![]() ![]() That’s like saying if WUWT talks about the Las Vegas shootings that Anthony is encouraging people to buy guns and rent rooms in high rise hotels!! Since when did the simple stating of facts, or covering of events become equal to: “to further the cause of, encourage, or advocate for” something? I too am confused as to how you view such articles as “promotion”. Our host is to be highly commended for allowing this comment to be published. I admire all of you regular commenters who are still hanging in here - you have more resilience for enduring what I described above than I do you are fine, great-hearted, people.Ģ. I gotta say this, before I take a break from WUWT (I don’t know for how long):ġ. ![]() Our host’s new policy of largely ignoring his supporters after they fund trips to AGU and other places and his doing nothing to address my expressed concerns (in a comment a few weeks ago which I know he read) assures me of that. Yes, I will miss many of you people, but, your presence here doesn’t make the swampy atmosphere here any more easy to take.Īnd, yes, I realize our host could not care less about what I write here. Thus, WUWT is no longer the powerful voice for truth and data it once was.Īnd if anyone wonders in the days to come, just because I’ve been around this place for a few years, “Where is Janice?” Here’s the answer: the anti-data (about human CO2 as well as “renewables”), lukewarm, soft-sell of AGW, around here is sickening to me and I can’t stand to hang out here. Kummer to promote AGW (promoting “renewables” is to promote AGW and its $$ quite another to simply promote them. It was one thing for that wily-but-dull writer, L. Such reporting is not “fair and balanced,” it is simply inaccurate - due to omitting significant key facts about “renewables” (See, e.g., (Note: Offshore Wind has the worst ROI (and EROEI)).Īnd I do not fault Eric Worrall - it is clearly the editorial policy of WUWT which is driving this subtle (and, now, not subtle at all) promotion of renewables. Now, after promoting (ANY publicity is publicity) the enviroprofiteers with mildly critical (or essentially neutral) articles about “renewables” almost non-stop for months (the exceptions have been relatively few), WUWT has sunk to the low it was headed for: simple promotion of “renewables” (always stated on WUWT now without ” ” and with no qualifiers, as if they truly are “renewable,” when they still cannot cover their cost of production with their un-subsidized sales revenue). #Breakwaters unobtainium freeOne hundred and eleven tons of free floating wind turbine could create a terrifying navigation hazard. The benefits of a floating offshore wind farm are the lower costs of production than onshore farms, as well as floating turbines being able to reach areas in the sea with a depth of 800m, which so far has been unattainable for wind projects. ![]() The concept of a floating turbine was conceived in 2001, a single prototype being made in 2009, and funding for the project was provided in 2015. The anchors used to stabilise the turbines stand at 16m and weigh 111 tonnes. The 6MW turbines rise 175m above sea level, making them taller than London’s Big Ben and Oslo’s Plaza, and extend 78m below the surface of the water, tied to the sea bed by cables. The world’s first floating wind farm opened on 18 October by Nicola Sturgeon, off the east coast of Scotland. The Hywind project: the world’s first floating wind farm Proponents claim the floating megastructures are cheaper than traditional turbines, and will open offshore sites too deep for traditional fixed pylon designs. By Jarvin (Own work -), via Wikimedia CommonsĪ Scottish wind farm composed of novel design floating offshore wind turbines has officially started generating power. Hywind offshore wind turbine, the world’s first floating offshore wind turbine. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |