Oil No, Wind Yes

[Veteran]

Looks like many states are getting covered with these eye sores.
When in Wyoming I was told that all of the ones locally were sending power to California. Must not be any wind there.

California is notorious for importing a huge percent of their power. They want everyone else to build plants to send power there, but you cannot build anything in California. Too many regulations, rules, and crazies.

Thats California.

 

[L2land]

Seems like there would be some geothermal potential in western WY but maybe there aren't any good places close enough to Yellowstone to tap in. Nobody wants those developments in the prime mountain areas that surround it. Any WY geologists on here?

 

[Veteran]

What I don't get is now the green weinies are going after hydroelectric???
You can't possibly get a better, more stable and zero emissions power source so why tear them out?
Just part of the agenda, I guess.

Greens eating the Greens.

Crazies eating the Crazies.

Yes, thats where crazy ultimately leads.

 

[22250imp]

In all the projects I am familiar with, the issue of decommissioning a wind farm always gets addressed up front.

Usually, in the leases the developer has obligations to remove, salvage, and haul away the old equipment.

But, on top of that legal obligation, the county that is granting zoning permits or a special use permit will stipulate that no permits can even be issued until the developer has posted bonds, letters of credit, or other financial assurance in a 3rd party escrow account sufficient to pay for removal or decommissioning. There is usually a look back review every 5 years to top off for inflation.

This is all pretty standard industry wide. No permit to build without first posting money to take down..
..

Do you think that developer will still be around or in business when that happens? Maybe!!! But probably not!!
Anyways, I will quit whining about this. This is not what this forum is about. Sorry!!

 

[Veteran]

Seems like there would be some geothermal potential in western WY but maybe there aren't any good places close enough to Yellowstone to tap in. Nobody wants those developments in the prime mountain areas that surround it. Any WY geologists on here?

Its government national parks.
They wont let you drill, and there is already fear of a catastrophic volcano, or some earthquake there geologically due to massive magma and geologic heat......its chicken and egg.....

 

[Veteran]

Do you think that developer will still be around or in business when that happens? Maybe!!! But probably not!!

The money deposited stays there even if the developer goes BR. Thats the point.

 

[victor3ranger]

And, also how much does it really cost to construct and put these things into motion. The amount of concrete underground as well as above ground not to mention the labor that is being paid out. Pretty good deal for those involved in the construction. Does anybody really know the cost of constructing one of these eye sores?I have a hard time believing they will ever pay for themselves. Another typical government project.

I have no idea but I do know that they always promise all this work for the locals and that never happens either. Everything thing you see has a out of state tag on it.
I can tell ya something else that has me scratching my head.
I went to the scrap yard one day to look for some particular things I needed and one of the guys that works there was helping me look. We got over by the train line and I could see all these on pallets and some look familiar but the other was wrapped, all brand spanking new.
I asked what they were and he said it was the generator portion on one rail line and the nose cones on another rail line, train car after train car full of them.
I asked why are they here??
He said that this is the 5th run that they have had to scrap in two years.
I counted 30 train cars just on the one rail line alone. And it looked like the same for the other and that was all that they were carrying.
Now why would they do that??? Not one single piece of this wind farm stuff makes any sense, ZERO!!!!

My brother owns a Company that works on main grid electric for the past 20 years and brings some of those wind farms on line into the main grid.
And he has been hired to do some of the work on them.
I won't repeat what he says but I will say that these things are extremely inefficient machines that do NOT do what they say they will do. He and I both have sat down and studied several design's of wind generators and I can promise that the ones that they are putting up are the very bottom of the barrel for efficiency and power.
We run every kind of energy that is out there for use except nuclear of course.
And I like solar, gas, fuels, and wind when it is done correctly.
My grandfather designed and built his own wind generator back in the late 30's that supplied all the electric needed for his house, almost every piece was made from parts of a old Model T car.
It's now on display in one of the towns.

 

[victor3ranger]

Looks like many states are getting covered with these eye sores.
When in Wyoming I was told that all of the ones locally were sending power to California. Must not be any wind there.

I think all ours is being sent to Texas and China lol

 

[Small Lady]

In all the projects I am familiar with, the issue of decommissioning a wind farm always gets addressed up front.

Usually, in the leases the developer has obligations to remove, salvage, and haul away the old equipment.

But, on top of that legal obligation, the county that is granting zoning permits or a special use permit will stipulate that no permits can even be issued until the developer has posted bonds, letters of credit, or other financial assurance in a 3rd party escrow account sufficient to pay for removal or decommissioning. There is usually a look back review every 5 years to top off for inflation.

This is all pretty standard industry wide. No permit to build without first posting money to take down..
..

Which is good, but they still really mess up the land, which is sad. Building just one nuclear power plant would replace hundreds of wind mills, or replace burning massive amounts of coal, natural gas, or whatever.
Personally, I wish they would build more nuclear plants, and less of other ways to produce electricity.

 

[victor3ranger]

Which is good, but they still really mess up the land, which is sad. Building just one nuclear power plant would replace hundreds of wind mills, or replace burning massive amounts of coal, natural gas, or whatever.
Personally, I wish they would build more nuclear plants, and less of other ways to produce electricity.

Absolutely.
Plus they need to build at least 5 new modern refineries to get rid of the excuse of the ones we have being taken off line and so they stop shipping piles of our oil to opec nations and we don't have to buy their oil.
They built a big plant a few years ago to figure out how to take natural gas and turn it into liquid fuels, when they got it all figured out guess what, they closed the facility down and never came on line with it.
I know several who worked on it, I can tell you it would have revolutionized lots of things.

 

[Muddyboots]

I totally agree with @Veteran that we need a full portfolio of energy options. The point of the post is the desired propaganda being fostered by our government that is completely controlled by the green looney left. We have an aging grid system that is prob past its lifespan, carrier transmission lines in need of upgrade, main control centers are trying to control systems too old, power generating plants being shut down, nuclear plants old. The permitting process for a new nuclear plant is prob past my lifetime. The bureaucracy is mind numbing along with the legal barriers being imposed by our own gov't as well as highly funded "anti" groups both here and abroad to diminish our country at all costs.

Recently even hydro generation is now being targeted to eliminate during a time when power is at a premium. There are 4 hydro plants in NW targeted for removal to protect salmon. This is now an issue? Yes salmon populations falling but we also need to balance society fundamental needs. These dams have been there for decades. We need to find a way to satisfy both needs not just blow up a dam. How about trading the dams for a nuclear plant? Not gonna happen cause there is a faction to take us back to off grid life.

 

[victor3ranger]

Absolutely and very well said

 

[Veteran]

I totally agree with @Veteran that we need a full portfolio of energy options. The point of the post is the desired propaganda being fostered by our government that is completely controlled by the green looney left. We have an aging grid system that is prob past its lifespan, carrier transmission lines in need of upgrade, main control centers are trying to control systems too old, power generating plants being shut down, nuclear plants old. The permitting process for a new nuclear plant is prob past my lifetime. The bureaucracy is mind numbing along with the legal barriers being imposed by our own gov't as well as highly funded "anti" groups both here and abroad to diminish our country at all costs.

Recently even hydro generation is now being targeted to eliminate during a time when power is at a premium. There are 4 hydro plants in NW targeted for removal to protect salmon. This is now an issue? Yes salmon populations falling but we also need to balance society fundamental needs. These dams have been there for decades. We need to find a way to satisfy both needs not just blow up a dam. How about trading the dams for a nuclear plant? Not gonna happen cause there is a faction to take us back to off grid life.

Hey Muddy if you live another 70 years you can see a nuclear plant permitted. Bout the same for a new refinery.

By then, all Hammer bullets will go around corners and go in the same hole!

 

[Muddyboots]

Heck by then, we will be back to clubs, spears, atlatl and just maybe LONG RANGE bows.