Denmark gets 47% of its electricity from wind in 2019

[remake it + 288]

1 hour ago, Douglas Buckland said:

Getting away from the number crunching, when I was working in Denmark (circa late 90’s), at least half of the people I spoke to in Copenhagen hated what these windmills were doing to their vistas and countryside.

Does this even enter the debate for wind energy?

No.

[Rasmus Jorgensen + 1,169]

6 hours ago, Douglas Buckland said:

Getting away from the number crunching, when I was working in Denmark (circa late 90’s), at least half of the people I spoke to in Copenhagen hated what these windmills were doing to their vistas and countryside.

Does this even enter the debate for wind energy?

I think I have mentioned this before - the critiscm of this was largely from communities effected by this. Same way fishermen complain over offshore oil and gas installations etc... 

[Boat + 1,323]

7 hours ago, Douglas Buckland said:

Getting away from the number crunching, when I was working in Denmark (circa late 90’s), at least half of the people I spoke to in Copenhagen hated what these windmills were doing to their vistas and countryside.

Does this even enter the debate for wind energy?

Ohio for example decided to support coal and has very little renewable penetration. But why I’m not sure. Each region makes their own decisions which in my view is better than getting the feds involved. 

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

2 hours ago, Rasmus Jorgensen said:

I think I have mentioned this before - the critiscm of this was largely from communities effected by this. Same way fishermen complain over offshore oil and gas installations etc... 

Regardless, there were many people opposed to windmill installations who just got railroaded for ‘the good of the masses’.

[Rasmus Jorgensen + 1,169]

3 hours ago, Douglas Buckland said:

Regardless, there were many people opposed to windmill installations who just got railroaded for ‘the good of the masses’.

I know it is blatant whataboutism, but I cannot resist

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Lsh1zdQJ6oU

[NickW + 2,714]

19 hours ago, Douglas Buckland said:

Getting away from the number crunching, when I was working in Denmark (circa late 90’s), at least half of the people I spoke to in Copenhagen hated what these windmills were doing to their vistas and countryside.

Does this even enter the debate for wind energy?

Not much on the net to suggest what public opinion is although this suggest 90% approval - from 2015 article

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/aug/10/denmark-renewable-wind-farm-energy

By guaranteeing the community a say in the planning process, this method has contributed to wind farms' social acceptability. Nine out of 10 Danes cite wind power as the main priority for developing renewable energies, according to a recent survey.

[NickW + 2,714]

10 hours ago, Douglas Buckland said:

Regardless, there were many people opposed to windmill installations who just got railroaded for ‘the good of the masses’.

Imagine a system where every development (including oil and gas) had to have 100% support.

Nothing would ever get built. 

[Boat + 1,323]

11 hours ago, Douglas Buckland said:

Regardless, there were many people opposed to windmill installations who just got railroaded for ‘the good of the masses’.

Dude, as usual you can’t see the Forrest for the tree. Red right Republican oligarchs run the windmills and their future in red states like Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas and N Dakota. A liberal can’t get a word in edgewise in those states. The big solar push is next. Oligarchs don’t care about the view. They only care to take market share from FF oligarchs who are also Republican and also fight over politician influence. Go MAGA by allowing another foreign refinery run off of foreign oil that ships refined products to foreign countries and quit worrying about your view. 

Edited January 6, 2020 by Boat

[NickW + 2,714]

On 1/5/2020 at 11:13 PM, markslawson said:

So you did - fair enough.. Sure, the Danish have always done well.. although the annual growth rates poijnted to in your article aren't spectacular or even particularly good.. just think what they could do with reasonable power prices.. 

For a mature developed economy 2-2.5% is considered to be a sustainable growth rate. 

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

3 hours ago, NickW said:

Imagine a system where every development (including oil and gas) had to have 100% support.

Nothing would ever get built. 

There you go again. Who said anything about 100% support?

You are saying that ‘eminent domain’ trumps any other consideration, the greatest good for the greatest number. Sounds pretty good until you have to identify WHO determines what constitutes the greatest good. 

[markslawson + 1,057]

5 hours ago, NickW said:

For a mature developed economy 2-2.5% is considered to be a sustainable growth rate. 

The Danish growth is  below that. I think these were the stats you were relying on.. GDP Annual Growth Rate in Denmark averaged 1.72 percent from 1992 until 2019, reaching an all time high of 6.40 percent in the fourth quarter of 1994 and a record low of -6.20 percent in the second quarter of 2009. That's a bit low but it depends on population growth as well.. but still its better to have lower prices for power.. anyway, time to move on..

[remake it + 288]

4 hours ago, Douglas Buckland said:

You are saying that ‘eminent domain’ trumps any other consideration, the greatest good for the greatest number. Sounds pretty good until you have to identify WHO determines what constitutes the greatest good. 

No, you have again created a straw man and shall be burned.  Wind farms are usually developed on commercial terms between land owners and the energy company, and most nations have procedures in place which allow for "consultation" before approval.

[NickW + 2,714]

8 hours ago, Douglas Buckland said:

There you go again. Who said anything about 100% support?

You are saying that ‘eminent domain’ trumps any other consideration, the greatest good for the greatest number. Sounds pretty good until you have to identify WHO determines what constitutes the greatest good. 

 

Wind power has multiparty support in Denmark. From what I gather the majority of the population support this and can challenge through the democratic system. There are planning policies on deployment to protect residents from potential disamenity & nuisance from turbines (primarily noise and vibration) along with considerations for effects on wildlife and commericla activities - ex fishing. 

What alternative system would you suggest?

[NickW + 2,714]

4 hours ago, markslawson said:

The Danish growth is  below that. I think these were the stats you were relying on.. GDP Annual Growth Rate in Denmark averaged 1.72 percent from 1992 until 2019, reaching an all time high of 6.40 percent in the fourth quarter of 1994 and a record low of -6.20 percent in the second quarter of 2009. That's a bit low but it depends on population growth as well.. but still its better to have lower prices for power.. anyway, time to move on..

The net cost of power in Denmark is typical of EU averages. Its the taxes which elevate the cost. 

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

1 hour ago, NickW said:

 

Wind power has multiparty support in Denmark. From what I gather the majority of the population support this and can challenge through the democratic system. There are planning policies on deployment to protect residents from potential disamenity & nuisance from turbines (primarily noise and vibration) along with considerations for effects on wildlife and commericla activities - ex fishing. 

What alternative system would you suggest?

Why would I suggest anything? Regardless what I suggest, you’d feel it is your duty on this site to disagree.

These circular debates get tiring.

[remake it + 288]

11 minutes ago, Douglas Buckland said:

Why would I suggest anything? Regardless what I suggest, you’d feel it is your duty on this site to disagree.

These circular debates get tiring.

It's lopsided, and you keep getting lopped!

[NickW + 2,714]

14 minutes ago, Douglas Buckland said:

Why would I suggest anything? Regardless what I suggest, you’d feel it is your duty on this site to disagree.

These circular debates get tiring.

You said this

Regardless, there were many people opposed to windmill installations who just got railroaded for ‘the good of the masses’.

I would contend that they weren't railroaded. Planning processes have checks and balances. 

 

I gave you examples and asked you if you had an alternative to this process.

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

 

“I would contend that they weren't railroaded. Planning processes have checks and balances.”

 

If you actually believe this, then I have some ocean front property in Arizona I’d like to sell you.

[NickW + 2,714]

1 hour ago, Douglas Buckland said:

 

“I would contend that they weren't railroaded. Planning processes have checks and balances.”

 

If you actually believe this, then I have some ocean front property in Arizona I’d like to sell you.

I don't know about the US but in the UK and Europe plenty of proposed schemes fail or are significantly amended at the planning stage which suggests a reasonably robust planning and consultation process. 

[Rob Plant + 2,756]

Just now, NickW said:

I don't know about the US but in the UK and Europe plenty of proposed schemes fail or are significantly amended at the planning stage which suggests a reasonably robust planning and consultation process. 

Nick the "planning and consultation process" in the US must be woeful as Douglas's view is pretty typical of the US view. A NIMBY viewpoint if ever there was one.

The US is enormous and there should be areas where wind turbines can be located in sparsely populated states (or offshore) that can contribute to their energy requirements. If we can do it in the UK where there is sod all land available then I'm damn sure you can do it in the States.

[SERWIN + 749]

Sounds at first to be some real feat of engineering, but when you realize that Denmark has a population of less than 6 million, not really that big of a deal. Denmarks population is smaller than the three largest cities in Texas, we have more wind power on the upper plains than they do, I would bet.

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,190]

On 1/5/2020 at 9:48 AM, Marcin said:

Dutch are in much more precarious position yet managed to take care of North Sea invasion. Trump is playing with the globe like a child ( old one) like Carey in Bruce Almighty.

https://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gistemp/show_station.cgi?id=620040300000&dt=1&ds=1

Above is the real Iceland data.

Here is the so called "data" being "used" in GISTEMP "models"

https://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gistemp/show_station.cgi?id=620040300000&dt=1&ds=12

No, Denmark is not flooding due to man-made hysteria.  In fact: it is rising out of the ocean due to hydrostatic rebound. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-glacial_rebound#/media/File:PGR_Paulson2007_Rate_of_Lithospheric_Uplift_due_to_post-glacial_rebound.png

In fact: Reyjkavik weather station is in a horrible city biased position: https://realclimatescience.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/Image1301132020.png.    So, the above graphs for current temps should be even lower.  

You can do the above for station after station all over the world.  But, "journalists" and "academics" are too damned lazy to do so. 

PS: I'll bet this feature(first couple of links) quickly disappears off the web just as the Old USCRN data before 2005 also disappeared because they could "claim" all 114 weather stations were not present even though ~half of these USCRN weather stations have been around many decades before 2005 but were called a different name or just not "complete".  I have been driving past one such station(Darrington, WA, USA) going on 4+ decades now.   When did they eliminate this "old" "useless" 1990's and some 1980's data?  2014, because everyone was pointing out that these unique weather stations, purposefully set up FAR from all city BIAS, showed, cooling across the USA from Hawaii to Alaska to Maine to Florida.  No, the USA is not the world, just shows there is no actual science happening, but rather plenty of propaganda. 

Edited January 7, 2020 by footeab@yahoo.com

[footeab@yahoo.com + 2,190]

22 hours ago, NickW said:

Imagine a system where every development (including oil and gas) had to have 100% support.

Nothing would ever get built. 

Vast difference: O&G is private money.  Wind turbines have been 100% subsidy(Paid my ass for several years! THX!)

[NickW + 2,714]

16 minutes ago, footeab@yahoo.com said:

Vast difference: O&G is private money.  Wind turbines have been 100% subsidy(Paid my ass for several years! THX!)

Completely irrelevant point in regard to subject matter which is planning process, notwithstanding the point its also a gross exaggeration. 

[NickW + 2,714]

21 minutes ago, footeab@yahoo.com said:

 

No, Denmark is not flooding due to man-made hysteria.  In fact: it is rising out of the ocean due to hydrostatic rebound. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Post-glacial_rebound#/media/File:PGR_Paulson2007_Rate_of_Lithospheric_Uplift_due_to_post-glacial_rebound.png

Perhaps take a look at that map. It suggest most of Denmark (except the northern part) is sinking by 1-1.5mm per year which is the opposite of what you are saying.