Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to Politics |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"And don't be fooled by the "Renewables" scam. When the supporters of these monstrosities blather on about how much "renewable" energy they have created. They make a glaring omission. Burning wood pellets counts as "renewable". It ain't all windmills and sunshine." Ed Miliband in charge is like putting a cuckold in charge of a brothel, Miliband is only trying to make a name for himself after all his failures even if he totally destroys the UK landscape in doing so. His latest wet dream is having 1 Billion solar panels fitted to all homes in uk | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"And don't be fooled by the "Renewables" scam. When the supporters of these monstrosities blather on about how much "renewable" energy they have created. They make a glaring omission. Burning wood pellets counts as "renewable". It ain't all windmills and sunshine." try household rubbish and waste let alone wood pellets | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"more concrete has been poured at hinckley c than would be required for 600 million wind turbines .... just to give some perspective" Hinckley C is predicted to need 3 million tonnes of concrete in total. Are you really saying that you can mount a 60m high turbine designed to withstand 150mph winds, on just 5kg of concrete? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"more concrete has been poured at hinckley c than would be required for 600 million wind turbines .... just to give some perspective Hinckley C is predicted to need 3 million tonnes of concrete in total. Are you really saying that you can mount a 60m high turbine designed to withstand 150mph winds, on just 5kg of concrete?" it's poured more than that site wide already pal  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"more concrete has been poured at hinckley c than would be required for 600 million wind turbines .... just to give some perspective " Did you get maths lessons from Ed Milliband ? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"more concrete has been poured at hinckley c than would be required for 600 million wind turbines .... just to give some perspective Did you get maths lessons from Ed Milliband ? " Ignore the comment, the wool has already been pulled over his eyes, he firmly believes wind turbines are good for the environment, scenery and tourism | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"And don't be fooled by the "Renewables" scam. When the supporters of these monstrosities blather on about how much "renewable" energy they have created. They make a glaring omission. Burning wood pellets counts as "renewable". It ain't all windmills and sunshine. Ed Miliband in charge is like putting a cuckold in charge of a brothel, Miliband is only trying to make a name for himself after all his failures even if he totally destroys the UK landscape in doing so. His latest wet dream is having 1 Billion solar panels fitted to all homes in uk " He'd have to repair quite a few rooves before that becomes a success. Besides we'll have months of darkness in the future so no sunlighty no bulb lighty. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"In the 20 year cycle of a wind turbine, it cannot cover its own carbon footprint. A huge steel and concrete foundation is required to ensure that the turbine column is stable and the area can be a third of an acre. Each foundation began as a large excavation within which a flat 'blinding' concrete base was poured to ensure that the turbines were installed on a level platform. A reinforced steel frame was then built by hand at each location comprising of around 105 tonnes of steel rebar. The frames were then filled with concrete (around 1700 tonnes in total) which was poured continuously until the base was complete to maximise the quality and strength of the foundation. Once the concrete had been poured and set, the excavation was then backfilled with aggregate, adding significant additional weight to the foundation structure with which to support the wind turbine. The completed flat platform then provided storage space for the wind turbine components and a strong level 'crane pad' from which the installation teams could set up and operate their heavy lift cranes and other lifting equipment during turbine installation. But ofcourse wind turbines do look good all over the countryside and landscape don't they!!!" You start off with an assertion which is not supported by numerous life cycle analyses which have been conducted and published. It's easy to make such statements but you need to do some reading of the literature before making such statements. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"more concrete has been poured at hinckley c than would be required for 600 million wind turbines .... just to give some perspective" "Hinckley C is predicted to need 3 million tonnes of concrete in total. Are you really saying that you can mount a 60m high turbine designed to withstand 150mph winds, on just 5kg of concrete?" "it's poured more than that site wide already pal" Where do you get that idea? The civil engineers that designed it (Tractebel Engie) say that it'll need 3m tons in total. An average wind turbine needs about 1000 tons of concrete for its base. Your 600m wind turbines would need 600bn tons of concrete, which is about 30,000 years of total UK annual production. That seems somewhat excessive for a single nuclear power plant. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
