Jacko's Wacko for Windmills

[dixon]

Jack Layton has a dream -- a dream of 10,000 windmills spread across Canada to save us from Global Warming (TM). Of course, the cost (by his reckoning) is a cool $10 Billion. Maybe he'll install one on top of his subsidized housing unit.

[Rocket Racoon]

10 Billion? That could make 100 more movies like The Day After Tommorow to scare people into driving electric cars!

RR

[dixon]

Regarding wind power, Dr. H.I.H. Saravanamuttoo, Carleton University (Ottawa, Canada) Professor Emeritus of mechanical engineering, shows that to provide the electrical power needs of even a small city such as Ottawa, would require hundreds of windmills, each as high as the Peace Tower, located in a windy area. The environmental cost of building these monstrosities would be enormous and they would cause significant visual and noise pollution, not to mention the death of thousands of birds that would collide with the moving blades

Dr. Hayden explains, "To produce an average of 1000 MW, the power produced by any large conventional (coal, oil, nuclear, gas) power plant, would require about 833 square kilometers of wind turbines. That's the area of a mile-wide swath of land extending from San Francisco to Los Angeles. Multiply that by about 30 and you have California's electricity."

[TranceNRG]

Originally posted by dixon
Jack Layton has a dream -- a dream of 10,000 windmills spread across Canada to save us from Global Warming (TM). Of course, the cost (by his reckoning) is a cool $10 Billion. Maybe he'll install one on top of his subsidized housing unit.

at least he has a dream that not only benefits Canadians health and environment but it benefits all the citizens of earth.

What's Harper's plan?
How is Harper planning to take care of our environment?
the air we breath and the water we drink.

[dixon]

Originally posted by TranceNRG
at least he has a dream that not only benefits Canadians health and environment but it benefits all the citizens of earth.

It dosn't benefit anyone except companies that built the windmills, if you see above post. It is a horrible waste a loss.

What's Harper's plan?
How is Harper planning to take care of our environment?
the air we breath and the water we drink.

Cleaner Environment
The Conservative Party will fight for a clean environment. We will propose workable solutions to make Canada a world leader in clean air, clean water and clean land.

Harper Promises Clean Air Act to Tackle Smog
For immediate release: June 9, 2004


Outlines key plank in Conservative environmental platform

BARRIE - Conservative Leader Stephen Harper attacked the Liberals record on the environment today as he laid out elements of the Conservative environment platform, including pledging a Clean Air Act to deal with the problem of smog.

"The Liberals have talked a good game on the environment, but delivered little. Paul Martin went from being an ultra-green opposition Environment critic to the Finance Minister who slashed environmental spending," said Harper. "We will replace environmental talk, with environmental action, and grandiose schemes with practical measures to improve our air, water and land. And we will start by dealing head on with the problem of smog."

Harper promised that a new Conservative government would take practical steps on the environment, starting with the problem of urban smog. Noting that there are already voluntary federal-provincial standards for pollutants like ozone and fine particulates, Harper said, "Now is the time for federal leadership to ensure that these targets for smog causing pollutants are reached by the 2010 deadline, through the introduction of Canada's first national Clean Air Act."

Harper also pledged to help relieve urban traffic congestion, a contributor to smog, through a transfer of gas tax revenues to provinces and municipalities to build roads and highways, and to improve Canada-U.S. relations to deal with problems like transboundary air pollution.

"The new Conservatives care deeply about this country's environment. We want to ensure that clean air, clean water, and clean land are the legacy of all Canadians. Conservative values include the ethic of conservation," said Harper.

But seriously, why do you have to go on the offensive? This thread is about Jack Layton's rediculous wind energy plans, not Stephen Harper (or was intended to be, by me). But you allowed me a good chance to showcase Harper's superior plan.

[dixon]

I think good old Pauly M. wanted to build some windmills too. Only enough to look good though, without spending alot of money. Then again, a few hundred million goes a long way if it were back in the hands of the tax payer, or could help get many people some MRI's.

[FiveOneNine]

Originally posted by dixon
Jack Layton has a dream -- a dream of 10,000 windmills spread across Canada to save us from Global Warming (TM). Of course, the cost (by his reckoning) is a cool $10 Billion. Maybe he'll install one on top of his subsidized housing unit.

Ever hear of Star Wars?

[dixon]

Originally posted by FiveOneNine
Ever hear of Star Wars?

Yah? Obviously I have since I support the Conservatives in this election.

Anyway, this is a great plan, lay out a cool ten billion on windmills that won't help.

[dixon]

A student at Eagle Rock Junior High won first prize at the Greater Idaho Falls Science Fair, April 26. He was attempting to show how conditioned we have become to alarmists practicing junk science and spreading fear of everything in our environment. In his project he urged people to sign a petition demanding strict control or total elimination of the chemical "dihydrogen monoxide."

And for plenty of good reasons, since:

1. it can cause excessive sweating and vomiting
2. it is a major component in acid rain
3. it can cause severe burns in its gaseous state
4. accidental inhalation can kill you
5. it contributes to erosion
6. it decreases effectiveness of automobile brakes
7. it has been found in tumors of terminal cancer patients

He asked 50 people if they supported a ban of the chemical.
Forty-three (43) said yes,
six (6) were undecided,
and only one (1) knew that the chemical was water.

The title of his prize winning project was, "How Gullible Are We?"

He feels the conclusion is obvious.

[FiveOneNine]

Originally posted by dixon
Yah? Obviously I have since I support the Conservatives in this election.

Anyway, this is a great plan, lay out a cool ten billion on windmills that won't help.

Star Wars is the Harper/Conservative equivalent. It's a huge money pit.

Why would both the Liberals and NDP support this idea if it was so ineffective and inefficient? Perhaps part of this funding would be appropriated to research and development? Also, wind technology has become more advanced since those articles were written.

[dixon]

Originally posted by FiveOneNine
[]Star Wars is the Harper/Conservative equivalent. It's a huge money pit.

No it's not.

1 How much money has Harper said he will contribute to it? 0
2 Will it happen if he is elected this term? No
3 Will it happen if he is elected next term? No

"Instead, Canada and the United States have decided to hold talks on current plans to create a land- and sea-based system, while agreeing that any decision on weapons in space is more than a decade away."

Why would both the Liberals and NDP support this idea if it was so ineffective and inefficient?

"Dr. Hayden concludes, "In recent years, Denmark has gained a certain amount of fame with its wind turbines. No, they don't get much electricity from them. They sell them to suckers.""

Perhaps part of this funding would be appropriated to research and development? Also, wind technology has become more advanced since those articles were written.

ALL of the funding should be given back to the person who it was stolen from, the worker who spent hours of his day sweating for his money, not to have it taken away by a useless grandiose scheme.

[ComfortEagle]

Originally posted by FiveOneNine
Star Wars is the Harper/Conservative equivalent. It's a huge money pit.

Why would both the Liberals and NDP support this idea if it was so ineffective and inefficient? Perhaps part of this funding would be appropriated to research and development? Also, wind technology has become more advanced since those articles were written.

Good lord, FiveOneNine... It's okay to admit that a liberal has a stupid idea once in a while! I'm sure they won't kick you out of the party for just one offense.

[FiveOneNine]

Originally posted by ComfortEagle
Good lord, FiveOneNine... It's okay to admit that a liberal has a stupid idea once in a while! I'm sure they won't kick you out of the party for just one offense.

Lol. Okay, I'll admit, I'm not big on the idea either. I just think that maybe some people shouldn't strike it down so readily, especially since two party leaders support the idea. Something must be catching their attention.

[dixon]

Originally posted by FiveOneNine
Lol. Okay, I'll admit, I'm not big on the idea either. I just think that maybe some people shouldn't strike it down so readily, especially since two party leaders support the idea. Something must be catching their attention.

It's funny when the polititians are more sure of the science than the scientists are.

[FiveOneNine]

Originally posted by dixon
It's funny when the polititians are more sure of the science than the scientists are.

Okay, you don't think they recognize the obvious criticism? Clearly, there's something that is grabbing their attention.

[dixon]

Originally posted by FiveOneNine
Okay, you don't think they recognize the obvious criticism? Clearly, there's something that is grabbing their attention.

I love insane liberal conspiracy theories, they appear everywhere. If something is proven wrong and Layton still wants to do it, he obviously must 'know something we don't know'.

[Debaser]

What's wrong with wind technology?

[TranceNRG]

Originally posted by Debaser
What's wrong with wind technology?

It's probably somehow connected with slavery.

[wayoutwest]

Originally posted by dixon
I love insane liberal conspiracy theories, they appear everywhere. If something is proven wrong and Layton still wants to do it, he obviously must 'know something we don't know'.

so everythin thats against conservatism is an "insane liberal conspiracy theory"?

[dixon]

Originally posted by wayoutwest
so everythin thats against conservatism is an "insane liberal conspiracy theory"?

Nope. Just the insane conspiracy theories.

[dixon]

Originally posted by Debaser
What's wrong with wind technology?

Woah. Hear of reading a thread before you post in it?

[Debaser]

Originally posted by dixon
Woah. Hear of reading a thread before you post in it?

Yes, because there's just a plethora of information on wind technology in this thread, especially on both sides of the argument.

[dixon]

Originally posted by Debaser
Yes, because there's just a plethora of information on wind technology in this thread, especially on both sides of the argument.

Oh, okay read my posts on it.

[Debaser]

Originally posted by dixon
Oh, okay read my posts on it.

You mainly talk about how it benefits the companies, etc. I don't see that much information on wind technology to convince me one way or the other. Sheesh, I am sorry for posting in your holy thread.

[dixon]

Originally posted by Debaser
You mainly talk about how it benefits the companies, etc. I don't see that much information on wind technology to convince me one way or the other. Sheesh, I am sorry for posting in your holy thread.

Are you sure you read this thread? The first few posts help build my point that it is inefficient, and the latter help prove that it is a ploy to get enviro-conscious Canadians to vote--and by conscious, I don't mean smart, thinking, or rational, I mean the typical no-mind who thinks all of these alternative energy sources are completely implementable for a significant portion of an industrialized country's power supply.

[FiveOneNine]

Originally posted by dixon
I love insane liberal conspiracy theories, they appear everywhere. If something is proven wrong and Layton still wants to do it, he obviously must 'know something we don't know'.

Okay buddy, believe whatever the hell you want to believe. These politicians aren't stupid; they recognize that they will get criticisized for it. Obviously, they are confident in this project. There is something you don't know, clearly.

Do you even have a source for this supposed 10 billion? I just went over Layton's proposed plans and it says nothing close to what you are claiming.

[dixon]

Originally posted by FiveOneNine
[]Okay buddy, believe whatever the hell you want to believe. These politicians aren't stupid; they recognize that they will get criticisized for it. Obviously, they are confident in this project. There is something you don't know, clearly.

There is something you don't know, polititians are not scientists.

Do you even have a source for this supposed 10 billion? I just went over Layton's proposed plans and it says nothing close to what you are claiming. [/B]

Boooooring: http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/Con...l=968350116467

[FiveOneNine]

Originally posted by dixon
There is something you don't know, polititians are not scientists.

As I said, if you want to believe that the Liberals and NDP both said "Hey, let's throw out the unpopular idea of ineffiecient wind power during election time to see how it flies," then you're allowed to believe that. In real life, that doesn't make sense though.

Originally posted by dixon
Boooooring: http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/Con...l=968350116467

Hey, you didn't give a site. I wanted to make sure you weren't pulling something out of your ass. However, your site doesn't say the proposed term for establishing this plan. 1 year? 10 years? You also took some strange spin off of this and made it seem as if Layton believed that they could fully replace the current power system.

You argue that it is not cost-effective, yet the Calgary train line is a perfect model of how is can actually be cost-effective. The wind turbines pay for themsleves because of the money saved on running these trains. This is what Layton is encouraging, not some whacked-out proposal to replace current power. It has nothing to do with global warming either, you just assumed alternative power ment saving us from global warming. By the way, there may be no conclusive evidence of global warming, but air pollution is an undeniable fact.

See what happens when you provide an actual source? A reasonable explanation is provided. Thanks.

[dixon]

Originally posted by FiveOneNine
[B]As I said, if you want to believe that the Liberals and NDP both said "Hey, let's throw out the unpopular idea of ineffiecient wind power during election time to see how it flies," then you're allowed to believe that. In real life, that doesn't make sense though.

They don't know its inefficient, they're suckers just like the rest of Canadians who think they're efficient.

Hey, you didn't give a site. I wanted to make sure you weren't pulling something out of your ass. However, your site doesn't say the proposed term for establishing this plan. 1 year? 10 years?

Dosnt matter how long, it's a waste of money fast or slow.

You also took some strange spin off of this and made it seem as if Layton believed that they could fully replace the current power system.

I didn't say anything about replacing the entire power system, nor did I mean to imply it.

You argue that it is not cost-effective, yet the Calgary train line is a perfect model of how is can actually be cost-effective. The wind turbines pay for themsleves because of the money saved on running these trains.

It's cheaper to have other power sources.

This is what Layton is encouraging, not some whacked-out proposal to replace current power.

Layton is proposing taking my money and spending it in the wrong place.

It has nothing to do with global warming either, you just assumed alternative power ment saving us from global warming.

You're cute, lol. I didn't say anything about global warming either.

By the way, there may be no conclusive evidence of global warming,

There IS conclusive evidence of global warming

but air pollution is an undeniable fact.

Of course it is, but Layton's plans are BS if he wants to fix air pollution. Kyoto is NOT about air pollution. Building windmills is about grandiosism, not air pollution. Action like Harper is suggesting will do more good, and won't waste billions and cause unemployment.

See what happens when you provide an actual source? A reasonable explanation is provided. Thanks.

What was reasonable about that?

[FiveOneNine]

Why did you break my post up into so many sections? I'm not going to reply to all those. I'll just stick to the main points, thanks:

"Jack Layton has a dream -- a dream of 10,000 windmills spread across Canada to save us from Global Warming (TM). Of course, the cost (by his reckoning) is a cool $10 Billion. Maybe he'll install one on top of his subsidized housing unit."

You obviously implied that his plan was about global warming.

How is it less expensive to use traditional power sources? As you can see from the Calgary model, the wind turbines pay for themself.