What is Digg?Sponsored by HTC
You and You and You. view!
youtube.com - You don't need to get a phone. You need a phone that gets you.
158 Comments
- Sluz, on 06/30/2008, -2/+31My grandmother gave me, my brother & my sister a small piece of land in the middle of nowhere in Texas. About two years ago an energy company asked to place a giant wind turbine on it for the next 20 years. We get about 5% of the production. So... If prices go up over the next 20 years, we get more money. The value of the land also went up by 40K because they built roads, plumbing, and electrical infrastructure. My taxes went up but the increase was paid by the energy company as part of the agreement.
Basically... It's FREE money that just landed in my lap. The checks come in like clockwork and what else can I say except for I LOVE it! - Iztikeit, on 07/01/2008, -0/+13I want one in my back yard.
- Altotus, on 07/01/2008, -0/+12It's the chili.
- rgladstein, on 06/30/2008, -0/+12And we continue to wait for Cape Wind, although it looks like it may finally happen: http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/08_27 ...
- JustAn0th3rFace, on 07/01/2008, -0/+9This needs to happen. Every wind turbine helps. As a resident of Long Island, I personally would love to see these go up off my coast. Yet many of my neighbors think the same yet not in their backyard. Times running out, energy costs are on the rise, and we are pretty much being forced into this option now.
Now if we could only find a way to shut the North Shore folks up and build a bridge to Connecticut.... - ISCHmail, on 07/01/2008, -1/+10I don't get whats with the people who are opposing these wind farms just as they do coal and oil refineries, wind farms are not an eyesore, they are clean, white, quiet.... There is a wind farm near where I live and people stop to take pictures.
Also I've seen more than a couple wind turbine wallpapers on peoples computers. - Grummond, on 07/01/2008, -0/+820% is already the reality some places.
Some countries already achieved that goal, and are moving on to higher levels of renewable energy.
They probably will never replace the coal plants entirely, but they WILL make us increasingly independent from coal, oil and nuclear power. - bobbknight, on 07/01/2008, -7/+15I have one word "NUCLEAR"
- malexan, on 07/01/2008, -0/+7Seems like a good use of land in many cases. And I'm sure the animals don't care :-)
- Altotus, on 07/01/2008, -1/+8Actually, wind turbines score fewer kills than glass windows. As a matter of fact, if you've ever talked to the guys that service them, the problem with birds and wind turbines is that the birds like to nest on/in them and they make a huge mess. They were never designed to be bird houses, but many of them become just that.
- WallyAnti, on 07/01/2008, -0/+6Why does global warming necessarily equal lack of temperature differential?
- inactive, on 07/01/2008, -0/+6Nuclear has the problem of nuclear waste disposal. Otherwise it is a good option.
- dha07030, on 07/01/2008, -7/+13Twenty percent is not "the future of energy" but hey this is Digg and the nature of media I guess.
- FLarsen, on 07/01/2008, -0/+6Cats kill more birds than wind turbines, should cats be banned?
Let go of the bird argument, it's *****. - Egoist, on 07/01/2008, -1/+6None of which would exist without the internet and personal computer, paid for by the so-called "pissing away" of tax payer money by the military.
- Grummond, on 07/01/2008, -5/+10So by 2030 you might get to the level Denmark was last year?
Way to be ambitious :P
It seems like the US is trailing when it comes to renewable energy. Hopefully someone like Obama will bring you guys back to the front of innovation again. - kamisama, on 07/01/2008, -0/+5In Belgium a chain of supermarkets has already invested in a couple of these windmills, and leading the way for other companies. They are doing very well, and in the future will invest more. Energy from panels on the roof and windmills are the way to go. Minus the cost of the gear you need it's completely free, and won't run out any time soon.
- CressCrowbits, on 07/01/2008, -2/+7Also, Nuclear has the problem of a finite amount of harvestable nuclear fuel.
- CressCrowbits, on 07/01/2008, -1/+6Twenty percent now = a lot more later if we reduce the amount of energy we waste.
(He says, sat at a computer with a 600w PSU and two 21" TFT displays) - ricksite, on 07/01/2008, -0/+5The future is going to suck if, in 25 years, fiberglass is going to start to rust.
- secrity, on 07/01/2008, -0/+5So why isn't he pushing for wind power and other renewable energy initiatives now?
- ihate2regist, on 07/01/2008, -0/+5cause it looks like boobs?
- Iztikeit, on 07/01/2008, -0/+4Texas is the wind capital of America apparently.
- piratearggghhh, on 07/01/2008, -4/+8I love how people who are supporting renewable energies like wind turbines and solar energy are labeled as liberals and environmental nuts while support nuclear energy, coal, more drilling etc. Haven't you learned in grade school that pollution is bad - it poisons the air we breath, water we drink, food we eat, and makes us sick? (see cancer) Nuclear power clean? It's called radioactive waste that decays in how many millions of years? Coal? WTF are we back in the industrial revolution? It's not even just the environment, it's about being energy independent so our pathetic president doesn't have to go to Saudi Arabia and beg OPEC to produce more oil - and guess what they want in exchage - nuclear power plants and technology. Now what would a country sitting on oil need nuclear energy? (history tells us ***** we sell to foreign countries somehow turns out to be the same stuff they use against us). We're definitely living in bizarro world.
- redcatalina, on 07/01/2008, -1/+5A small piece of land in Texas is over 100 acres.
- drmangrum, on 07/01/2008, -1/+5Considering that Denmark is only slightly bigger than West Virginia ( 26k SqMiles vs 24k SqMiles ) that's hardly fair. I think many people just don't understand how big the US is. Overhauling that much infrastructure is neither quick nor cheap.
- aleksandar, on 07/01/2008, -0/+4I have one image to say:
http://aleksandarrodic.com/images/content/energy_p ... - inactive, on 07/01/2008, -0/+4 There should be an artists competition to design some more aesthetically pleasing towers.
- kd1s, on 07/01/2008, -0/+4The solution is going to be a combination of things, wind, solar, tidal, geothermal, etc. It's finally economically feasible to deploy these technologies. As I look out my window right now I see the trees swaying in the breeze. That's energy to be captured.
The sun is shining brightly and the newest generation o f photovoltaic cells has efficiencies ranging from 30% to 70% even under cloudy sky. - GeauxLSU, on 07/01/2008, -0/+4Texas becomes leader in wind energy
http://www.bizjournals.com/sanantonio/stories/2008 ...
and how did that happen??
The Power of Green
The politician who actually proved just how effective this can be was a guy named George W. Bush, when he was governor of Texas. He pushed for and signed a renewable energy portfolio mandate in 1999. The mandate stipulated that Texas power companies had to produce 2,000 new megawatts of electricity from renewables, mostly wind, by 2009.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/15/magazine/15green ... - makis, on 07/01/2008, -0/+4greener than these? http://www.wavedragon.net/
- Grummond, on 07/01/2008, -2/+5A single feral cat kills more birds in a week than the average wind turbine kills in over three years.
We should ban cats. That would also be a crackdown on the "cheesing" craze. - inactive, on 07/01/2008, -3/+6With all the ***** coming out of the Republican party these days, there's no shortage of hot air to turn those bitches.
- Grummond, on 07/01/2008, -1/+4Except birds, of course.
- WallyAnti, on 07/01/2008, -1/+4@kylere
Last time I checked none of those things were operational at this time.
It might just be me, but when I think highly combustable rocket and highly radioactive waste, the next thing I think about is "dirty bomb". Maybe that's out of ignorance, I'm no rocket scientist, but neither are the millions of Americans who watch American Idol like clockwork and will be vital in paying for such endeavors. - jsams81, on 06/26/2009, -1/+4So its going to take it 22 years to get to a paltry 20%? That doesn't impress me much.
- Loonatickle, on 07/01/2008, -0/+3While I suspect that nuclear (fusion) is the only true long term solution, the idea of firing radioactive waste at the sun from an earthbound rail gun or other projectile launcher is more than a little scary. The only reasonable method is a space elevator, but we don't have anywhere near the materials technology for that. Fission waste will simply have to be stored for at least the next half century. Hopefully fusion generation will be available then, and waste won't be nearly the issue.
- niczar, on 07/01/2008, -3/+6kylere: do you know how much it costs to send stuff into space? Do you have any idea? Think $10000 per kg, at the very least. And that's for low earth orbit, which means that it will go back down to earth sooner or later.
- Egoist, on 07/01/2008, -3/+6Right, compare the entire United States to small country that could fit inside some of our national parks. The cost of overhauling the electrical system in a single state would be equal to your country's GDP x 5. It has nothing to do with innovation, or lack thereof, it's purely economic and logistical.
- The_Wallbanger, on 07/01/2008, -3/+6Two words: "TOXIC WASTE"
- vulapine, on 07/01/2008, -0/+3Actually, multiple sources would be the "way to go". Wind, Solar, Geothermal, Hydroelectric, etc. together to meet the needs and balance the grid in areas where one would work better than another.
- nick111, on 07/01/2008, -0/+3It's considerably cheaper and easier to decommision a windmill than a nuke station - we're trying it in the UK at the moment... another cost hidden from the taxpayer until after the fact - and so far the bill is stretching into the tens of billions.
Sellafield costs EACH UK taxpayer 100 GBP a year... and this is from the industry that told us it would be "too cheap to meter"
I really think the only reason you nuke retards want nuke is that you want to replace the oil industry with another centralised conglomeration run by corrupt old men. It's some weird "father figure" thing you've got going on. - nick111, on 07/01/2008, -3/+6What an utter crock of *****.
You do know that you're writing on a web app based on PHP/MySQL/Linux, all of which were started by Scandinavians don't you?
Oh to be an ignorant ***** who thinks that pissing 3 trillion dollars of his children's tax money up the wall losing a foreign war is somehow "acting responsibly" and doing the rest of the "free-riding" world a favour. - Fizpez, on 07/01/2008, -1/+3While there is a certain logic to some of your response, you apparently don't know much about nuclear power. The "waste" is really anything that has ever been in or near the reactor, from low level stuff like clothing and tools, all the way up to "hot" waste like "spent" fuel rods.
The worst stuff, the stuff you wouldnt want to be around, really isnt created at the plant - all that Uranium and every one of its decay products would still be doing its thing if left in the ground - just more spread out, and thus less of an immediate danger.
People seem to think nothing has changed in nuclear power for the past 50 years - the truth is we could power the world for thousands of years, very cleanly with the known uranium/thorium reservers. Nuclear power needs a face - someone with a high degree of public exposure and good will to say "Hey, this is doable, here's how, here's why" and get a standardized program of national nuclear expansion. - sparkrainfir, on 07/01/2008, -1/+3citation needed
- Phearce, on 07/01/2008, -1/+3From what I've read, the older turbines did in fact kill plenty of birds. Newer designs have slower spinning blades and consequently far fewer birds die.
- Egoist, on 07/01/2008, -1/+3We were simply correcting someone who has no perspective. This is a person who can't understand why a country that is over 200 times as large as his own wasn't able to accomplish a national energy overhaul in the same amount of time as his country was able to. This is a person who says that the US is trailing in renewable energy innovation when the US has more money in development of these products than any other country in the world.
If no one corrects him, others with the same lack of perspective will assume what he says is true. - Screwy1138, on 07/01/2008, -0/+2I saw a study that housecats killed more birds than wind turbines. I know I know, citation needed. Take it as it is.
- drmangrum, on 07/01/2008, -1/+3If you've ever been to west texas you would know why. It's nothing but open plain/desert for literally as far as you can see. You can drive for an hour at 100 mph and maybe see 2 or 3 other vehicles. Occasionally, you see an oil derrick, hopefully to be replace by wind turbines soon. The biggest problem is getting all that power back to the cities. Not very practical to run hundreds of miles of power lines, the power drop wouldn't make it worth the while.
- FLarsen, on 07/01/2008, -1/+3One word: "Thorium"
Most thorium waste is needed by other industries (no, not nuclear bomb industries). -
Show 51 - 100 of 161 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is 