Live data from Hacker News

Wind farms can offset their emissions within two years, new study shows

newsroom.taylorandfrancisgroup.com

1–10 of 196 posts

Re: Wind farms can offset their emissions within two years, new study shows

#3

But how much energy is used to create the wind farm?

That's exactly the question the study was answering

> The study reviewed current literature on wind farms, as well as using real construction data to take into account everything from the manufacturing of individual turbine parts, to transporting them into place, to decommissioning the entire wind farm at Harapaki – which comprises 41 turbines.

Re: Wind farms can offset their emissions within two years, new study shows

#5

But how much energy is used to create the wind farm?

A lot less than they create? Like, if it was a negative return on investment, energy wise, no one would be building wind farms.

Wind turbines produce whole integer MW, which is way more than they cost to make.

Re: Wind farms can offset their emissions within two years, new study shows

#6
post #5

But how much energy is used to create the wind farm?

A lot less than they create? Like, if it was a negative return on investment, energy wise, no one would be building wind farms. Wind turbines produce whole integer MW, which is way more than they cost to make.

>negative return on investment, energy wise, no one would be building wind farms

I don't think it's this simple considering politics is usually involved.

But if it was a simple profit question I still don't think people would be building wind farms.

Re: Wind farms can offset their emissions within two years, new study shows

#8
post #6
post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A lot less than they create? Like, if it was a negative return on investment, energy wise, no one would be building wind farms. Wind turbines produce whole integer MW, which is way more than they cost to make.

>negative return on investment, energy wise, no one would be building wind farms I don't think it's this simple considering politics is usually involved. But if it was a simple profit question I still don't think people would be building wind farms.

Exactly right. Government subsidies makes a lot of things appear viable and/or affordable, when in reality they are not. Subsidies are bolstered by politics.

Wind farms appear as ridiculous as they are. Yet... they keep getting built because there's government money to be made. There's government money to be made because they give the appearance of "doing something, anything" while in fact doing almost nothing. Follow the votes...

Re: Wind farms can offset their emissions within two years, new study shows

#9
post #8
post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>negative return on investment, energy wise, no one would be building wind farms I don't think it's this simple considering politics is usually involved. But if it was a simple profit question I still don't think people would be building wind farms.

Exactly right. Government subsidies makes a lot of things appear viable and/or affordable, when in reality they are not. Subsidies are bolstered by politics. Wind farms appear as ridiculous as they are. Yet... they keep getting built because there's government money to be made. There's government money to be made because they give the appearance of "doing something, anything" while in fact doing almost nothing. Follo…

Wind farms generate substantial quantities of power at like $0.04/kwh unsubsidized - they're in no way ridiculous. California generates well over 10% of their total electricity demand via wind, Texas is closer to 25% of their total demand (more than coal and nuclear combined). Hundreds of thousands of cheap, carbon-free GWh produced is an odd definition of "doing almost nothing".
Post reply on HN