The Permafrost is melting fast in the Yukon, what are we going to do?

[SamiD]

Electricity from turbines will never be used to make more turbines, that is inefficient and undependable.

Since this thread is about permafrost, does anyone have anymore thoughts on a solution to slow the melt now? If not maybe all this alternative energy talk would better be suited on another thread.

 

[JustDave]

Electricity from turbines will never be used to make more turbines, that is inefficient and undependable.

Since this thread is about permafrost, does anyone have anymore thoughts on a solution to slow the melt now? If not maybe all this alternative energy talk would better be suited on another thread.

Alternative energy seems directly related to any of the symptoms of climate change, not just permafrost.

 

[bobcat]

The writer says that wind turbines have a 99% less footprint than coal, yet he doesn't consider the emmissions the coal plant puts out in

New report hahaha! Just a writer paid to promote an agenda. The article totally lacks in facts and the writer having any knowledge about what they write. It is stupid to say a turbine has 99% less footprint than a coal generator when coal fired plants are used to make them. A portion of the coal fired plants footprint must be included in the wind turbines footprint.

It was in the report. You must have skipped over that part.
Here's the part you missed:
"Citing data from the likes of National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Vestas, Siemens Gamesa Renewable Energy, and Bernstein estimates, Venkateswaran determined that the biggest contributors to the carbon footprint of wind turbines are steel, aluminum and the epoxy resins that hold pieces together — with the steel tower making up 30% of the carbon impact, the concrete foundation 17% and the carbon fiber and fiberglass blades 12%.

Good news: amortizing the carbon cost over the decades-long lifespan of the equipment, Bernstein determined that wind power has a carbon footprint 99% less than coal-fired power plants, 98% less than natural gas, and a surprise 75% less than solar".

 

[SamiD]

It was in the report. You must have skipped over that part.
Here's the part you missed:
"Citing data from the likes of National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Vestas, Siemens Gamesa Renewable Energy, and Bernstein estimates, Venkateswaran determined that the biggest contributors to the carbon footprint of wind turbines are steel, aluminum and the epoxy resins that hold pieces together — with the steel tower making up 30% of the carbon impact, the concrete foundation 17% and the carbon fiber and fiberglass blades 12%.

Good news: amortizing the carbon cost over the decades-long lifespan of the equipment, Bernstein determin

I read the entire report. Lots of claims made in general that don't work out if broken down. No where near the total footprint studied. Not even close.

Just the shipping alone take 13 days, burns 1,092,000 gallons of fuel, and carries 4 wind turbines. That is 250,000 gals per turbine just considering shipping alone. Blades may last up to 10 years, 6 years in my area, and the blades are the largest part of the turbine. The staggering shipping fuel burn could be eliminated by making in the USA, but that isn't going to happen because of the outrageous emissions and mining it requires.

No one wants those emissions in our country or paying the cost of labor. Cheaper to make them in China and less emissions in the USA. I am concerned about GLOBAL climate change, not what is financially or politically correct for the USA or other country that uses China for the dirty work. I am not interested in links that are in general and written to support an agenda.

Wind turbines are having zero affect in slowing the permafrost melt, which is the topic of this thread, so with this I won't discuss them anymore on this thread.

 

[HermitHogan]

Not all things are the way they seem on the surface.
This article sheds a different light on it.
How Green Is Wind Power, Really? A New Report Tallies Up The Carbon Cost Of Renewables

I've often wondered why they don't just grind up the old wind turbines and other waste and use it as filler for asphalt and concrete. According to that article, that's exactly what's happening.

"Increasingly these old blades are being put to modest new use — broken down, ground up and added to cement as filler."

 

[AnnieA]

@SamiD, while it's true that China is currently the number one contributor to anthropogenic climate change, they have been investing heavily in clean energy technology.

China has the largest installed solar capacity in the world. It has invested heavily in large-scale solar farms and rooftop solar systems. They lead in wind energy production, with a substantial number of onshore and offshore wind farms. It is also home to the world’s largest hydropower plant, the Three Gorges Dam, and continues to expand its hydropower capacity.

The Chinese government provides significant subsidies and incentives for renewable energy projects, research, and development. Clean energy has been a core focus of China’s recent five-year economic plans, emphasizing renewable energy expansion and energy efficiency. China has pledged to peak its carbon emissions before 2030 and achieve carbon neutrality by 2060, driving investments in clean energy and low-carbon technologies.

China is the largest market for electric vehicles, with strong government support through subsidies and charging infrastructure. Chinese companies, such as CATL, dominate the global market for EV batteries and energy storage systems.

China has made remarkable advancements in high-speed rail (HSR) transportation, establishing the largest and most advanced HSR network in the world.

It's not slowing their coal usage. Even with a declining population their coal output reached a record high several weeks ago.

.

 

[dilettante]

Almost all of the massive waste from wind turbines ends up piled in dumps. There just isn't any economically sound use for the crap.

 

[papa tiger]

Gore was an investigative reporter for the Tennessean, Graduated from Harvard and Vanderbilt.
He isn't a dumb man, but as he has often joked, Boring. Yes, stupid no.

As a verification of the important role that teacher’s play in the lives of their students, it was a professor during Gore’s senior year at Harvard University that sparked his passion to be an environmental activist.

Most all the ice is a gonna melt, its been going on for 1000's of years. The continental shelf is probably how low the oceans got. Inland
Sea water lakes a gonna happen. Many billions of Asians, Islanders, costal lowlanders, human beings are gonna have ta move to the hills.
Gas Masks, anyone? Most likely some places are going to get nastier than California of the 60's. Wait China is like that now. Most likely our grandchildren lives will change the momentum of the Races.

I believe the creation of the Mountain ranges had a huge impact on weather of the past. Early lots of rain, later lots of snow / ice.
It has sort of been proven the high O2 in the atmosphere caused the Ice ages. It also caused incredible fires. It could have been the lowland wetlands of Africa that gave hu-mans a jump up.

Just a reckoning. Yep, lots of stuffs gonna be wrecked. Just guessing the amount now. Domed Cities, air filtration and HVAC / Heat Pump
No combustion. All Electric, very little travel allowed. Sort of like a Morman / Religious groups lifestyle. Most likely a world of Plutocracies.

 

[bobcat]

I read the entire report. Lots of claims made in general that don't work out if broken down. No where near the total footprint studied. Not even close.

Just the shipping alone take 13 days, burns 1,092,000 gallons of fuel, and carries 4 wind turbines. That is 250,000 gals per turbine just considering shipping alone. Blades may last up to 10 years, 6 years in my area, and the blades are the largest part of the turbine. The staggering shipping fuel burn could be eliminated by making in the USA, but that isn't going to happen because of the outrageous emissions and mining it requires.

No one wants those emissions in our country or paying the cost of labor. Cheaper to make them in China and less emissions in the USA. I am concerned about GLOBAL climate change, not what is financially or politically correct for the USA or other country that uses China for the dirty work. I am not interested in links that are in general and written to support an agenda.

Wind turbines are having zero affect in slowing the permafrost melt, which is the topic of this thread, so with this I won't discuss them anymore on this thread.

View attachment 392431

Well, never say never. The future is always changing. Here's a new twist:
Fast-dissolving bio resin could drive recycling of wind turbine blades

 

[papa tiger]

Being in a region where the Turbine parts pass, the LEO block off the City I states for them, they seem to be on the move much faster...
Solar has gone huge here with 1000's of flat farm acres harboring farms of them black B-terds. Most all recent build castrated
Boxes, 2 story homes have them on their roofs. No Trees too. Are destroying the forest is key to the overall plan with Solar stuff.
The Black is here to stay I'm thinking. But who skates and who cleans them messy thing off. For every step forward there are
100 steps back for planned profits. HOA's seem to hate trees as part of their spray the ground with Fertilizer and bug killer's plan.
Millions of acres polluted with bug killers every year.