Australian Politics Forum - 122% Wind Power?

Chimp_Logic Gold Member Offline πολιτικός Posts: 4826 Mawson Base Gender:	Re: 122% Wind Power? Reply #45 - Nov 23^rd, 2013 at 3:37pm lee wrote on Nov 23^rd, 2013 at 1:46pm: So it seem we should exchange one form of pollution, which may have benefits for the world, for another. That's logic for you. what exactly is the POLLUTION exchange here again?
Back to top	Mini Ice Age (2014-2029) Dr Sircus cures cancer with Baking Soda and Magnesium - Jethro the MENTAL GIANT & his flute madness IP Logged

lee Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 19295 Gender:	Re: 122% Wind Power? Reply #46 - Nov 23^rd, 2013 at 4:30pm Are they wind turbines? Don't look like it. May just be the picture.
Back to top	IP Logged

Chimp_Logic Gold Member Offline πολιτικός Posts: 4826 Mawson Base Gender:	Re: 122% Wind Power? Reply #47 - Nov 23^rd, 2013 at 4:54pm lee wrote on Nov 23^rd, 2013 at 4:30pm: Are they wind turbines? Don't look like it. May just be the picture. It really doesn't look much better lee you putrid clown maggot
Back to top	Mini Ice Age (2014-2029) Dr Sircus cures cancer with Baking Soda and Magnesium - Jethro the MENTAL GIANT & his flute madness IP Logged

lee

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 19295
Gender: male

Re: 122% Wind Power?
Reply #48 - Nov 23^rd, 2013 at 5:15pm

Ok- let's talk solar panels.

"Are solar panels the worst thing for the environment ever? Um, no"

'To be fair, pollution is bad. The AP report suggests that pollution in the solar industry may be unusually high because of the industry’s rapid growth. But what we’re talking about isn’t pollution from solar panels, it’s pollution from manufacturing. That’s been a challenge for far longer than solar panels have existed.'

extract:grist.org/news/are-solar-panels-the-worst-thing-for-the-environment-ever
-um-no/

Grist is a 'Green' mob, isn't it.

Back to top

IP Logged

Chimp_Logic

Gold Member

Offline

πολιτικός

Posts: 4826
Mawson Base
Gender: male

Re: 122% Wind Power?
Reply #49 - Nov 23^rd, 2013 at 6:20pm

lee wrote on Nov 23^rd, 2013 at 5:15pm:

Ok- let's talk solar panels.

"Are solar panels the worst thing for the environment ever? Um, no"

'To be fair, pollution is bad. The AP report suggests that pollution in the solar industry may be unusually high because of the industry’s rapid growth. But what we’re talking about isn’t pollution from solar panels, it’s pollution from manufacturing. That’s been a challenge for far longer than solar panels have existed.'

extract:grist.org/news/are-solar-panels-the-worst-thing-for-the-environment-ever
-um-no/

Grist is a 'Green' mob, isn't it.

What about pollution from making weapons or the manufacture of women's cosmetics, or the manufacture of golf balls?

Why the concern for solar panels which actually convert solar radiation into electrons?

Why aren't you concerned about the waste in materials and manufacturing pollution associated with mobile phones and computers which has essentially become 24 month disposable items?

In any case, the energy pay back period for a typical Solar PV panel is about 2 years in total.

Almost All solar PVs have 20+ year warrantees (with less than 20% efficiency loss over this period)

Can you show me how a Plasma TV or a cricket bat pays back the energy consumed to manufacturer it?

Back to top

Mini Ice Age (2014-2029)
Dr Sircus cures cancer with Baking Soda and Magnesium - Jethro the MENTAL GIANT & his flute madness

IP Logged

#

Gold Member

Offline

A fool is certain: an
ignorant fool, absolutely
so

Posts: 2603

Re: 122% Wind Power?
Reply #50 - Nov 24^th, 2013 at 10:47am

lee wrote on Nov 23^rd, 2013 at 5:15pm:

Ok- let's talk solar panels.

"Are solar panels the worst thing for the environment ever? Um, no"

'To be fair, pollution is bad. The AP report suggests that pollution in the solar industry may be unusually high because of the industry’s rapid growth. But what we’re talking about isn’t pollution from solar panels, it’s pollution from manufacturing. That’s been a challenge for far longer than solar panels have existed.'

extract:grist.org/news/are-solar-panels-the-worst-thing-for-the-environment-ever
-um-no/

Grist is a 'Green' mob, isn't it.

As the article says, solar panels aren't "the worst thing for the environment ever". Nor are they perfect.

You're fond of cherry-picking any factoid that you think might support your beliefs. Unfortunately for you, the only reason you can do that is that there are so few of them. Also unfortunately for you, you're not qualified to interpret those factoids - and it shows.

To every action, there are consequences. The questions are:

what is the significance of those consequences;
what are the consequences of alternatives and
what is the significance of the alternatives' consequences?

Back to top

IP Logged

lee Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 19295 Gender:	Re: 122% Wind Power? Reply #51 - Nov 24^th, 2013 at 12:12pm Exactly. However it is unclear from the graph whether that is merely airborne pollution as some sites attest or whether it includes chemical ground pollution as well.
Back to top	IP Logged

# Gold Member Offline A fool is certain: an ignorant fool, absolutely so Posts: 2603	Re: 122% Wind Power? Reply #52 - Nov 24^th, 2013 at 12:34pm lee wrote on Nov 24^th, 2013 at 12:12pm: Exactly. However it is unclear ... Which is why amateurs like you and I must be cautious. Science is difficult to do well. There are some out there who will do it poorly, with the intention of deceiving. On balance of probabilities, it's safest to accept the majority view.
Back to top	IP Logged

Chimp_Logic

Gold Member

Offline

πολιτικός

Posts: 4826
Mawson Base
Gender: male

Re: 122% Wind Power?
Reply #53 - Nov 24^th, 2013 at 1:28pm

# wrote on Nov 24^th, 2013 at 12:34pm:

lee wrote on Nov 24^th, 2013 at 12:12pm:

Exactly. However it is unclear ...

Which is why amateurs like you and I must be cautious. Science is difficult to do well. .

that is not generally true.

The scientific method was invented by the ancient Greeks who carried out the first known scientific experiment that resembles todays commonly practiced scientific methodology (see the experiment of Eratosthenes in about 190 BC)

the practice of Science is usually quite tedious, boring and repetitive as far as generating data and recording results is concerned.

there are however difficult aspects that emerge such as interpretation of results and keeping experimental errors to a minimum or at least to a level whereby statistical significance becomes important and known.

Look at the Large Hadron Collider experiments. A couple of decades of design and construction, etc, thousands of people involved and the level of statistical significance demanded for a positive identification of the Higgs Boson was at least 5 sigma levels. Astonishing level of accuracy needed. But with literally trillions of collisions per second, in the collider, eventually you will see a Higgs Boson (if it exists that is - and it seems that they have verified the existence of at least one type of Higgs Boson giving Peter Higgs and two others the Physics Nobel prize for 2012)

Overall though practising experimental science is no more complicated than say carpentry or motor mechanics

Scientific theory on the other hand can turn out to be very complicated and often involves abstract mathematical concepts and tools

Back to top

Mini Ice Age (2014-2029)
Dr Sircus cures cancer with Baking Soda and Magnesium - Jethro the MENTAL GIANT & his flute madness

IP Logged

#

Gold Member

Offline

A fool is certain: an
ignorant fool, absolutely
so

Posts: 2603

Re: 122% Wind Power?
Reply #54 - Nov 24^th, 2013 at 2:10pm

Chimp_Logic wrote on Nov 24^th, 2013 at 1:28pm:

# wrote on Nov 24^th, 2013 at 12:34pm:

lee wrote on Nov 24^th, 2013 at 12:12pm:

Exactly. However it is unclear ...

Which is why amateurs like you and I must be cautious. Science is difficult to do well. .

that is not generally true.
...

Perhaps I have a higher opinion of the skill set than you.

Or less hubris.

Back to top

IP Logged

Chimp_Logic

Gold Member

Offline

πολιτικός

Posts: 4826
Mawson Base
Gender: male

Re: 122% Wind Power?
Reply #55 - Nov 24^th, 2013 at 6:44pm

# wrote on Nov 24^th, 2013 at 2:10pm:

Chimp_Logic wrote on Nov 24^th, 2013 at 1:28pm:

# wrote on Nov 24^th, 2013 at 12:34pm:

lee wrote on Nov 24^th, 2013 at 12:12pm:

Exactly. However it is unclear ...

Which is why amateurs like you and I must be cautious. Science is difficult to do well. .

that is not generally true.
...

Perhaps I have a higher opinion of the skill set than you.

Or less hubris.

No, its just that Science is like any other human activity, mostly hard word and little bit of luck and inspiration thrown in

The actual output of science is not generated with any special magic - quite the opposite.

Back to top

Mini Ice Age (2014-2029)
Dr Sircus cures cancer with Baking Soda and Magnesium - Jethro the MENTAL GIANT & his flute madness

IP Logged

#

Gold Member

Offline

A fool is certain: an
ignorant fool, absolutely
so

Posts: 2603

Re: 122% Wind Power?
Reply #56 - Nov 25^th, 2013 at 12:58pm

Chimp_Logic wrote on Nov 24^th, 2013 at 6:44pm:

...
No, its just that Science is like any other human activity, mostly hard word and little bit of luck and inspiration thrown in

You don't mention skill, knowledge, training or experience. Interesting.

Chimp_Logic wrote on Nov 24^th, 2013 at 6:44pm:

The actual output of science is not generated with any special magic - quite the opposite.

No, not magic. Perhaps you just don't understand enough to appreciate the complexity of the subject and the dedication required to do it well.

Back to top

IP Logged

Chimp_Logic

Gold Member

Offline

πολιτικός

Posts: 4826
Mawson Base
Gender: male

Re: 122% Wind Power?
Reply #57 - Nov 25^th, 2013 at 6:51pm

# wrote on Nov 25^th, 2013 at 12:58pm:

Chimp_Logic wrote on Nov 24^th, 2013 at 6:44pm:

...
No, its just that Science is like any other human activity, mostly hard word and little bit of luck and inspiration thrown in

You don't mention skill, knowledge, training or experience. Interesting.

Chimp_Logic wrote on Nov 24^th, 2013 at 6:44pm:

The actual output of science is not generated with any special magic - quite the opposite.

No, not magic. Perhaps you just don't understand enough to appreciate the complexity of the subject and the dedication required to do it well.

I am not sure if you actually read my comments - your responses appear to be disconnected.

Back to top

Mini Ice Age (2014-2029)
Dr Sircus cures cancer with Baking Soda and Magnesium - Jethro the MENTAL GIANT & his flute madness

IP Logged

BatteriesNotIncluded

Gold Member

Offline

MediocrityNET: because
people died for this!

Posts: 26966

Re: 122% Wind Power?
Reply #58 - Nov 25^th, 2013 at 7:05pm

The hard bits includethe making of measurements? What, in the first, are you tring to measure and why. True the taking of measurements may not be difficult once the method has become established but establishing the method and plan could take ,well, a very long time. In thatprocess youmay decide you need other measurements first for instance.
Science feeds on itself as new types of measurement becomes possible with new techniques and materials,...but insight is needed to realise such possibility.

Back to top

*Sure....they're anti competitive as any subsidised job is. It wouldn't be there without the tax payer. Very damned difficult for a brainwashed collectivist to understand that I know.... (swaggy) *

IP Logged

BatteriesNotIncluded Gold Member Offline MediocrityNET: because people died for this! Posts: 26966	Re: 122% Wind Power? Reply #59 - Nov 25^th, 2013 at 7:07pm The devils in the details
Back to top	Sure....they're anti competitive as any subsidised job is. It wouldn't be there without the tax payer. Very damned difficult for a brainwashed collectivist to understand that I know.... (swaggy) IP Logged