Across America, clean energy plants are being banned faster than they’re being built::The clock is ticking toward a deadline to meet renewable-energy standards. But USA TODAY’s analysis finds local governments banning wind turbines, solar plants.
Across America, clean energy plants are being banned faster than they’re being built::The clock is ticking toward a deadline to meet renewable-energy standards. But USA TODAY’s analysis finds local governments banning wind turbines, solar plants.
My dad was absolutely one of them… He mentioned it out of nowhere and I couldn’t refute it because I had never encountered that lunacy before then…
He already wanted to hate wind then and this is just his justification. I once encountered someone telling me that wind turbines cause global warming. I told them the only part generating heat was the copper in the motor and that’s the same in every power generation. Turn out Faux News misrepresented a study that showed the turbulence caused by wind turbines brought warm air to the ground level.
Damn that would be an issue if we built them in urban areas which we don’t.
Except physically speaking, that warmth from the motor is still just from the energy the wind has… energy that would get transformed to heat from friction eventually anyway. It’s just that this way we get useful work for our own purposes in the form of electricity.
Regardless of the source of rotation, all other aspects are the same as far as heat generation goes. That was the point I tried getting across to the people who were insisting to me that wind turbines cause climate change. Hydro, diesel engine, NG fire or nuclear driven steam turbines, wind turbine. They’re all just spinning copper coils. Any heat from those would be the same.
The copper coils also had nothing to do with the heat in question anyway. The study was just showing turbulence could bring warm air to ground level. Honestly, sounds like wind turbines should be setup above frost sensitive crops like fruit trees. One bad frost during the tree’s bloom could ruin a whole year’s harvest.
You absolutely can refute it. Just ask for proof.
They’ll point to articles on Breitbart and other sites that are even less trustworthy.
I hate that. They’ll just say something like “well how can you support solar panels when it kills the rare ballet fork bird?! Or when the solar panels kill the nearby trees!? Or when the toxic chemicals leak into the streams and the kill the river!?”
It’s just like this slew of crap and you can’t possibly know it’s totally crap when you start talking to them. Then you go back research it and it turns out it’s from some (typically CCP or Russian financially backed) fake news website “pRoMOTinG fReeDoM aNd tHe AMeRicAn wAY.”
Then they just don’t want to hear about how freedom4everything.scam is a scam and think you’re being political and close minded for insisting they check these things out and look for collaborating sources with more credibility, NYTimes, Washington Post, WSJ, etc.
Then that turns into a whole “but the NYTimes is too liberal to ever mention mutant fish caused by renewable energy” … and it just goes on and on…
I don’t know how well it works in the end, but when I see that kind of stuff from people I usually say “I’m not going to tell you who to listen to, but try not to use sources that are named anything politically charged. No “patriot.grift” site no “RealMuricanDaily.bs” no “StarSpangledReport.asshat” anyone who chooses a name like that is broadcasting a political bias.”