The Anthropocene

[Natural Citizen]

Who wants who dead?

You will lose.

Humanity itself will tire of your brood eventually. History is rife with example.

From using the education system to indoctrinate an entire generation of youth to accept that butt wrangling is natural...to a national campaign to indoctrinate an entire generation that they should all just kill off their unborn...to outright sending the token cackling chicken to the podium to espose to everyone how wonderful it will be when they can get away with using government to openly create a scenario where humanity is strategically reduced and unfavorable segments eliminated so that they can't dirty so much of your commie air or drink too much of your commie water ..people are tired of it.

Eventually the people will revolt...again. And it will be glorious...

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

Ambidextrous Fallacy

"Rain Forest" is a tiptoe-through-the-tulips term for useless jungle inhabited by humanoid dumb savages. There are better ways to produce carbon dioxide from oxygen, ways that provide food and products. At least the Windbags are finding uses for the Amazon wasteland.

(Freudian slip about what trees do. The Treehuggers don't know what the purpose of science is, so I overdid it in condemning their sacred forests and wildlife reserves)

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

what part of the Earth are you concerned about destroying?

Full-Blown BlueHeads

No wonder degenerate Globalist Warmalarmie Democrats delight in calling Earth "the Blue planet."

 

[The Sage of Main Street]

I have repeatedly demonstrated to everyone watching here that wind turbines are not a net CO2 source, that the amount of fossil fuels used in their construction is absolutely trivial compared to the amount they will prevent being burned during their lifetime. That is just fucking undeniable. You've found a hundred ways to avoid admitting that, apparently even to yourself. If you aren't just trying to save face, you need psychiatric help.

Blowhards Inherit the Wind

I thought that Don Quixote was the only nutcase tilting at windmills.

 

[Crick]

50,000 tons of CO2 everyday forever is emitted manufacturing wind turbines. That CO2 can never be compensated for. It is released into the atmosphere, period.

Your own source (the blatantly biased and unreliable Stop These Things at How Much CO2 Gets Emitted to Build a Wind Turbine?) calculated 241.85 tons of CO2 to manufacture a wind turbine of unspecified size. In 2022, the world added 78 GW of wind turbine capacity with an average of 3 MW/turbine. That indicates the construction of 26,000 wind turbines worldwide along with a total, unreliably estimated 6,288,100 tons or 12,576,200,000 pounds of CO2 emitted by their construction.

NOW, how much CO2 would be produced using fossil fuels to produce 78 GW for one year?

The EIA provides this handy table. You should probably print it out and tape it to the top of your monitor.

U.S. electricity net generation and resulting CO2 emissions by fuel in 2021

	Electricity generation	CO2 emissions
	million kWh	million metric tons	million short tons	pounds per kWh
Coal	897,885	919	1,013	2.26
Natural gas	1,579,361	696	767	0.97
Petroleum	19,176	21	23	2.44
Data source: U.S. Energy Information Administration, State Electricity Profiles, U.S. Profile, Table 5 (net generation) and 7 (emissions). Note: Data are for utility-scale electric power plants, including combined heat and power plants.

One year is 8,760 hours.
78 GW years x 8,760 hrs/yr is therefore 683,280 GWh
One GW is one million kW, so 683,280 GWh = 683,280,000,000 kWh.

Using that last column: pounds of CO2 produced per kWh for the three listed fuels

For coal: 683,280,000,000 kWh x 2.26 lb/kWh = 1,544,212,800,000 pounds of CO2 produced
For natural gas: 683,280,000,000 kWh x 0.97 lb/kWh = 662,781,600,000 pounds of CO2
For petroleum: 683,280,000,000 kWh x 2.44 lb/kWh = 1,667,203,200,000 pounds of CO2


Now let's divide those two yearly amounts and see what portion of a year's wind turbine output the construction CO2 represents

For coal: 12,576,200,000 pounds CO2 / 1,544,212,800,000 pounds CO2/yr = 0.00814 years or 2.97 days
For natural gas: 12,576,200,000 pounds CO2 / 662,781,600,000 pounds CO2/yr = 0.01897 years or 6.93 days
For petroleum: 12,576,200,000 pounds CO2 / 1,667,203,200,000 pounds CO2/yr = 0.00754 years or 2.75 days

Aside from STT's garbage numbers, I'll lowball wind turbine effectiveness and say it only produces electricity 25% of the time. Worst case, then, all the wind turbines built on Earth in 2022 make up for all the CO2 produced by their manufacture in 27.72 days.

You let me know when you're ready to give this up.

Crick wishes for us to accept the false premise that Wind Turbines pay for themselves and are a good investment in our future.

See above

Crick, wind turbines are subsidized because they do not produce enough electricity to pay for themselves. If wind turbines paid for themselves, then why do governments pay for them?

See above

Crick, the government has changed the rules and regulations governing utilities and what they pay and charge for electricity to create a government controlled market for wind turbines which nobody will buy or pay for if they have a choice.

Is the idea of evidence utterly foreign to you?

Wind Turbines do not produce electricity 24 hours a day, yet the claim is they replace electricity that is produced 24 hours a day by fossil fuels.

I took that into account, generously. See above.

Wind and Solar do not replace fossil fuels.

They are replacing fossil fuels. Denying reality is not a viable option.

And, as I said, let me know when you're ready to give this up. You can do it by PM if you like.

DOES ANYONE HERE BESIDES POSTER ELEKTRA BELIEVE I HAVE FAILED TO DEMONSTRATE MY POINT?

 

[elektra]

Your own source (the blatantly biased and unreliable How Much CO2 Gets Emitted to Build a Wind Turbine?) calculated 241.85 tons of CO2 to manufacture a wind turbine of unspecified size. In 2022, the world added 78 GW of wind turbine capacity with an average of 3 MW/turbine. That indicates the construction of 26,000 wind turbines worldwide along with a total, unreliably estimated 6,288,100 tons or 12,576,200,000 pounds of CO2 emitted by their construction.

NOW, how much CO2 would be produced using fossil fuels to produce 78 GW for one year?

	million kWh	million metric tons	million short tons	pounds per kWh
	Electricity generation	CO2 emissions
Coal	897,885	919	1,013	2.26
Natural gas	1,579,361	696	767	0.97
Petroleum	19,176	21	23	2.44
Data source: U.S. Energy Information Administration, State Electricity Profiles, U.S. Profile, Table 5 (net generation) and 7 (emissions). Note: Data are for utility-scale electric power plants, including combined heat and power plants.

Aside from STT's garbage numbers, I'll lowball wind turbine effectiveness and say it only produces electricity 25% of the time. Worst case, then, all the wind turbines built on Earth in 2022 make up for all the CO2 produced by their manufacture in 27.72 days.

You let me know when you're ready to give this up.

STT's numbers came from the IPCC, and they linked to the IPCC

The numbers only addressed one part of a wind turbine, not the entire thing. But none of that matters because building wind turbines is everyday, 24 hours a day, forever.

Crick states that 26,000 wind turbines are built in one year. That is 71 per day. Each weighs how much with the foundation, on average 2000 tons. For each ton of material used, a conservative estimate of CO2 is 1/2 a ton of CO2 per ton of wind turbine.

According to crick, the amount of CO2 will be a minimum of 71,000 tons of CO2 everyday.

Wind Turbine manufacturing never stops, 71,000 tons of CO2 everyday, forever.

Wind Turbine manufacturing is contributing 26 million tons of CO2 every year. Forever. That is the conservative figure, we are told manufacturing of wind turbines must double.

All across our nation, fossil fuel power plants are being built, wind turbines are not replacing fossil fuels, in the USA or the World.

26 million tons of CO2 every year emitted by wind turbine manufacturing.

 

[Crick]

STT's numbers came from the IPCC, and they linked to the IPCC

The numbers only addressed one part of a wind turbine, not the entire thing. But none of that matters because building wind turbines is everyday, 24 hours a day, forever.

Crick states that 26,000 wind turbines are built in one year. That is 71 per day. Each weighs how much with the foundation, on average 2000 tons. For each ton of material used, a conservative estimate of CO2 is 1/2 a ton of CO2 per ton of wind turbine.

According to crick, the amount of CO2 will be a minimum of 71,000 tons of CO2 everyday.

Wind Turbine manufacturing never stops, 71,000 tons of CO2 everyday, forever.

Wind Turbine manufacturing is contributing 26 million tons of CO2 every year. Forever. That is the conservative figure, we are told manufacturing of wind turbines must double.

All across our nation, fossil fuel power plants are being built, wind turbines are not replacing fossil fuels, in the USA or the World.

26 million tons of CO2 every year emitted by wind turbine manufacturing.

DOES ANYONE HERE BESIDES POSTER ELEKTRA BELIEVE I HAVE FAILED TO DEMONSTRATE MY POINT?

 

[elektra]

DOES ANYONE HERE BESIDES POSTER ELEKTRA BELIEVE I HAVE FAILED TO DEMONSTRATE MY POINT?

70,000 tons of CO2 everyday, and it must rise, is emitted by manufacturing wind turbines. Forever. How is that a solution to reduce CO2?

Wind Turbines are so inefficient, they will always be subsidized, they will always be dictated to be built, by the government.

Crick, everyone understands your point, you like expensive, intermittent, inefficient, sources of electricity. A shame crick does not have to live with pure wind or solar power.

 

[Crick]

70,000 tons of CO2 everyday, and it must rise, is emitted by manufacturing wind turbines. Forever. How is that a solution to reduce CO2?

Wind Turbines are so inefficient, they will always be subsidized, they will always be dictated to be built, by the government.

Crick, everyone understands your point, you like expensive, intermittent, inefficient, sources of electricity. A shame crick does not have to live with pure wind or solar power.

No one has responded to my bold red query. That is not good for you, particularly considering how well liked I am on this forum ; - ).

DOES ANYONE HERE BESIDES POSTER ELEKTRA BELIEVE I HAVE FAILED TO DEMONSTRATE MY POINT?

 

[elektra]

DOES ANYONE HERE BESIDES POSTER ELEKTRA BELIEVE I HAVE FAILED TO DEMONSTRATE MY POINT?

Crick's points

Electricity is good if it is expensive
Electricity is fine supported by government subsidies
Electricity does not need to be available 24 hours a day, just sometimes
Electricity can be produced using the largest machines ever built
Electricity is good if only a tiny bit is produce by a wind turbine
Electricity's price should be dictated by the government and not the market
Electricity is good even if it requires heavy industry to emit CO2 every hour of every day
Elictricity's CO2 emitted does not matter if it comes from heavy industry building wind turbines

did i miss anything crick

can you reply to any of this?

70,000 tons of CO2, everyday, directly attributed to Wind Turbines. Forever

 

[elektra]

No one has responded to my bold red query. That is not good for you, particularly considering how well liked I am on this forum ; - ).

DOES ANYONE HERE BESIDES POSTER ELEKTRA BELIEVE I HAVE FAILED TO DEMONSTRATE MY POINT?

hahahahahahah, as if you getting zero responses on your comment is a reflection of my facts. You are grasping at straws to prove yourself right.

How about simply telling us, when you will quit manufacturing wind turbines (never).

 

[Crick]

Crick's points

Electricity is good if it is expensive

This is not one of my points

Electricity is fine supported by government subsidies

This is not one of my points

Electricity does not need to be available 24 hours a day, just sometimes

This is not one of my points

Electricity can be produced using the largest machines ever built

This is not one of my points

Electricity is good if only a tiny bit is produce by a wind turbine

This is not one of my points

Electricity's price should be dictated by the government and not the market

This is not one of my points

Electricity is good even if it requires heavy industry to emit CO2 every hour of every day

This is not one of my points

Elictricity's CO2 emitted does not matter if it comes from heavy industry building wind turbines

This is not one of my points

did i miss anything crick

You seem to have missed that being repeatedly outraged in the past by what you claimed (but have never been able to demonstrate) were my lies, it's more than a little disappointing to see you rattle off lie after lie after lie after lie after lie after lie as you just did. And, as I've noted before, lying about what someone has said is a violation of USMB rules.

can you reply to any of this?

70,000 tons of CO2, everyday, directly attributed to Wind Turbines. Forever

If we have to build wind turbines forever, under your plan we would have to continuously increase the amount of fossil fuels we are burning, which, as I have demonstrated, produces orders of magnitude more CO2 than building wind turbines, no matter the quantity.

We are building large numbers of wind turbines now because we are attempting to replace the entire planet's energy infrastructure. Once the entire planet is serviced by non-emitting technology, production will only need to keep up with growth, not growth plus replacement. I believe hydrogen will replace batteries to power vehicles and fusion reactors will replace wind and solar, but each will take a while.

 

[elektra]

We are building large numbers of wind turbines now because we are attempting to replace the entire planet's energy infrastructure. Once the entire planet is serviced by non-emitting technology, production will only need to keep up with growth, not growth plus replacement. I believe hydrogen will replace batteries to power vehicles and fusion reactors will replace wind and solar, but each will take a while.

Bullshit, large numbers of wind turbines are being built because that creates the most profit for the government politicians and the rich.

Wind Turbines and Solar do not work all day, every day. It is impossible to replace something that works, with something that does not

and how in the hell will you not have to replace wind turbines? we have already replaced every single first generation wind turbine.

None of my points about you are true, yet you support exactly what you claim, you dont?

 

[Crick]

Bullshit, large numbers of wind turbines are being built because that creates the most profit for the government politicians and the rich.

Wind Turbines and Solar do not work all day, every day. It is impossible to replace something that works, with something that does not

and how in the hell will you not have to replace wind turbines? we have already replaced every single first generation wind turbine.

None of my points about you are true, yet you support exactly what you claim, you dont?

DOES ANYONE HERE BESIDES POSTER ELEKTRA BELIEVE I HAVE FAILED TO DEMONSTRATE MY POINT?

 

[elektra]

DOES ANYONE HERE BESIDES POSTER ELEKTRA BELIEVE I HAVE FAILED TO DEMONSTRATE MY POINT?

I believe crick demonstrated his point,

Crick will not respond to members of usmb quotes and comments made from Crick's links

 

[elektra]

DOES ANYONE HERE BESIDES POSTER ELEKTRA BELIEVE I HAVE FAILED TO DEMONSTRATE MY POINT?

hahahahah

listen???

 

[Crick]

hahahahah

listen???

View attachment 804901

That's right. Crickets. That should not please you since it implies that no one thinks I have failed to demonstrate my point.

You really need to do a little more thinking before hitting that Post button.

 

[Crick]

I believe crick demonstrated his point

Well, that is excellent news.

Crick will not respond to members of usmb quotes and comments made from Crick's links

I'm not really certain what you're trying to say here, but no one but you and I have posted in this thread for quite some time. To what other members and comments do you refer?

 

[elektra]

Well, that is excellent news.

I'm not really certain what you're trying to say here, but no one but you and I have posted in this thread for quite some time. To what other members and comments do you refer?

I commented and quoted from your links, showing they are wrong and crick has no reply to those comments

 

[elektra]

No one has responded to my bold red query. That is not good for you, particularly considering how well liked I am on this forum ; - ).

DOES ANYONE HERE BESIDES POSTER ELEKTRA BELIEVE I HAVE FAILED TO DEMONSTRATE MY POINT?

you are funny as hell, you are very popular (in your own mind) and beings how you are so well liked, when nobody responds to your big red post, that means you are right

crick, you are such a joke, pathetic