Posts Tagged ‘Vestas’

Ottawa forces a bad idea on Toronto in the name of environmental purity – Fantasy Passed off as Reality

October 28, 2008

Editor:

When are the politicians going to stop listening to the Green Freaks?

The buses have turned out to be a colossal waste of taxpayers money, just like the wind farms will prove to be.

Did the politicians ask a mechanic before they ordered the buses?



Did they let the engineers evaluate the wind energy idea before they went ahead?

collapsed  Vestas wind turbine

collapsed Vestas wind turbine


Or did they listen to the rhetoric of people like Al Gore and David Suzuki.

I’d put my money on the latter.


Billions of taxpayer dollars are being wasted chasing the C02 boogie man.

It’s time to demand that your tax dollars go where they belong. Politicians continue to chase the boogie man  while our health care,education,farm and manufacturing sectors all continue to suffer from underfunding.

This must stop now!


Ottawa forces a bad idea on Toronto in the name of environmental purity
Posted: October 28, 2008, 2:00 PM by Kelly McParland

A perfectly good diesel bus costs $500,000. Instead, the city bought hybrid electric/diesel buses at $700,000 each.

Why? Because the only way Ottawa would give it the $300 million to buy the buses was if it bought “alternative fuel” vehicles. Naturally it complied. The only problem: the buses suck. They don’t save much fuel, and the batteries keep going kaput, requiring expensive towing operations by emission-spewing conventional vehicles.

So, in the name of environmental purity the federal government induced the city of Toronto to buy lousy buses at great expense, that don’t work well and don’t really save much in the way of fuel consumption.

National Post

TC wants to reopen Daimler contract for hybrid buses

Diesel vehicles seen as more reliable

The manufacturer of Toronto’s hundreds of faulty hybrid-engine buses can expect a call this morning, the TTC’s chief general manager says, after his political overseers voted to give him the authority to play hardball in new talks.“The president will get a phone call,” Gary Webster, chief general manager of the TTC, said in an interview. “There’ll be meetings in the next few weeks to see if we can address this issue.”

Many of the Toronto Transit Commission’s nearly 500 diesel-electric hybrid buses have seen their rooftop lead-acid batteries fail after just 1½ years on the roads.

A handful of buses have even conked out mid-route, leaving passengers at the curb, TTC officials acknowledged.

Globe and Mail

Advertisements

Wind turbine marketers are full of hot air

July 11, 2008

Editor:
As happy as I am to see this article show up in a “Mainstream Canadian Newspaper”, I still have to ask-why has it taken so long to expose the scam that is the wind industry?
Hell, Enron started this scam years ago. Google- Enron, Al Gore, Maurice Strong and Bill Clinton. Like the media never noticed what was going on.

I’ve noticed the Globe and Mail reading my blog lately ‘site tracker’ and that’s good. But, why does it take so long to get a story out. People have been sending the mainstream papers this same information for years. Why have they remained silent for so long?

Billions of taxpayer dollars have been wasted, landscapes ruined and peoples lives destroyed, while the media sat on the information.
I called the head office of CanWea two years ago this coming Nov. I told them the wind scam would be shut down within two years. I still believe it is possible.
It’s time for journalists to shake the cobwebs from their brains, remember the journalistic oath and get back to doing what they are supposed to do- inform the public of the truth.

Leave the lies and bullshit to the politicians and industry.
As J. Lennon said “Just give me the truth”

Anyway, I thank Mr. Reynolds for this story. Good work-even if it’s years late.

NEIL REYNOLDS

Globe and Mail

OTTAWA — Republican presidential candidate
Senator John McCain travelled to Oregon in mid-May to deliver the
definitive climate change speech of his campaign. He spoke in Portland,
at the U.S. headquarters of Vestas Wind Systems AS, a Danish company
that markets wind turbines around the world. He started on a
self-deprecating note. “Today is a kind of test run for this company,”
he said. “They’ve got wind technicians here, wind studies and all these
wind turbines. But there’s no wind. So now I know why they asked me to
come and give a speech.”

It was perhaps his most perceptive statement of the day. Five
sentences later, Mr. McCain made perhaps his least perceptive. “Wind,”
he said, “is a predictable source of energy.”

Really? Define predictable. Wind turbines operate occasionally with
remarkable efficiency at 100 per cent capacity. More often, they
operate with 20 per cent capacity. Once in a while, they operate with
subzero capacity – taking electricity from the grid to keep themselves
running until they get hit again by a restless wind.

British energy consultant Hugh Sharman, based in Denmark, documented
wind power’s capacity for subzero performance in a report published by
Civil Engineering magazine in 2005. With more wind power per capita
than any other country, Denmark (population 5.4 million) is the world’s
showroom nation for this highly fashionable form of renewable energy.

Why, then, does Denmark export almost all of its wind power – at a
revenue loss? Why, then, does Denmark still operate all of its
conventional coal-fired power plants? In a phrase, Mr. Sharman says,
the reason is Denmark’s “wildly fluctuating wind power.”

It turns out that Denmark’s vast array of turbines often produce
minimal electricity when demand is high, maximum electricity when
demand is low. Basing his analysis on data from a single year (2002),
Mr. Sharman reported that wind power produced less than 1 per cent of
the country’s electricity supply on 54 different days. On one of these
54 days, the wind turbines took more power from the grid than they
produced. (Wind turbines consume considerable electricity whether winds
are blowing or not blowing.)

British author and energy analyst Tony Lodge makes the same point in
a report by the Centre for Policy Studies, a London think tank. “Not a
single conventional power plant has been closed in the period that
Danish wind farms have been developed,” he says. “Because of the
intermittency and variability of the wind, conventional power plants
have had to be kept running at full capacity to meet the actual demand
for electricity and to provide backup.”

Mr. Lodge says it is not practical to turn coal-fired plants off and
on as winds rise and fall – because ramping them up consumes more fuel
(and emits more carbon dioxide) than running them at a constant rate.
Thus Denmark relies almost exclusively on coal-fired plants for its own
consumption and exports its wind power at whatever off-peak price it
can get.

Only 3.3 per cent of Denmark’s wind power gets “accepted” on the
grid for domestic consumption. In 2003, Denmark exported 84 per cent of
its wind-generated electricity at money-losing rates. And CO{-2}? In
2006, Denmark produced 36 per cent more carbon emissions than the year
before.

Messrs. McCain, Dion and Pickens notwithstanding, winds do not blow
predictably. Without an energy storage battery the size of Mount
Everest, most wind-powered electricity will be wasted and will almost
certainly increase a country’s carbon emissions – albeit inadvertently.
When your power plant operates at only 20 per cent capacity (or less),
you have to build four or five times as many plants as you need. For
reliable backup, you still need either coal, gas or nuclear power – all
of which are cheaper than wind.

The conclusion seems self-evident. Apparently it isn’t. Fortunately,
you can test wind power for yourself. Go outside on a hot and humid
day. Feel the breeze. Or don’t

The Globe and Mail