If you thought that illegally dumping decommissioned windmills is bad for the environment, read up on what 'normal' use does--the contamination of everything with toxic crap
Speaking of windmills, came across this in Samnytt, a paper which is regarded as "far-right extremist" because it won't pixel or anonymise foreign criminals, and criticises the massmigration narrative:
50 out of 60 mills at standstill in a park. 85 meter long rotor blades have broken loose to be hurled who knows how far. And several cubic meters of oil and diesel have spilled out from the mills straight into the ground.
And the private capitalist company behind it is doing their level best to cover things up, it seems.
I sometimes think believers in windmills would need to have a stake with all the ills and flaws with the mills engraved on it hammered into their skulls to understand.
Especially up here. Norway, Finland, Sweden have supremely good opportunities for continued expansion of hydroelectric power. Sweden could (again) cover its power needs to more than 50% using hydroelectric dams alone. Not just big ones. There are ca 400 smaller ones that could be repaired and modernised to cover local needs, leading to lessened stress on the grid too.
And we could build several new ones on top of what we already have. I'm reasonably sure Norway and Finland can too.
But no. It just has to be wind and solar. And EVs. 10 000 000 EVs if every car is to be replaced. What's the environmental impact of that, I often ask believers in EVs. "But thuh climate! muh muh muh" is the reply. And since EVs typically doesn't last even 20 000 mil (200 000km) before battery and engine needs replacing - which costs more than a new car - and since the engine and battery cannot be re-used. . .
"But thuh climate global warming save thuh planet muh muh muh are you a science-denier?"
And their inevitable fall-back position when they realise they have zero solid arguments?
"Well you may believe what you want, but wind/solar and EVs are better"
The no. 1 prize goes to the Green Party politician I once debated on nuclear power, who said this when I asked if new unknown to her facts couldn't make her change her mind?
"No, I don't change my mind just because I get new information!"
In context, what she said meant she didn't change or make up her mind on factual issues, based on facts, but only on emotion and belief.
I fear future historians will talk about democracy and universal franchise as one of the greatest follies of all time.
Speaking of windmills, came across this in Samnytt, a paper which is regarded as "far-right extremist" because it won't pixel or anonymise foreign criminals, and criticises the massmigration narrative:
https://samnytt.nu/vindkraftshaveriet-50-av-60-snurror-star-stilla
50 out of 60 mills at standstill in a park. 85 meter long rotor blades have broken loose to be hurled who knows how far. And several cubic meters of oil and diesel have spilled out from the mills straight into the ground.
And the private capitalist company behind it is doing their level best to cover things up, it seems.
Oh, my, what an insane thing--in Germany, they proscribe PPE to clean up such things.
Damn this is depressing. I know all about these chemicals through my various trade jobs.
The only conclusion I can draw from this is 'they' want to kill us.
It does ‘look’ like that, doesn’t it?
Even if you don’t know these from your work (like me), I can tell you from looking them up that you don’t want these materials anywhere around you.
I sometimes think believers in windmills would need to have a stake with all the ills and flaws with the mills engraved on it hammered into their skulls to understand.
Especially up here. Norway, Finland, Sweden have supremely good opportunities for continued expansion of hydroelectric power. Sweden could (again) cover its power needs to more than 50% using hydroelectric dams alone. Not just big ones. There are ca 400 smaller ones that could be repaired and modernised to cover local needs, leading to lessened stress on the grid too.
And we could build several new ones on top of what we already have. I'm reasonably sure Norway and Finland can too.
But no. It just has to be wind and solar. And EVs. 10 000 000 EVs if every car is to be replaced. What's the environmental impact of that, I often ask believers in EVs. "But thuh climate! muh muh muh" is the reply. And since EVs typically doesn't last even 20 000 mil (200 000km) before battery and engine needs replacing - which costs more than a new car - and since the engine and battery cannot be re-used. . .
"But thuh climate global warming save thuh planet muh muh muh are you a science-denier?"
And their inevitable fall-back position when they realise they have zero solid arguments?
"Well you may believe what you want, but wind/solar and EVs are better"
The no. 1 prize goes to the Green Party politician I once debated on nuclear power, who said this when I asked if new unknown to her facts couldn't make her change her mind?
"No, I don't change my mind just because I get new information!"
In context, what she said meant she didn't change or make up her mind on factual issues, based on facts, but only on emotion and belief.
I fear future historians will talk about democracy and universal franchise as one of the greatest follies of all time.
Nothing that occurs in reality will shake this cult-like belief; I do see quite strong parallels to the whole Covid BS, believe it or not.
As to future historians, well, it's not as if Aristotle or Plato didn't know a thing or two about democracies and follies…
Very interesting topic. Can I translate part of this article into Spanish with links to you and a description of your newsletter?