That's only because they were massively installed due to massive totally unfeasible subsidies. C'mon, you're a military officer thus almost an engineer. Look trhu the greenwashing propaganda. A gigantic, essentially, bit of a propeller airplane high up at a sea mast can't be feasible to maintain.
youtu.be/7GCOGldDho8
Besides blocking traffic, windmills also does not release CO2 into the atmosphere, neither do they spew mercury - both wonderful, integral parts of coal-driven plants. So wind farms cannot ever replace those beautiful fossil fuels. Not even infinite windmills would suffice... (sarcasm included)
Didn't need the lecture: I used to work in coal as a media guy. Know everything there is to about air and water pollution; saw the inside of the hell that a typical Donbas mine is. Live in a green pioneer country. Notwithstanding, TODAY's renewables are just unsustainable so far💔 Watch DW "Planet A"
It seems to me that both sun and wind is working pretty well. I am not an expert on the finances but we have a discussion in Denmark about nuclear as well, and the general argument against is that it is too expensive and that other renewables are cheaper.
They're NOT working well as they need gigantic subsidies to replace the fossil fuels. Solar today is completely dependent on China-made panels. I suggest you watch everything in this DW channel. Journos are biased pro-renewables but don't censor out their downsides. www.youtube.com/@DWPlanetA
I suggest you read every paper and article ever written on renewables and fossil fuel, think about it for ten years and then write your next reply.
Yes, but building new nuclear power plants would also require subsidies. I just looked a bit into the numbers, and at least this research paper finds that it's much cheaper for Denmark to continue building wind and solar farms. vbn.aau.dk/ws/portalfil...
* your research paper probably forgot to mention two herds of elephants in the room: - China controls world market of solar panels and can destroy it by cutting its subsidized export - Denmark / EU simply don't have money or labor for costly expansion of the "Green Energy" (not with Russia's war).
Hence the painful need to keep fossil fuels electricity generation (even building new plants in some cases)💔
Fossil fuels are only affordable if we don't count the bill to deal with the pollution and climate change. From a societal point of view, it is a ridiculous business case.
It's about societal survival, not business( Fossils and nuclear are online now and people's lives depend on their electricity output. Pollution and climate are, sadly, MUCH less important. Switching fossils / nukes off will require a mammoth centralized investment, and a DEEP sociopolitical reform.
That is not the case in this part of Europe. I fully understand that green transition is not a priority in Ukraine right now, but here there is still bandwidth for it and it is even seen as a security priority. In fact, just yesterday the government moved forward on a new giant wind farm.
Economy of scale, if there is no market then it is more expensive.
There IS no market physically for the expensive renewable energy. Commercial consumers will just offshore their operations (a key reason why EU can't scale up weapons manufacturing) and home consumers will just flee the inaffordable housing: abroad, to homelessness, to the grave.
There are many ways to count those things, and I think it's a mistake to discuss fossil fuels without including the costs of the pollution. In either case, what the idiot in the video is talking about is not sabotage against the wind farm but drones hiding between the windmills.
Yes, we're stuck with the nuclear fission if we wanna limit the air pollution. Hopefully, the West eventually begins making PV panels affordable enough to maintain the existing solar farms. I got what his immediate point is, unsure if that's a real air defense problem.
It sounds like he is imagining swarms of underwater drones and not an air threat. 🤷♂️
That only makes it even stupider.