Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2024 Poal.co

755

(post is archived)

[–] • 1 pt

The article doesn't mention the complete environmental disaster these monstrosities become when they are broken and worn out. Costly to remove and nearly impossible to dispose of.

And they're ugly.

[–] • 0 pt

Those points have been talked over quite a bit, but this article's purpose was only to show how much fossil fuel goes into making them. The fact that they need special handling when worn out is another gorilla in the room.

[–] • 1 pt

I think that instead of using absolute costs in fossil fuel per turbine, it might have been more useful to talk about what the cost is like per kw.

So if I have a turbine that'll generate 100kw over it's lifetime, and it costs ~200T of carbon emissions to construct and put in place, then we know it costs .5T of co2 for every kw.

Also, I'm not sure it makes sense to call out the fossil fuels invested in making carbon fiber blades since the carbon isn't going to be released again (unless it goes on fire, which looks hilarious (youtube.com) when it happens btw).

Not that I particularly care about the carbon emissions scam, just trying to see what might redpill normies more.