Why people in eastern Washington don't like wind farms.....

[Vladimir Steblina]

You should read this:

https://www.bpa.gov/p/Generation/Hydro/hydro/columbia_river_inside_story.pdf

 

[Yard Sale]

You should read this:

https://www.bpa.gov/p/Generation/Hydro/hydro/columbia_river_inside_story.pdf

That was written in 2001 by the dam operators. Worthless.

Fair question: who has more legal rights to the water, farmers or ESA listed fish who require spill?

As for the tribs, you can’t have water rights to water that doesn’t exist.

For starting a post in the conservation forum you sure don’t seem to give a shit about the fish.

 

[Dan Page]

Why is hydrogen power not pursued more? You can get it from water and there is no toxic exhaust. There must not be enough profit.

 

[FinLuver]

You don't like wind farms because you don't agree with diversifying our energy portfolio with green alternatives.

Have you seen the chemicals used in the manufacture of your so called green energy?
Not to mention the disposal of such items after they wear out. [smh]

 

[Yard Sale]

Have you seen the chemicals used in the manufacture of your so called green energy?
Not to mention the disposal of such items after they wear out. [smh]

How are your carbon fuels transported?

 

[FinLuver]

How are your carbon fuels transported?

So your OK trading one for the other?
Or worse yet, creating more of the same?
That's mighty green of you.

 

[Jim Wallace]

So what are you suggestions for better alternatives?

If its not raining, and the round trip isn't more than 20 miles or so, and the air temp/wind chill isn't too bad, I like to ride my bicycle. The bicycle is THE most efficient form of transportation ever devised.

 

[The T.O. Show]

So your OK trading one for the other?
Or worse yet, creating more of the same?
That's mighty green of you.

I'm concerned about fish. That's why I'm here on this fishing forum talking about conservation issues that impact fish. So I'm willing to trade some energy sources that might have a lower impact on said fish. I'm not sure what they talk about on the shrub steppe habitat conservation forums. You might want to check that out and report back.

 

[FinLuver]

I'm concerned about fish. That's why I'm here on this fishing forum talking about conservation issues that impact fish. So I'm willing to trade some energy sources that might have a lower impact on said fish. I'm not sure what they talk about on the shrub steppe habitat conservation forums. You might want to check that out and report back.

I'm sure you've got that covered...
what say you?

 

[The T.O. Show]

I'm sure you've got that covered...
what say you?

I say these discussions are more circular and less interesting everytime. For a bunch of guys who claim to have the same interests at heart we always end up slamming our heads against the opposite sides of the same wall.

 

[b_illymac]

I say these discussions are more circular and less interesting everytime. For a bunch of guys who claim to have the same interests at heart we always end up slamming our heads against the opposite sides of the same wall.

One side talks interventions and the other side just talks about what's wrong with those interventions.

 

[FinLuver]

Sometimes an intervention, needs a good intervention.

 

[Gene S]

Seems as though most wind turbine advocates think these smokestacks with blades...usually sited in large groups on ridge tops and open areas, aren't unsightly because of their anti fossil fuel image.

 

[Vladimir Steblina]

That was written in 2001 by the dam operators. Worthless.

Fair question: who has more legal rights to the water, farmers or ESA listed fish who require spill?

As for the tribs, you can’t have water rights to water that doesn’t exist.

For starting a post in the conservation forum you sure don’t seem to give a shit about the fish.

Ok....since you won't read anything put out by BPA and the Northwest Power Council.

What do you read to get information on the river system???

 

[HBB]

Seems as though most wind turbine advocates think these smokestacks with blades...usually sited in large groups on ridge tops and open areas, aren't unsightly because of their anti fossil fuel image.

Visual impacts are pretty much universally considered in developing environmental impact statements for wind farm projects, and typically draw significant public comment. A draft EIS will typically include renderings showing what the project would look like from certain vantage points, both at night and during the day, and will consider alternative locations to minimize visual impacts. It's also common to consider visual impacts not only during operation, but during the construction phase as well.

For example, here's a Final EIS for a project off Cape Cod: https://www.energy.gov/sites/prod/files/DOE-EIS-0470-Cape_Wind_FEIS_2012.pdf

I haven't seen anyone argue that the visual impacts are not worth considering due to the fact that the turbines produce energy without burning fossil fuels. To the contrary, sites are generally selected to minimize visual impacts.