• Welcome to the FREE TUGBBS forums! The absolute best place for owners to get help and advice about their timeshares for more than 32 years!

    Join Tens of Thousands of other owners just like you here to get any and all Timeshare questions answered 24 hours a day!
  • TUG started 32 years ago in October 1993 as a group of regular Timeshare owners just like you!

    Read about our 32nd anniversary: Happy 32nd Birthday TUG!
  • TUG has a YouTube Channel to produce weekly short informative videos on popular Timeshare topics!

    All subscribers auto-entered to win all free TUG membership giveaways!

    Visit TUG on Youtube!
  • TUG has now saved timeshare owners more than $24,000,000 dollars just by finding us in time to rescind a new Timeshare purchase! A truly incredible milestone!

    Read more here: TUG saves owners more than $24 Million dollars
  • Wish you could meet up with other TUG members? Well look no further as this annual event has been going on for years in Orlando! How to Attend the TUG January Get-Together!
  • Now through the end of the year you can join or renew your TUG membership at the lowest price ever offered! Learn More!
  • Sign up to get the TUG Newsletter for free!

    Tens of thousands of subscribing owners! A weekly recap of the best Timeshare resort reviews and the most popular topics discussed by owners!
  • Our official "end my sales presentation early" T-shirts are available again! Also come with the option for a free membership extension with purchase to offset the cost!

    All T-shirt options here!
  • A few of the most common links here on the forums for newbies and guests!

New scientific paper: offshore wind turbines alter marine eco-system, could shift ocean currents

Australia will provide electricity for free during afternoon hours


Not something Carolinian's Aussie buddies want to talk about

Intermittent energy is a feast or famine proposition. At certain times you can have too much of it and have to get rid of it to keep the grid stable. At others, it craps out when it is needed and power has to be bought on the very expensive spot market to replace it. Both inefficiencies cost money, directly or indirectly. The overproduction times mean having to run other power sources as "peakers" making their production more expensive than it would be without the intermittent source. I guess when your intermittent energy source gives too much power for a brief period of the day which would otherwise overload the system, giving it away encourages more people to use it then and helps get rid of it. But there are other ways this is done. In the UK, the "green energy" sources are just paid not to produce it during those periods, and the cost of paying them off is added to consumers power bills.
 
Last edited:
We have heard multiple times (and I mean multiple) about Germanys high cost for electricity to the consumer

The costs are driven primarily by Germany's tax on electricity
Not the cost of production

Taxes and surcharges were the biggest cost driver

Germany layered multiple policy charges onto electricity bills starting in the early 2000s.
  • EEG renewable surcharge (to fund early solar/wind subsidies)
  • Electricity tax
  • VAT at 19%
  • Concession fees to municipalities
These added 10–20 cents per kWh on top of the energy price — far more than nuclear could ever offset.

Even when nuclear provided cheap generation, the taxes alone made German electricity expensive.

Yes, those renewable surcharges do add to the cost, but that is just one of the system costs that caused electric rates to skyrocket after Merkel's Energiewende.
 

dead-eagle-turbine.png


Wind farms that are killing eagles need to be fined very, very, very heavily and then permanently shut down.

 
Last edited:
You are in favor of producing more toxic material??

We have a real problem with Coal ash already

Do you realize how large a pile 500 Million Cubic Yards of coal ash is

You do realize that coal ash contains a variety of toxic materials

Coal ash contains contaminants like mercury, cadmium, and arsenic.
Without proper management, these contaminants can pollute waterways, ground water, drinking water, and the air.
The need for federal action was highlighted by large coal ash spills near Kingston, Tennessee and Eden, North Carolina

A group of 12 major utility companies holding over half a billion cubic yards of coal ash have formally asked EPA to relieve them of cleanup obligations for toxic coal ash sites.

People advocating for new coal plants fail to EVER mention these types of problems

China and India have little Natural Gas

They have no choice but to burn coal to keep up with the demand for electricity for their growing economies

Their use of coal would be even higher without the use of solar and wind to supplement coal burning

China has also expanded the use of renewables at the fastest rate of any country in the last 5 years


I am in favor of cheap, reliable base load energy. I favor nuclear and gas and geothermal, plus the promise of fusion, for the future, but it raises electric rates to prematurely close coal plants, and I support keeping them running during their useful life.

There are lots of toxic and harmful materials in both solar panels and wind turbines, and a lot of that is going into our landfills, as well as being spewed into the environment when a hurricane or tornado or even a hail storm comes along. Here is one of them:


Then there are the tons of toxic microplastics being shed from wind turbine blades, including Bisphenol A

 
Last edited:
Wind farms that are killing eagles need to be fined very, very, very heavily and then permanently shut down.
You're hilarious!

Coal strip mines kill protected animals. Oil drilling operations kill protected animals. Pollution from fossil fuel powered energy production kills protected animals. Heck, even the construction of dams for "clean" hydroelectric power kills protected animals.

By your logic, they should all be "fined very, very, very heavily and then permanently shut down".

This just goes to show how unhinged you are, to the point of being mentally obsessed in your crusade against clean, renewable energy that the orange-haired one doesn't like. It's sad how people can't think for themselves and just blindly follow anything that idiot says.

Kurt
 
I am in favor of cheap, reliable base load energy. I favor nuclear and gas and geothermal, plus the promise of fusion, for the future, but it raises electric rates to prematurely close coal plants, and I support keeping them running during their useful life.

There are lots of toxic and harmful materials in both solar panels and wind turbines, and a lot of that is going into our landfills, as well as being spewed into the environment when a hurricane or tornado or even a hail storm comes along. Here is one of them:


Then there are the tons of toxic microplastics being shed from wind turbine blades, including Bisphenol A

The slanted propaganda continues

Nothing you put out is designed to be factual

SF6 is used extensively in the electrical generation and transmission industry

Wind turbines are numerous, and each contains a small sealed switchgear unit.
This makes for dramatic headlines like “SF₆: the climate killer in wind turbines,” but the data shows:

  • A single high‑voltage GIS substation for a city uses far more SF₆ than an entire wind farm.
  • Offshore wind farms use SF₆, but so do all offshore substations, including those serving oil & gas platforms.
Wind is visible, but not the main consumer.
 
You're hilarious!

Coal strip mines kill protected animals. Oil drilling operations kill protected animals. Pollution from fossil fuel powered energy production kills protected animals. Heck, even the construction of dams for "clean" hydroelectric power kills protected animals.

By your logic, they should all be "fined very, very, very heavily and then permanently shut down".

This just goes to show how unhinged you are, to the point of being mentally obsessed in your crusade against clean, renewable energy that the orange-haired one doesn't like. It's sad how people can't think for themselves and just blindly follow anything that idiot says.

Kurt

When other industries kill eagles, they get fined. Government has looked the other way with wind turbines. Refusing to release the numbers with FOIA as the first article relates is an example, and that is happening in this administration.

Even Bill Gates has now recanted from the climate cult. Maybe you could try? And there are even climate cult guys like Michael Moore who recognize that wind and solar are NOT the way to go.

The fines for killing eagles ought to apply to everybody, and since wind turbines have been getting a free ride, they ought to be hit harder.

second_red_kite_killed-by_navarre_windfarm_feb_14_2010-1038x576-e1443934236522.jpg
 
Last edited:

The slanted propaganda continues

Nothing you put out is designed to be factual

SF6 is used extensively in the electrical generation and transmission industry

Wind turbines are numerous, and each contains a small sealed switchgear unit.
This makes for dramatic headlines like “SF₆: the climate killer in wind turbines,” but the data shows:

  • A single high‑voltage GIS substation for a city uses far more SF₆ than an entire wind farm.
  • Offshore wind farms use SF₆, but so do all offshore substations, including those serving oil & gas platforms.
Wind is visible, but not the main consumer.

Okay, but how is that going to hold up in a hurricane? Why put such toxic chemicals in vulnerable locations like offshore wind? This stuff is in onshore wind, too, but the article is about the offshore turbines which are far more vulnerable.

And you conveniently ignore the microplastics including Bisphenol A.

Then there are all of the toxic substances in solar panels listed in items #3 and #12 of this article from "Letters About Nature and Technology":

 
Last edited:
Here are some very detailed studies on the costs of wind and solar versus other energy sources that show how wind and solar are more expensive:


That study comes from the Brookings Institute, a rather liberal entity and generally well regarded on the left.


Then there is a great interview by Sir David MacKay, former Chief Scientific Advisor of the UK's Department of Energy and Climate Change on how wind and solar does not make sense. In spite of thinking wind turbines are "beautiful" and not personally opposing wind or solar, and believing in the climate change narrative, he calls using wind and solar for electric supply is "an appalling delusion" This interview was before the UK starting going hog wild on wind and solar, jacking up their power prices. Too bad they did not listen to him. This was Dr. MacKay's last interview before his untimely death

 
Last edited:
Here are some very detailed studies on the costs of wind and solar versus other energy sources that show how wind and solar are more expensive:



Then there is a great interview by Sir David MacKay, former Chief Scientific Advisor of the UK's Department of Energy and Climate Change on how wind and solar does not make sense. In spite of thinking wind turbines are "beautiful" and not personally opposing wind or solar, and believing in the climate change narrative, he calls using wind and solar for electric supply is "an appalling delusion" This interview was before the UK starting going hog wild on wind and solar, jacking up their power prices. Too bad they did not listen to him.

I cannot sort out the summary of the second report you posted

I answered about Katie Singers letter in the thread on silver

She wants to live in the 19th century and breath coal dust
 
I cannot sort out the summary of the second report you posted

I answered about Katie Singers letter in the thread on silver

She wants to live in the 19th century and breath coal dust

Ms. Singers is an enviromentalist. You know, a "tree hugger" and someone who wants to "save the whales" Many of them are not too fond of the environmental downside of wind and solar. Indeed, I much prefer trees and birds and whales over wind turbines and solar panels myself.

Dr. MacKay was scientific advisor to a British government department dealing with energy and climate. He lays out why wind and solar makes no sense. He points to the same thing as many others I have posted - land intensity and intermittency. He also points out that in the UK, the careerists in government, after crunching the numbers, recommended against subsidizing solar, but that parliament voted for it anyway due to lobbying from the solar industry.
 
Last edited:

So, Brett, it only functions about 20% of the time and your (as usual) unidentified source claims it is the "most reliable" of the "renewable" sources?.

Conventional energy runs on average 90% of the time. Most people call hydro and geothermal "renewable" and they also run most of the time.

schuyler-county-unravelled-turbine-5.jpg
 
Brett, you are spamming the site by posting the same thing over and over and over again.
 
Speaking of Spam
How many times have you posted the AI slop picture of the lady holding the Eagle with the wind turbine in the background

8 times ??
10 times ??
or more
 
Speaking of Spam
How many times have you posted the AI slop picture of the lady holding the Eagle with the wind turbine in the background

8 times ??
10 times ??
or more
Probably three. Next time it is appropriate I will use a different dead bird picture. And falsely calling it AI is a cheap shot.

griffon-vultures-navarre-spain.jpeg
 
Speaking of Spam
How many times have you posted the AI slop picture of the lady holding the Eagle with the wind turbine in the background

8 times ??
10 times ??
or more

Yeah, I know. But you gotta tug on those heartstrings, y'know? Nothing like a mauled Eagle to get the people who order the Super Patriot 3000™ Bucket of Dehydrated Food, the Super Patriot 3000™ Portable Solar Generator and the Super Patriot 3000™ silver and gold (plated) commemorative coin set in a total lather.
 
You have never labeled when or where those pictures come from
Why
Because the site you get them from doesn’t give them to you
Those are AI generated slop propaganda pictures
 
You have never labeled when or where those pictures come from
Why
Because the site you get them from doesn’t give them to you
Those are AI generated slop propaganda pictures

BS. Another cheap shot. AI is a fairly recent phenomenon and the pictures predate the widespread use of AI.

Then there are actual carcass counts or bird censuses in places like the UK, Spain, and the Isle of Man which confirm the loss of birds to wind turbines.

To you climate industrial complex anti-environmentalists, birds, including eagles, whales, bats, insects, trees, etc. are expendable as long as it feeds your fake "green" fantasy.
 
How many eagle nests have you visited this year
How many bird counts have you participated in
How many whale breeding lagoons have you visited in the last 10 years
I have done this several times for each category
San Ignacio Lagoon in Baja is my favorite area by far to visit for whale breeding lagoons

I am a realist
If you look up the real statistics
You will find that more eagles are killed by cars as they eat roadkill than killed by wind turbines
Way more eagles are killed by electrocution than by collisions with wind turbines

Every good environmentalist that I know is sure to identify where and when a dead bird is found
Especially an eagle
They do this every time

The fact that your pictures are never ever identified by time or place tells me something is up
I know you didn't make the pictures
You don't know how

But whatever propaganda site you are using certainly knows how to create them
 
Coal use in Australia and its devastation of bird ecosystem


The country that now provides 3 hours of free electricity a day from solar

The country is transitioning away from coal despite the intense propaganda campaign run by coal interests
 
Top