Political Crossfire Forums

[poweRob]

Shell seems to know alt energy is better

I couldnt let this one go by without a comment. This has got to be one of the biggest, most ironic paradoxes to have come down the pipe. Shell with the help of Exxon is building this mini-manless offshore drilling platform that runs completely emissions free off of alternative energies. It is cheaper to build than regular platforms which allows them to build them to access smaller pockets of gases that would otherwise not be feasible to drill in with larger more expensive rigs.

It's quit interesting and telling that they'll invest into using alt energy for their gains but shirk bringing such technologies to the public. Profit margin before logic I guess.



Quote: Shell opens world's first wind-powered gas field

LONDON - The world's first offshore gas field powered entirely by renewable energy has started up in the UK North Sea, project owners Shell and ExxonMobil said on Wednesday.

The Cutter project in the southern North Sea uses a platform powered by wind and solar energy that produce zero carbon dioxide emissions, the firms said in a statement.

[perdidochas]

poweRob wrote: Shell seems to know alt energy is better

I couldnt let this one go by without a comment. This has got to be one of the biggest, most ironic paradoxes to have come down the pipe. Shell with the help of Exxon is building this mini-manless offshore drilling platform that runs completely emissions free off of alternative energies. It is cheaper to build than regular platforms which allows them to build them to access smaller pockets of gases that would otherwise not be feasible to drill in with larger more expensive rigs.

It's quit interesting and telling that they'll invest into using alt energy for their gains but shirk bringing such technologies to the public. Profit margin before logic I guess.


Not all locales are suitable for wind energy. Oil/gas platforms are one of the best places for wind energy. That is why it works. Their are three major problems with wind energy: 1) a suitable location that has fairly constant winds; 2) a suitable location that the neighbors won't mind (a proposed wind power plant off of Nantucket was kiboshed by the Kennedies because it ruined their view); and 3) it kills a lot of birds.

[poweRob]

perdidochas wrote: poweRob wrote: Shell seems to know alt energy is better

I couldnt let this one go by without a comment. This has got to be one of the biggest, most ironic paradoxes to have come down the pipe. Shell with the help of Exxon is building this mini-manless offshore drilling platform that runs completely emissions free off of alternative energies. It is cheaper to build than regular platforms which allows them to build them to access smaller pockets of gases that would otherwise not be feasible to drill in with larger more expensive rigs.

It's quit interesting and telling that they'll invest into using alt energy for their gains but shirk bringing such technologies to the public. Profit margin before logic I guess.


Not all locales are suitable for wind energy. Oil/gas platforms are one of the best places for wind energy. That is why it works. Their are three major problems with wind energy: 1) a suitable location that has fairly constant winds; 2) a suitable location that the neighbors won't mind (a proposed wind power plant off of Nantucket was kiboshed by the Kennedies because it ruined their view); and 3) it kills a lot of birds.

You did notice the solar panels too didn't you? I don't think they jump out and kill birds too. The bird kill bit is something that status quo lovers of the energy market have grabbed on to throw in the face of alt energy lovers. I hear this all the time. No it doesn't kill LOTS of birds if you have a wind generator on your home. Those studies are about wind generating fields.



I guess you have to decide what you want. Status quo polluting energy crisis, or a reduction of the status quo with the expansion of alt energy minus some birds until they decide to make bird whistles to put on top of them to chase the birds away.

[John Galt]

Quote: It's quit [sic] interesting and telling that they'll invest into using alt energy for their gains but shirk bringing such technologies to the public. Profit margin before logic I guess.

Shell and Exxon are not generic "power" companies. This is like saying that since a McDonald's manager eats well on his own he should be bringing decent food to sell at the store. It's not what McDonald's sells. McDonald's sells these shi**y burgers that are not good for anyone but people want that product. Exxon sells gas, people want gas... they are just providing their product. How they get it is immaterial. They don't do wind. They may use the tech but that's not what they do. Criticing them for not providing something that they have never provided and really has nothing to do with what they do provide is silly. You don't goto Taco Bell for perscription drugs, do you?

As for the birds... NO ONE SHOULD CARE.

As for Nantuckians, those people love spending other people's money to do good, but they won't sacrifice anything themselves. They scream bloody murder if you tell them they should make the sacrifices they demand of others, like using alternative energy and "ruining their view." So what if their value of the land goes down? It's for "the good" right? Why aren't they into it? They are perfectly fine in spending billions upon billions of other people's money in projects like the big dig, spending other people's money to "improve" education, drowing women in water, etc, but if you ask them to risk the property values of the property they inherited OH NOES YOUR ASKING TOO MUCH! How dare you build wind plants here! Build them in the evil suburbs where evil SUV drivers live!

[poweRob]

John Galt wrote: Quote: It's quit [sic] interesting and telling that they'll invest into using alt energy for their gains but shirk bringing such technologies to the public. Profit margin before logic I guess.

Shell and Exxon are not generic "power" companies. This is like saying that since a McDonald's manager eats well on his own he should be bringing decent food to sell at the store. It's not what McDonald's sells. McDonald's sells these shi**y burgers that are not good for anyone but people want that product. Exxon sells gas, people want gas... they are just providing their product. How they get it is immaterial. They don't do wind. They may use the tech but that's not what they do. Criticing them for not providing something that they have never provided and really has nothing to do with what they do provide is silly. You don't goto Taco Bell for perscription drugs, do you?

As for the birds... NO ONE SHOULD CARE.

As for Nantuckians, those people love spending other people's money to do good, but they won't sacrifice anything themselves. They scream bloody murder if you tell them they should make the sacrifices they demand of others, like using alternative energy and "ruining their view." So what if their value of the land goes down? It's for "the good" right? Why aren't they into it? They are perfectly fine in spending billions upon billions of other people's money in projects like the big dig, spending other people's money to "improve" education, drowing women in water, etc, but if you ask them to risk the property values of the property they inherited OH NOES YOUR ASKING TOO MUCH! How dare you build wind plants here! Build them in the evil suburbs where evil SUV drivers live!

*ahem*

Quote: Shell WindEnergy
Generating wind power on a commercial scale

Wind power is a naturally abundant source of energy and is the most economically viable form of renewable energy at this moment. Continuous improvements of turbine technology are bringing down generating costs and government-backed market incentives provide additional stimulus to the sector.

Shell WindEnergy focuses on development and operation of utility-scale wind farms that add significant power, flexibility and capacity to the grid. Working with our partners in Europe and the US, we have advanced rapidly from early pilot projects to commercial-scale wind energy production. As wind energy becomes increasingly competitive with conventional power sources, we aim to be one of the industry’s leading players and a force for progress in this rapidly developing sector. Shell WindEnergy does not manufacture wind turbines.


The point is, record profits off of price gouging hasn't helped their supposed wind energy division much at all. It is a gimmick to make them look like an enviro friendly company. Just watch their commercials.

...and yes, they are hypocrits in Nantuckett.

[perdidochas]

poweRob wrote: perdidochas wrote: poweRob wrote: Shell seems to know alt energy is better

I couldnt let this one go by without a comment. This has got to be one of the biggest, most ironic paradoxes to have come down the pipe. Shell with the help of Exxon is building this mini-manless offshore drilling platform that runs completely emissions free off of alternative energies. It is cheaper to build than regular platforms which allows them to build them to access smaller pockets of gases that would otherwise not be feasible to drill in with larger more expensive rigs.

It's quit interesting and telling that they'll invest into using alt energy for their gains but shirk bringing such technologies to the public. Profit margin before logic I guess.


Not all locales are suitable for wind energy. Oil/gas platforms are one of the best places for wind energy. That is why it works. Their are three major problems with wind energy: 1) a suitable location that has fairly constant winds; 2) a suitable location that the neighbors won't mind (a proposed wind power plant off of Nantucket was kiboshed by the Kennedies because it ruined their view); and 3) it kills a lot of birds.

You did notice the solar panels too didn't you? I don't think they jump out and kill birds too. The bird kill bit is something that status quo lovers of the energy market have grabbed on to throw in the face of alt energy lovers. I hear this all the time. No it doesn't kill LOTS of birds if you have a wind generator on your home. Those studies are about wind generating fields.

Wind generating fields are the only practical way to use wind generated power for most of us. From what I've researched, wind is becoming more and more practical. It's not quite as cheap as other sources, but it's getting there. However, to ignore the possible harm as just nay-saying, is the same attitude that has caused a lot of human environmental problems.



poweRob wrote: I guess you have to decide what you want. Status quo polluting energy crisis, or a reduction of the status quo with the expansion of alt energy minus some birds until they decide to make bird whistles to put on top of them to chase the birds away.

It depends on which birds.... If it were mainly just sea gulls, "bye, bye flying rats....."

[poweRob]

perdidochas wrote: poweRob wrote: perdidochas wrote: poweRob wrote: Shell seems to know alt energy is better

I couldnt let this one go by without a comment. This has got to be one of the biggest, most ironic paradoxes to have come down the pipe. Shell with the help of Exxon is building this mini-manless offshore drilling platform that runs completely emissions free off of alternative energies. It is cheaper to build than regular platforms which allows them to build them to access smaller pockets of gases that would otherwise not be feasible to drill in with larger more expensive rigs.

It's quit interesting and telling that they'll invest into using alt energy for their gains but shirk bringing such technologies to the public. Profit margin before logic I guess.


Not all locales are suitable for wind energy. Oil/gas platforms are one of the best places for wind energy. That is why it works. Their are three major problems with wind energy: 1) a suitable location that has fairly constant winds; 2) a suitable location that the neighbors won't mind (a proposed wind power plant off of Nantucket was kiboshed by the Kennedies because it ruined their view); and 3) it kills a lot of birds.

You did notice the solar panels too didn't you? I don't think they jump out and kill birds too. The bird kill bit is something that status quo lovers of the energy market have grabbed on to throw in the face of alt energy lovers. I hear this all the time. No it doesn't kill LOTS of birds if you have a wind generator on your home. Those studies are about wind generating fields.

Wind generating fields are the only practical way to use wind generated power for most of us. From what I've researched, wind is becoming more and more practical. It's not quite as cheap as other sources, but it's getting there. However, to ignore the possible harm as just nay-saying, is the same attitude that has caused a lot of human environmental problems.



poweRob wrote: I guess you have to decide what you want. Status quo polluting energy crisis, or a reduction of the status quo with the expansion of alt energy minus some birds until they decide to make bird whistles to put on top of them to chase the birds away.

It depends on which birds.... If it were mainly just sea gulls, "bye, bye flying rats....."

Or pidgeons. :lol:

The solar wind combo is a great tag team. When the suns out it may be still air, but when it's cloudy, it's most likely windy.

The wind generators they ahve on their rig look to be home sized and not commercial sized. If you don't go too big with your generator, the maintenence stays quite low. If you get up there in size, you'll need a bit more hands on. I'd rather go solar for low to no maintenance reasons but the costs are often prohibitive.

[mathurin]

just to clarify rob

we didnt latch onto the birds, environmentalists did, i doubt they are status quo lovers
we latched onto them because the courts seem to agree with the silly bird-lovers, so until you can reduce the number of birds they kill, any attempt to make more wind farms can be blocked by the bird-lovers

killing half a dozen birds a year is no skin off my nose, but its not really my decision

[poweRob]

mathurin wrote: just to clarify rob

we didnt latch onto the birds, environmentalists did, i doubt they are status quo lovers
we latched onto them because the courts seem to agree with the silly bird-lovers, so until you can reduce the number of birds they kill, any attempt to make more wind farms can be blocked by the bird-lovers

killing half a dozen birds a year is no skin off my nose, but its not really my decision

I know where it came from. Enviro studies. It's just that the people who tend to throw that in my face are never enviro pushers but always the right wingers who are usually pissed at such studies. I find that irritating as hell.

If a study by enviro's came out talking about how many birds where killed on the highway by cars, these same people throwing this study in my face everytime I mention wind generators would spend countless hours bashing the study itself. Now they are praising it to confront effectual progress.

It's like arguing for the sake of arguing and pulling from sources they'd rather or usually hate... just to argue.

[perdidochas]

poweRob wrote: mathurin wrote: just to clarify rob

we didnt latch onto the birds, environmentalists did, i doubt they are status quo lovers
we latched onto them because the courts seem to agree with the silly bird-lovers, so until you can reduce the number of birds they kill, any attempt to make more wind farms can be blocked by the bird-lovers

killing half a dozen birds a year is no skin off my nose, but its not really my decision

I know where it came from. Enviro studies. It's just that the people who tend to throw that in my face are never enviro pushers but always the right wingers who are usually pissed at such studies. I find that irritating as hell.

If a study by enviro's came out talking about how many birds where killed on the highway by cars, these same people throwing this study in my face everytime I mention wind generators would spend countless hours bashing the study itself. Now they are praising it to confront effectual progress.

It's like arguing for the sake of arguing and pulling from sources they'd rather or usually hate... just to argue.

Actually, part of it came from an early large scale experiment in California. They chose a high wind area that happened to be a favorite spot of hawks and other birds of prey, and got a huge bird kill.

After researching it some more, I'm more in agreement with you about the bird kill issue. It's not a big deal, in general, but it should be thought of whenever siting a major windmill field.

[mathurin]

regardless i dont care, i feel it is very stupid to ignore renewable energy because some birds die, i dont have a problem with it

[Winchester]

mathurin wrote: regardless i dont care, i feel it is very stupid to ignore renewable energy because some birds die, i dont have a problem with it

It is stupid. We need more hydroelectric power as well, but those projects are more difficult to build now because of the impact on native fish species. There are costs/benefits to every type of power source, I'm on the side that clean, renewable sources > fish and birds.

[ieatfood]

Just becuase they use alternative energy on an unmanned outpost in the middle of the ocean does not mean that alternative energy is practical for use in other situations.

They use solar panels on those mars rovers. Does that mean that NASA thinks that solar is more efficient than oil? Hell no. It just means that on the surface of mars, oil can't be delivered by your local oil company and so solar is the only way you can get energy. Same thing with an oil platform in the middle of the ocean.

It doesn't say anything about the feasability of solar or wind in generating energy for the masses.

[poweRob]

mathurin wrote: regardless i dont care, i feel it is very stupid to ignore renewable energy because some birds die, i dont have a problem with it

People put deer whistles on their cars and they work. There has to be some easy simple device fix to mount on a wind generator's structure to divert birds away. Some frequency. Something. THey'll find it and it will be simple.

[Winchester]

poweRob wrote: mathurin wrote: regardless i dont care, i feel it is very stupid to ignore renewable energy because some birds die, i dont have a problem with it

People put deer whistles on their cars and they work. There has to be some easy simple device fix to mount on a wind generator's structure to divert birds away. Some frequency. Something. THey'll find it and it will be simple.

I question if deer whistles really work. I've known two people who had them and still hit deer. I've even tried them and still had to avoid deer the old fashioned way as they didn't get out of my way.

But not to degrade your point, I'm sure their is something that can be done to mitigate bird kills and if not hopefully they'll learn to avoid windmills on their own.

[Free Thinkr]

poweRob wrote: mathurin wrote: regardless i dont care, i feel it is very stupid to ignore renewable energy because some birds die, i dont have a problem with it

People put deer whistles on their cars and they work. There has to be some easy simple device fix to mount on a wind generator's structure to divert birds away. Some frequency. Something. THey'll find it and it will be simple.
I remember back in high school we had a computer programming class, and there was this bit in our book on sounds. It was explaining sound frequencies, and how we happened to find out that a certain frequency (7 hz, IIRC) causes chickens brains to hemorrhage; apparently a factory by a chicken farm was producing a 7hz sound, resulting in massive chicken deaths.

I say find the frequency that kills gulls; I hate them. That or find the "brown note." :P

Fun note: Found a link confirming my memory from back in '97 is spot on.

[poweRob]

Winchester wrote: poweRob wrote: mathurin wrote: regardless i dont care, i feel it is very stupid to ignore renewable energy because some birds die, i dont have a problem with it

People put deer whistles on their cars and they work. There has to be some easy simple device fix to mount on a wind generator's structure to divert birds away. Some frequency. Something. THey'll find it and it will be simple.

I question if deer whistles really work. I've known two people who had them and still hit deer. I've even tried them and still had to avoid deer the old fashioned way as they didn't get out of my way.

But not to degrade your point, I'm sure their is something that can be done to mitigate bird kills and if not hopefully they'll learn to avoid windmills on their own.

I had heard from people that they work well but you have to frequently clean them out or they don't. They allegedly get clogged quickly with bugs and dirt. I've heard both sides though. Some people laugh at them while others swear by them.

[cap'n queasy]

Alt energy needs a visionary. Someone who thinks outside the box.

Someone who is willing to risk it all on an unrealized great idea and become the next Bill Gates.