year it's a pretty good deal. I'm not just going to say that. It sounds like you may like or need to have things explained. You don't pay anyone to be a journalist. You are or aren't. Your stuff/material is crap or not. They serve as a journalist resource tool, that's the point of the organization. For those that may be newcomers or assistance they help in lot's of ways. Ever get into or try getting into the media/press area at Times Square for New Years Eve? Right, thought so. It takes a lot of paperwork and time, not to mention dealing with the NYPD. Think they just let anyone walk in and schmooze with Anderson Cooper, lol... No seriously, it really is quite a process. They help daily with such a wide range of issues. I'd say it's a great resource and it's a damn good value too. Even if you are just a groupie that wants pictures of some band. I've seen the organization turn those people into people that are passionate about concert photography and telling a great story. They've been around now over a decade. Look at some of their members now, people from Discovery Channel, Huffington Post, NBC the list goes on. It's also a good way to meet and chat with those guys too. Anyway, enough preaching. You should take another look before mocking. I'll take the opportunity to support them when I can.
maddezmom
(135,060 posts)But really just makes my point...anyone can be a journalist and get a press badge. BTW, welcome to DU!
Thanks for the welcome. My initial member application was rejected. At the time my body of work and portfolio wasn't substantial enough. There are exceptions I guess, but they want to see something established a blog, a decent photo portfolio, good demo reel or things you published.
Rex
(65,616 posts)so I guess I stand corrected.
sabrina 1
(62,325 posts)Wind Turbines and the Oil Industry. You said it very well. A whole lot of people in this thread appear to be way behind on what has been going on with Wind Turbines.
Here where we are eg, I was surprised and happy at first when I saw the Wind Farms, surprised because this is a pretty Conservative area. But it wasn't long before I learned that the Oil Corps are controlling these farms and making it very expensive while getting laws passed to restrict ordinary people from building their own windmills, regulating height etc.
Re any threat from them other than that, if as the OP said upthread, Monsanto's Roundup is being used around them, that would be a huge threat but no surprise to see giant Corps joining forces to profit from the inevitable development of alternative energy.
Too bad the usual suspects jumped into the thread and derailed it before any serious discussion could take place. But they reveal that there is huge ignorance surrounding this issue, at least now we know.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)People are repeating very effective talking points from the AWEA, a very powerful trade group.
Throd
(7,208 posts)Evacuate the Midwest immediately.
I've been to Ocatillo. Worst case is that a lizard got squished.
Buzz Clik
(38,437 posts)winter is coming
(11,785 posts)I didn't ask her if she handed out hankies to the lizards and collected them afterwards. Some things are best not known.
Occulus
(20,599 posts)No, I'm serious.
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)ZRT2209
(1,357 posts)nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)But centralized power generation run by large power companies is not either.
These are the same companies fighting distributive networks, that include rooftop solar and blade less wind. Care to try to connect some dots?
These industrial sites also produce more expensive energy and depend on peaker plants (fossil fuel) to maintain grid stability and motors at their bases to get them going that require fuel. Trust me, it's not pixie dust that runs them.
Go read what is happening to the German utilities now that their energy basket is tilting towards distributive energy models, using quite a bit of solar. That will connect a few important dots here.
Junkdrawer
(27,993 posts)The reason we're not seeing an even bigger explosion of wind is:
1.) that EROI is over the life of the plant (it's CAPITAL intensive - it's a long term investment)
2.) Pushback from the fossil fuel and nuclear industries
3.) Social acceptance
But Wind is a player. A BIG player.
So how do you think the fossil fuel and nuclear industry will push back?
Of course, 3.)
They will spread lies and exaggerations everywhere they can.
Cleita
(75,480 posts)the Nuke plant I do have built over two earthquake faults. I think the wind farm is far more benign. Also, in So CA and the Southwest at large, we have so much sun and so many sunny days, it seems going solar would be the best solution.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Is fighting because distributive networks will destroy the business model.
Nobody is saying they are the worst thing ever, but these industrial plants are run by the who's who of the big energy industry, not mom and pop corporations. They have real issues to them.
But apparently reporting in those means we're in the pocket of big oil, given shell is in wind and oil, it's kind of funny.
As to being close to either...I am not sure what is worst from a quality of life standard. The people who live near them have been robbed of that peace and quiet.
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)Sure, you could walk around underneath one and try to get your jollies by imagining you'll be decapitated at any moment, but as long as you're not wearing a cape, your chances of doom are too small to get excited about.
Junkdrawer
(27,993 posts)for all the "externalities" as the economists say.
Externalities: A nice way of saying "Destroying the future for our children"
badtoworse
(5,957 posts)Last edited Fri May 17, 2013, 04:02 PM - Edit history (1)
If it's not properly sited, flicker and noise will drive your neighbors crazy and many areas have passed zoning ordinances requiring a substantial setback from the nearest house (I've heard of requirements as much as 1000 meters). Impacts to bats and birds are a dirty little secret - wind turbines kill hundreds of thousands of birds every year, but this fact is rarely discussed. There is also the danger of a fire in the nacelle.
As far as a blade being thrown a mile, I doubt that could happen if the blade stayed in one piece, but if the blade broke up, I believe it could happen in a "runaway" situation. If the coupling broke, there would be no load on the rotor, i.e. nothing to keep the rotor from spinning faster than its design rating. Eventually, it would reach a speed where the centrifugal force on the rotor would cause it to break up. I would not be surprised if pieces of the blade could travel a mile in that scenario - the physics would be similar to what drove a medieval trebouchet. (A trebouchet could hurl 200 lb stones 300 meters). Such an occurence would be rare, but I beieve it's possible.
BTW, the turbine in the picture is a small one (Siemens 1.3 MW). The blades are only 31 meters long and the tower is 68 meters high. There are turbines being produced today that are mounted on 126 meter towers and these turbines have blades that are more than 100 meters long.
Whisp
(24,096 posts)It would be great if you could start a thread on this as this one is generally useless for information on a very important topic.
HiPointDem
(20,729 posts)The vast majority of research shows that wind turbines kill relatively few birds, at least compared with other man-made structures:
Associated bird deaths per year (U.S.)
Feral and domestic cats: Hundreds of millions [source: AWEA]
Power lines: 130 million -- 174 million [source: AWEA]
Windows (residential and commercial): 100 million -- 1 billion [source: TreeHugger]
Pesticides: 70 million [source: AWEA]
Automobiles: 60 million -- 80 million [source: AWEA]
Lighted communication towers: 40 million -- 50 million [source: AWEA]
Wind turbines: 10,000 -- 40,000 [source: ABC]
http://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/green-science/wind-turbine-kill-birds.htm
badtoworse
(5,957 posts)"The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS) estimates that almost a half million birds are killed each year in the U.S. by wind turbines. "
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=wind-turbines-and-bird-conflicts
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)Which makes sense of a sort, considering how much more common they are. It would be interesting to see a per-tower and per-turbine estimate, to get a better feel for what the mortality numbers would be if wind turbines were more widespread. It would also be useful to know whether adding turbines causes an arithmetic or geometric increase in mortality, and how dependent the increase is upon the placement and configuration of clusters of turbines.
badtoworse
(5,957 posts)During the planning state, you would do a bat and avaian study that gets submitted to the US Fish & Wildlife Service for their comment and approval. Some locations are bad because birds use specific flyways when they migrate, so locating a turbine there would be bad.
You don't actually need USF&W approval as a matter of law, but having it is very helpful in the event that an environmental group takes you to court over bat or bird mortality. Courts have ordered plants to shut down during certain times of the years to reduce mortality during the migratory seasons. This can have severe economic impact on a project and should be avoided at all costs.
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)backscatter712
(26,357 posts)What's green, used as a substitute for grass on athletic fields, and was created by Monsanto?
Liberty Belle
(9,707 posts)In some areas they pose severe fire hazards, such as San Diego's East County. Expect lots of Roundup there. Ocotillo residents were never even told they would be sprayed with toxic weedkiller, a neurotoxin that can cause birth defects, sterility, cancer and Parkinson's disease. Monsanto must love wind farms.
freshwest
(53,661 posts)Buzz Clik
(38,437 posts)... that no DUers oppose wind energy.
Jesus Christ.
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)
Ms. Toad
(38,641 posts)Not only was the caption to that thread all caps, so was one of the six responses to it.
And not a complaint in sight. Maybe I should alert on that thread and see if it is outrageous enough to be hidden...Nah. Even though I almost never use my alert button I'm not interested in having it turned off for 24 hours. (Served on the 0-6 jury letting this OP stand even though ***horror of horrors*** the caption was in all caps. Seriously. Someone alerted on it for that reason.)
Junkdrawer
(27,993 posts)"Should I try to debate or expose this fool?"
** refers to thread **
"Expose it is"
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Big oil...such as BP and Shell, are telling you all you need to know about the good things with the current energy system
I think we all know who the fool is...look in the mirror.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)But prefer it not be in the hands of big oil for starters that it uses blade less systems...they exist, more efficient even. And are not blind tote problems of centralized wind and energy production
badtoworse
(5,957 posts)...go with rooftop solar. It's well suited to distributed generation. I've seen wind designs that look like big egg beaters and other designs with shrouded blades, but they tend to be small. I doubt they would be economical, especially since production tax credits are unlikely to be renewed again (I think they expire the end of this year). IMO, wind generation needs economies of scale (at least 100 MW plant size) to be economic. A 100 MW plant would have about a $200 million price tag - not something a mom and pop operation could finance. As a practical matter, wind generation is for big companies.
What difference does it make if an oil company also owns renewable generation? They are in the energy business.
Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)but what do we do when the fan hits the shit?
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)Buzz Clik
(38,437 posts) Warren DeMontague
(80,708 posts)Geez, that doesn't seem very fair.
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)
Skidmore
(37,364 posts)nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)I'd love to see them on La Jolly shores...or worst...literally down the road from me in Mission Bay . That be five minutes from where I live.
We got wind on both sites, we also got a lot of people, some of them very well connected
I even wrote an editorial to that effect. Ocotillo is a good two hours from where i sit right now, this hardly nimby
I prefer they use more efficient and newer tech. But that is another kettle of fish
But as a reporter this is a story
Skidmore
(37,364 posts)And we get plenty of wind. It is welcomed here but many farmers and rural communities have histories of using windmills on a smaller scale.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Little understood issues with infrasound
Thus there are new blade less technoligies emerging for the record...ocotillo quite possibly would do better with those.
Winds are marginal there
I think the comming years will reveal some surprising issues We are just at the begining. And that will curtail future newer tech
Yes...size matters
MindPilot
(12,693 posts)La Jolla.
Matariki
(18,775 posts)And coal. And nuclear energy.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)There are problems with industrial wind generation, even health problems. We should not close our eyes to them just because it is a current sacred cow.
Wind can be green, as in very green...proof in pudding how wind is used, has been used in farms, for centuries...it is these systems that are not.
Big difference.
There are advanced technologies that avoid many of the issues with these farms...you know why the industry does not like them? And we are talking Shell and BP here... They rely on the distributive model of energy production...for some odd reason Shell and BP and Siemens don't like that model, one iota...I wonder why.
But if that is all you got from the article, let me know, so I put you in the ignore list...in this case the la, la I can't hear ya list.
Matariki
(18,775 posts)I was being sarcastic all on my own. Had nothing to do with you. And wow, I'm generally supportive of you and usually agree with most of what you post. If all it takes is a minor disagreement with you to get on your ignore list you must have more than half of DU there (and I'm not even disagreeing with you btw - though I'd like to see some links/facts about wind that you are alluding to as I've not seen those criticisms of wind energy before).
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Jacoby365
(516 posts)to learn about the downside of wind turbines. The documentary can be seen on Netflix. It is quite interesting.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)When I started covering this I went...somebody is making shit up. Not anymore.
pintobean
(18,101 posts)The DUzies should just link to it.
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)Better get there early, before all the good seats are taken.
Junkdrawer
(27,993 posts)Jamastiene
(38,206 posts)Canuckistanian
(42,290 posts)Really, is an all-caps title necessary?
It's not exactly breaking news that SOME people are against wind turbines and will seize on ANY excuse to have them banished from the earth. And pro fossil fuel or nuclear power corporations are more than willing to "help publicize" failures like these to "help" the poor "residents" scared out of their wits by stories like this.
So, keep doing the bidding of the non-renewable energy conglomerates by posting three-alarm posts like this.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)See, paper style sheet. Copy, paste and all that, but the pile on is just damn peachy.
That is number one
Number two...there are issues with the current technology. Issues that are just emerging. These issues will poison the well for wind technology that lacks those issues.
Number three there is alternative wind technology that actually does not have the issues these turbines have.
Number four, I did not say ban all turbines...for that matter neither the impacted residents say that. On the other hand, you implied what was not said.
Number five, for some background you will probably ignore, this is the wrong site for that project and it's not, will not...produce the amount of power promised to regulators.
Hugabear
(10,340 posts)WINDMILLS ARE GOING CRAZY AND ATTACKING
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)
madrchsod
(58,162 posts)this is my county. northern illinois has a whole lot of turbines and so far no one has gotten cancer,no one has had a blade fall on their land,and no one is actually been harmed in anyway by a turbine. the biggest complaint is the fees paid to the land owners and who is going to pay to take them done.the biggest problem around here is that most of the turbines are owned by the european companies because of the breaks that got from the usa tax incentives and other niceties.
around this part of the country it`s all about the rivers of air it boils down to how much they are worth and whole will own them.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Also...we have noticed that for the most part failure stories are not in a central repository. This place I found tonight is the closest to a central repository I have seen.
For the record, the cancer cluster locally was identified last year. It is not due to wind. I have heard two working theories, one makes perfect sense to me, not wind, the other makes zero sense to me. Again, it's not wind.
They need to test both, and let me repeat this, neither is wind.
Given the nature of this kind of research it will take at least five years to confirm or discard either of the two theories. In that sense public health is slow.
There are a few other clusters world wide, again way early in the research, and again, none of the working theories says wind.
It s sad this has to be clarified, but hey, such is life.
NYC_SKP
(68,644 posts)Ahem:
Searched for Sourcewatch and windaction.org and got this:
While the homepage of its website implies it is neutral on whether wind power is a good idea or not, elsewhere on its website it is more explicit that it opposes windpower. The group was formed, it states, "to counteract the misleading information promulgated by the wind energy industry and various environmental groups. Support for this effort comes from a large and diversified group of environmentalists, energy experts, and ordinary citizens." [1] However, no specific individuals or organizations are listed anywhere on the website.
Parkerhill Technology Group was founded by Jonathan S. Linowes, a self-proclaimed Tea Party activist and climate change denier.[5]
According to the Wisconsin Gazette, the group "routinely quotes as 'experts' affiliates of various front groups supported by Koch Industries, Charles Koch and the Koch family."
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Industrial_Wind_Action_Group
I'm telling you, if you want some good sources send a PM or at least vet what you post.
For mainstream gov data, use the EIA for federal info and the Ca Energy Commission for state.
Thanks!
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)And you do know the Koch brothers are also involved in wind right?
They are everywhere.
I will try to make this crystal, until we started covering this and listening to people who have actually, honest to god gotten sick, not in their heads, sick, as in diagnosis and everything...I thought Industrial wind was the solution. I no longer do...nor was it ever the solution.
Is wind part of the energy basket? Yes, but not this way. And if we do, away from homes, period, as in miles away, not one mile, not half a mile...miles, multiple miles.
You probably should come and talk to these folks. And anyway, 100 mile transmission lines to point of use...is stupid. 30-40% power loss in the lines. Why it is more expensive than other power sources.
Yup, that's effective.
I will kindly wait for the results of the public health study by the way.
I guess you and I will not agree...on this ever, and that's ok. I will reexamine my views when this stops happening.
NYC_SKP
(68,644 posts)The 30%-40% line loss, however, is an error. Combined transmission and distribution losses in the US are around 7%.
According to EIA data, national, annual electricity transmission and distribution losses average about 7% of the electricity that is transmitted in the United States.
EIA has estimates for total annual losses related to electricity transmission and distribution (T&D) and other losses in the State Electricity Profiles.
http://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.cfm?id=105&t=3
And, even if true, the loss would apply to any form of transmission, not just wind.
Except for on-your-roof solar and wind and smaller natural gas peaker plants, most of our energy has to travel some distance from generation point to end user.
We do agree on distributed energy being the better way moving forward, and I am a bigger fan of solar PV than of wind, but to make an effective argument, we have to use the very best sources or admit that the jury is still out, lest we lose our credibility.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Is how close to people it is being put.
That is the main, major, greatest beef.
Also distributive is being fought by utilities every where from here to Tuesday. They don't want it.
If industrial wind is so great...I want it in La Jolla Shores, top of users, great winds.
I want it two miles down the road, great winds.
No, that won't happen, because we are sacrificing back country communities that are not well connected politically. Or have the money for that matter.
That is my other major beef with it.
Mind you for daring to say that, I am called names and told I am not in favor of green energy, which is a crock of bullshit. I want those people to tell these back country communities that they are disposable.
So no, I am no longer a fan of industrial wind, one bit. Does it have a place in the basket? Assuming of course the dark side is there, yes, and in spite of line loss...very much away from human populations, even back country hamlets. In places like the Tejon pass, that are both windy and away from people.
Also many of the sites being fast tracked, don't meet requirements for wind production, so mark this space...lawsuits will happen since these companies lied to the Feds. This will only pollute that well and will make people less likely to want it, even at the right place.
And for that we will all pay.
By the way...did you know these things use water? And in Ocotillo they need to truck it in since they don't have enough in the underlying aquifer? Did you know the company did not produce the 7.5 topo map, and relied on GPS to grade roads, changing the hydrology of the area?
Not best practices, and if (when) the Elsinore fault goes, they might topple since they are on top of the fault, and not designed to earthquake standards. I will drive to photograph that...I swear.
These are the things that make you go...hmmm....
randome
(34,845 posts)
[hr]
[font color="blue"][center]Stop looking for heroes. BE one.[/center][/font]
[hr]
MNBrewer
(8,462 posts)GoneOffShore
(18,021 posts)
Lady Freedom Returns
(14,198 posts)If it came off in a storm, it could have caused major damage.
The people in charge of upkeep needs to deal with this before something happens.
Your post about the bladeless turbines could be a help too!
http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2013-04/3/bladeless-wind-turbine-ewicon
If no one says it, I will.
Good Job! Good story!
Codeine
(25,586 posts) Honest question.Lady Freedom Returns
(14,198 posts)Or landing on the road with traffic.
Codeine
(25,586 posts)The physics just don't back that up.
Lady Freedom Returns
(14,198 posts)freshwest
(53,661 posts)
Democracyinkind
(4,015 posts)The average distance for thrown off blades is a couple of hundred yards.
Some extreme cases of 300-500 meters.
One unverified claim of 1.5km (about a mile, pretty much) - reported by residents for what its worth.
If we accept the anomaly of 1.5km as real, we can still say that the chances of this happening over such a distance is ridiculously low and can be disregarded. If we exclude the anomaly of 1.5km, we can assume that the op and his clone simply made that part of the story up.
Either way, blade parts that are ejected over a distance of miles are negligible.
Codeine
(25,586 posts)Not really. A 747, for example, is 70m long. These blades are 53m long. That's a difference of 17m, or 55 feet.
OhioChick
(23,218 posts)Codeine
(25,586 posts)Rex
(65,616 posts)From the OP? Just a few weeks ago we were given the Nancy Grace guarantee that North Korea would attack any day by the OP. She shames real reporters imo.
byeya
(2,842 posts)in the UK alone are part of the reason nations more advanced in this form of power generation than we are, are debating things such as placement; size of the wind farm; materials; etc.
When one of the blades failed in a windstorm a part of the blade traveled over a mile.
Many countries and localities are enforcing a 2 kilometer distance from a turbine and housing.
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)When and where did this happen? Surely something like that would have made the news.
byeya
(2,842 posts)"Pieces of blade are documented as travelling up to one mile. In Germany, blade pieces have gone through the roofs and walls of nearby buildings. This is why CWIF believe that there should be a minimum distance of at least 2km between turbines and occupied housing, in order to adequately address public safety and other issues including noise and shadow flicker."
Apparently these turbines don't fail often but there are so many of them in Europe and NZ that there's an ongoing analysis of both how to make them safe and how close can human activity be without danger.
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)Got a link from a local newspaper or TV station? Something like that should have made the news.
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)So far, all I'm seeing is one from Kingman County, Kansas. The report links to windaction.org, not a news outlet, and the table entry on the Caithness Windfarm site is
A lot of stuff is going to travel in a tornado. The tornado was allegedly on May 15, 2012. I'll see if I can find local coverage about it.
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)www.crh.noaa.gov/images/ddc/News/SWAW_newest.pdf
Jumping down to Kingman county, there's a picture of a damaged wind turbine. Text includes the following passage
ground.
To call an EF3 tornado a "wind storm" is lying by selective truth-telling, IMO. Yes, a tornado is a kind of wind storm, but to avoid the word "tornado" deliberately downplays the strength of the wind.
byeya
(2,842 posts)have the motivation to gather news reports and information from other sources that helps from their perspective. Want to know about whaling, I go to Greenpeace - that sort of thing.
There are apparantly enough accidents from industrial wind farms for political entities from nations down to localies to enact zoning laws and ordinances aimed at providing safety for the people without closing down these generators.
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)can lead you astray. I consider that sort of a thing a jumping-off point for searching for information from other, possibly less biased sources.
byeya
(2,842 posts)has to say in way of rebuttal. I agree with you that there probably is a slant here but I can't expect the NY Post(say) to write a story on wind farm problems. There are some media that you would expect to carry an industry press release and maybe stir up some saleable controversy, kind of like the Japanese and Norwegian governments giving their side to whaling.
So far, I don't see a rebuttal to these incidents and I don't see the % of incidents as being overboard compared to the number of generators in place.
Personally, I would like to see dispersed small wind turbines for home and community use with the ability to give back - for money - the excess power. I have no way of knowing if that's economically feasable or not.
But the matter at hand: The incidents, including the part of a blade that traveled a mile, is legit to me until I see otherwise and I can stop repeating it. The fact that countries with more experience with large scale wind power generation are adopting safety zones leads me to believe that these generators are not wholly benign.
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)Here's why: If you merely say "windstorm", people don't have a good yardstick to measure the force of the wind by. You'll likely get people thinking, "Gosh, if it could travel a mile during a windstorm, how far could it travel when there isn't a windstorm?" and "Gosh, there's a 10mph with with 25mph gusts. I could be struck by a blade at any moment!"
If you tell them it happened during the tornado, they'll likely think, "Wow, that was a dangerous storm. Maybe we should make turbines more wind-resistant," not "Wow, that was a dangerous wind turbine!"
So... is your goal to inform people that turbines may need to be redesigned to make them safer for use in tornado-prone areas, or is your goal to make people afraid of wind turbines?
sammytko
(2,480 posts)being blown about by the wind.
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)being carried on the same wind. Should we outlaw beer bottles?
byeya
(2,842 posts)redesigned and/or re-sited.
byeya
(2,842 posts)a tornado. Metal barn roofs are deadly projectiles in tordados as are things you'd never consider dangerous.
[I am having trouble with my computer loading this long thread; it doesn't want to it seems]
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)I flipped through the table and entry 1247 is the only one mentioning anything about debris being found up to a mile away. It mentions the tornado. You'll have to blow up the PDF though, to see anything, as the font is tiny.
So, if you dig down into details you can find it, but that's not mentioned in the paragraph you originally quoted at the top of this subthread. It might be a good idea to take a closer look at their other claims before repeating them.
MNBrewer
(8,462 posts)
I could barely hear it over the noise coming from interstate 694 and other busy roads nearby. I heard the "whoosh" of the blades, which reminded me of a rhythmic splashing of water, and also a low, constant electrical hum. I was standing directly underneath the blades.
Birds were abundant nearby, red-winged black birds and some kind of plover, right in the parking lot. I didn't start bleeding cancerous brain matter out of my toxified ears.
the nocebo effect is in full swing in Ocotillo.
MineralMan
(151,269 posts)North St. Paul. I've stood right under it, too, with the blades passing fairly close to the top of my head. Awesome.
Ganja Ninja
(15,953 posts)Presumably this thing would be making a hell of a noise long before it falls off. I can't see why anyone would be standing around waiting for it to hit them.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)And they are not that far fromhome.
sammytko
(2,480 posts)Its about 15 ft. by 10 ft.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)But if you want to live in fantasy land and believe the imaginary people who live there don't exist.
I got one better, next time you come to San Diego, I will drive you, and you can tell the residents to their faces they are just figments, don't exist, and they should be sacrificed. In fact. We'll stop at Boulevard on then way back, and Campo, so you can tell them that too.
MNBrewer
(8,462 posts)What's the address?
pintobean
(18,101 posts)on Facebook, and said it was taken with a zoom. How far away were you, and when and how did you determine that it was a home?
tammywammy
(26,582 posts)That's very disingenuous if so.
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)No place for a vehicle to park and no kid's toys or other stuff lying near the house. If it's a residence, they must be the tidiest people ever.
Marr
(20,317 posts)It's shot with a zoom, for one thing. Whatever it is could be two miles or more from the windmills, and the zoom would make them look like they're right next to each other.
What's more, I don't see a single turbine-- even a proposed one-- less than half a mile away from any house:
http://www.blm.gov/pgdata/etc/medialib/blm/ca/pdf/elcentro/nepa/ocotilloexpress.Par.61832.File.dat/Figure%202_Turbine_Location_Map.pdf
winter is coming
(11,785 posts)The complete lack of stuff around the building is what gives me pause.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)The picture was taken on a bad angle.
sammytko
(2,480 posts)Could it be exhaust for a generator?
I don't know, but we worked on a lot of com projects for the air force and it looks like a typical equipment building. An equipment building built to fit in with the local architecture.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)sammytko
(2,480 posts)is in the pics from the fallen blade.
This details the construction of the project to the fall of the blade. I'm just at 2012 pics. No small house yet!
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)uppityperson
(116,020 posts)
Kali
(56,829 posts)they emit dangerous flammable material and a branch might fall on somebody walking along a trail
there might be some small legitimate concerns about this issue, but you and your "editor" are either fools or are just scaremongering for some personal agenda. You sure aren't any good at discerning reality or documenting evidence of your rather insane assertions.
your version of this whole issue belongs in Creative Speculation (if on DU at all), not GD.
muriel_volestrangler
(106,212 posts)so they are 53 times as far away. Going by the bush to the left, the photographer was at least 10m away from the window. So the turbine is at least half a kilometre away.
pintobean
(18,101 posts)She also called it a structure on Facebook. Also, comparing that pic to the one in the OP, they look like they are shot from the same angle. I'm not very good at this type of thing, but I would think the pic in the OP was taken from somewhere between the turbine and the structure, yet far enough away from the turbine to get the whole thing in the picture, with plenty of room to spare.
sammytko
(2,480 posts)Marr
(20,317 posts)Accidents happen. I grew up in an area like the one pictured, with a wind farm nearby. It had off-road trails near it, too. You could walk those trails for days and never see another living soul.
I don't really see where the big risk was here. Accidents happen with any mechanical system. Wind energy accidents seem like they'd be about the most benign.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)Last edited Tue May 21, 2013, 08:28 PM - Edit history (1)
And i guess nothing involving industrial wind is a story worth covering or the fact that we actually have research into an actual cluster (sadly it needs clarifying...it has none to do with wind itself)
Look...I used to think that wind...industrial wind ...was part of the solution. But this particular project will get sued. They are not even producing half the energy promised . I can't wait for the lawsuit
I guess if I don't-shut my eyes to the dark side I am in the pocket of big oil...
And the other proposed project, or projects already deployed...will not produce it either. Don't worry...La Jolla shores will never, ever see a single turbine
Whisp
(24,096 posts)are investing in - in trying to make wind power sound dangerous.
You should be ashamed. Full out ashamed of yourself and what you are peddling here.
And to your 'supporters' - it is a disgrace that they will overlook what is the real story here and what the purpose of your posting this all-out fake crap on a stick right wing bullshit.
freshwest
(53,661 posts)Rex
(65,616 posts)Hard to overlook obvious lies. Just another Bev Harris imo.
RudynJack
(1,044 posts)nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)If you bothered going to the link...you'd know that
Marr
(20,317 posts)
I really don't understand where you're coming from on this. Your facts are just wrong and, even if you don't have a real agenda yourself, there is so much money that goes into blocking alternative energy advancements, that this sort of flimsy and yet prolonged attack seems suspect.
nadinbrzezinski
(154,021 posts)That does not want to have competition from other wind systems that are actually better.
Some of that money is coming from GE, that does not want any distributive networks relying on safer technology. Distributive would be really bad for centralized power generation...and incidentally good to reduce carbon emissions.
You keep telling yourself they are great.
Tell you what, next time you come to town, I will drive you to Ocotillo, and Boulevard and Campo. You can tell the residents to their faces...that they are disposable.
For the record, they are so great, when is the La Jolla Shores project going on line? They got the winds, but they also have the money and political connections to ensure that does not happen.