A wind turbine caught fire in Texas after being struck by lightening: https://www.fox10phoenix.com/news/wind-turbine-fire-texas "The fire chief estimated there were 800 gallons of oil in the gearbox and around 1,300 gallons of mineral oil in the ground-level transformer, which caused the smoke to appear dark black in the sky." What? Yet many environmental extremists consider wind turbines 'green' while discounting water turbines in dams as not being considered renewable. If each turbine consumes 2,100 gallons of oil we're taking about requiring millions of gallons of oil in order to provide enough electricity for consumers. How often does this oil in the wind turbines need to be changed? Where does the discarded oil go? More green extremist nonsense...
I'm not sure the left knows anything more than green good, oil bad so let's switch over to wind turbines. They never really think anything through. They just eat the food crumbs the left throw out at them without ever questioning anything.
Synthetic lubricant https://www.windpowerengineering.com/positive-outlook-for-wind-turbine-lubricants/ Don't be afraid of those sparkly things in the sky.... they aren't here to hurt you.....
OK, but the turbines listed in the story certainly didn't have synthetic lubricants. And try again: "Full synthetic, or 100 percent synthetic oils, are usually extracted from crude oil or a byproduct of the same. In the case of Pennzoil, they have figured out how extract synthetic oil from natural gas." https://knowhow.napaonline.com/how-synthetic-oil-is-made/ I'm not going to do a deep dive here, but it would be interesting to do the math to determine how much oil is used in wind turbines and the amount of hours needed in wattage to provide a full charge to an electric tractor-trailer vs the fuel required for a diesel tractor-trailer traveling the same amount of miles. So much of the extremist green agenda is based on politics instead of science, we just can't trust their propaganda any longer...
Same situation as recycling. It is pointless. Much of our recyclables have been dumped in the Pacific by China. But it makes the some people feel good about themselves so...
It's a lubricant, not a fuel. It doesn't burn down and emit exhaust, and doesn't need constant replacement, much like the oil and other fluids that your car uses. https://www.azocleantech.com/articl...ich are,synthetic lubricant for wind turbines. The possible impact issues with these lubricants are known, and they are working on it. "If there is a leak in the hydraulic system of a wind turbine, released lubricant fluid can contaminate the ground and even reach nearby water supplies. Researchers have therefore investigated the application of biodegradable hydraulic oils to address this concern. Hydraulic oils, which originate from natural mineral oils, demonstrate the potential to be a safe alternative to synthetic lubricants that could otherwise contaminate land or water sources." Fortunately, lubricant leaks are not very frequent, and compared to the disasters of massive oil leaks from wells and pipelines, they don't amount to much.
Your fake outrage is noted. Lubricants in the turbines - hardly an environmental disaster. The idea was never to completely replace the use of oil - just vastly reduce the need to burn it for energy. But you go on and pretend to rend your clothes and wail at the sky.
Well yeah there's some grease or oil inside them to lubricate. Wind turbines don't matter at all. If you amount of energy our country uses currently we would need to build 650 million of these to meet that demand currently so it's just window dressing. Anytime you see one of these windmills just think it's only there to make tree huggers happy. It doesn't serve any other purpose currently we have 78,000 of these in our country. That puts them right about 8% of the energy we need as a country. When does a joke and it's subsidized to a much greater extent than anything except for solar.
Why waste hundreds of thousands of gallons of synthetic lubricant in these jokes? The US consumes 3.9 trillion kW annually all of the wind turbines collectively make about 6 billion KW annually. And that's only after operating at peak efficiency 24 hours a day 365 days a year they don't. This is the biggest waste of money I can imagine. Wind will never be the source of power. The only hope for something that pollutes less than call or natural gas is nuclear. If you don't support nuclear energy you don't support green energy.
They don't produce much power either so it's a waste of oil to lubricate the damn thing it'd be better to tear it down melt it and make pipes to carry oil that would be more efficient.
You’re both beating your heads against a brick wall, trying to introduce facts that completely destroy the RWNJ narrative / spin. They can’t handle the truth!
agreed destroying the land around it and whatever land you had to destroy to mine up the components of it and refine them that's much more of an environmental disaster than it leaking some synthetic oil. It's because the trade-off in the devastation to the environment to build the stupid thing doesn't match the amount of energy it makes. It's an extraordinarily inefficient use of space. Second only to solar. windmills failed at that too. Collectively our country uses 3.9 trillion KW a year all of these stupid things collectively make less than 8% of that. If you took the space it would take to make five nuclear power plants and subtracted that from the space we used to make these idiotic windmills the amount of energy generated would probably be about 30 or 40 times, and the nuclear power plant police because the whole thing isn't garbage after a couple years. well it's really just calling out the fake green nonsense these aren't green they're not even close I bet a coal fired power plant would be greener than those damn things. You'd have to pull those less of the environment you'd have to refine a lot less material and in one day of a cold fired power plant running it will outperform 30 of these windmills producing power over the next 5 years. Windmills only exists to make people feel warm and fuzzy there is no other purpose.
Well it seems to be pointing out the hypocrisy of calling these things green they're completely not green and it's for completely different reason than that they use lubricant.
A windmill being hit by lightning is not a scientific breakthrough. FYI, an internal combustion engine needs oil, and electricity. Suggesting an internal combustion is more efficient than an electric is hardly scientific. BTW, an ICE can only be at a maximum, -25% efficient.
I fully support nuclear energy.... 10000%.... And wind is already a source of power.... whether it can be a better source of power is TBD, but I think it's something that should be attacked like there's no tomorrow.... hint hint... If there was more funding for climate change research, who knows what engineers and scientists could come up with??
that is the only hope for greener energy. it's not really a source of power I mean if we had a deficit in power where we needed more power generator we wouldn't build more windmills because it wouldn't make much of a difference. They make nothing they are window dressing with an extremely high cost per kilowatt. An engineer can't engineer physics away. I think we're closer to fusion generated energy then wind power wind power would rely on probably mass die off of the human race. That's the only hope it ever has of becoming a significant portion of energy. And even then why would you do that when there's much better ways to make much more energy with much less damage.
We use about a billion gallons a day of oil. So at millions of gallons, all the wind turbines combined might use a tiny fraction of what we use each day. It might account for something like a couple of minutes worth of our daily consumption. More nonsense from the right wing because you don't understand science. Did it ever occur to you to do the math? Hell no!!!!
If the arguments weren't so pathetic, shooting them down wouldn't be so annoying. Why does it never occur to righties to simply ask for an explanation rather than standing on your barrel of BS and proselytizing? Answer: You don't want to know the real explanation.
You need to check your figures. You are also mixing up total energy requirements with total electricity generation
Total energy requirements makes more sense because that's the energy we need electricity generation means nothing. My numbers are rounded off but they're accurate.
My mistake how is it going by a residential windmill we're still not talking very much at all 3.6 trillion kilowatts a year 380 billion is nothing. For the amount of destruction that these things need to have to be built it's a waste.
They don’t BURN fossil fuels - which releases CO2. They use fossil fuels (or things derived from fossil fuels) as a lubricant. I’m quite sure you are intelligent enough to see the difference, but too partisan to acknowledge it.
