Wind power is an increasingly popular form of renewable energy. However, when it’s time to replace the huge turbine blades... disposal is a problem. Now, scientists report a new composite resin suitable for making these behemoths that could later be recycled into new turbine blades or a variety of other products, including [kitchen and bathroom] countertops, [road vehicle] taillights, diapers—and gummy bears.
These eminently edible gummy bears were made from a "bioplastic" resin that has been tested by researchers at Michigan State University.
The researchers say that their new resin could be used to manufacture the very largest wind turbine blades, and that such future wind energy "behemoths" would be more readily recyclable than the glass fiber composite wind turbine blades that are currently representative of the industry. Wind turbine blades made from this resin could be recycled into many in-demand products—including newly manufactured wind turbine blades.
Let me be proactive and consider the (likely) question "Why would it be useful to recycle wind turbine blades into newly manufactured wind turbine blades?"
Wind turbine blades have a fixed service lifetime. And there could be advantage in preemptively replacing even serviceable blades with larger blades, or blades of a different and improved design. Replacing wind turbine blades before the end of their originally projected service life. That's upping the wind energy game from checkers to chess (metaphorically speaking).
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 12-26-2022).]
These eminently edible gummy bears were made from a "bioplastic" resin that has been tested by researchers at Michigan State University.
This screams: We want more grant $moneys$ that gives us over paid phd-heads something to do and not produce results.
How about hemp. It can be used for aaannnyyytthhhaanngg, so the potheads say. Are these guys talking bong resin?
R.I., are you promoting bong resin edibles? Maybe if they come up with rainbow colors, you know the colors that kids are attracted to and the groomers use to attract the kiddies.
How about they use the hides of those who were registered D-Evil whom passed away (is that term even pc?). That's some good recycling there.
[This message has been edited by WonderBoy (edited 12-26-2022).]
You must've backed Theranos. $$$$$$$$ makes the central bank and it's CONTROLLERS happy.
Are they factoring in climate change and "projected" loss of crops? You and they paint pictures with liquified BU!!$HIT. Master arteeests y'all are. Don't forget to carry the one with your fuzz logic.
"World's biggest floating offshore wind farm begins construction in Hainan, China" ShanghaiEye魔都眼 January 3, 2023.
quote
The project is planned to be constructed in two phases. The construction scale of the first phase is 12 wind turbines with an installed capacity of [200 MW], which is scheduled to be grid-connected by the end of 2025. The second phase, to be put into operation by the end of 2027, will add another [800 MW] of capacity.
When completed, [it's] set to generate more than [4 GW-hours] of clean electricity per year.
As one of the key projects of the 14th Five-Year Plan Period (2021-25), it is required to be in line with carbon peak and carbon neutrality goals, as well as Hainan's requirements of building a new energy system.
It will involve development of domestically made technology systems for high-capacity floating wind power projects, that can be used to promote the upgrading of the offshore wind power industry in other parts of China.
"You wouldn't want to be responsible for a Floating Wind Turbine gap, would you?"
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 01-04-2023).]
This is an interactive web page. Anyone can select from various options and parameters to create the customized or "bespoke" data plot of their dreams.
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 01-14-2023).]
According to the World Economic Forum, the conference where the ultra wealthy fly into Davos to party with Hollywood celebrities. A casual dressed Burning Man of sorts where they all get drunk and do blow and hookers to discuss the world's problems.
This is what they came up with while spewing more C02 than 99.9% of the population does.
[This message has been edited by Wichita (edited 01-16-2023).]
These eminently edible gummy bears were made from a "bioplastic" resin that has been tested by researchers at Michigan State University.
The researchers say that their new resin could be used to manufacture the very largest wind turbine blades, and that such future wind energy "behemoths" would be more readily recyclable than the glass fiber composite wind turbine blades that are currently representative of the industry. Wind turbine blades made from this resin could be recycled into many in-demand products—including newly manufactured wind turbine blades.
Let me be proactive and consider the (likely) question "Why would it be useful to recycle wind turbine blades into newly manufactured wind turbine blades?"
Wind turbine blades have a fixed service lifetime. And there could be advantage in preemptively replacing even serviceable blades with larger blades, or blades of a different and improved design. Replacing wind turbine blades before the end of their originally projected service life. That's upping the wind energy game from checkers to chess (metaphorically speaking).
This is dangerous territory. I really like gummy bears...
I still think they should / could be using those old blades for something... like making roofing materials, etc. It kills me that they just felt it necessary to dump them all in the desert.
Originally posted by 82-T/A [At Work]: I still think they should / could be using those old blades for something... like making roofing materials, etc. It kills me that they just felt it necessary to dump them all in the desert.
Originally posted by rinselberg: ... Evidence-Based Decarbonization Methodologies.
That BS, , may sound warm and fuzzy to the Green Nuts but it is bunk. Go ahead, tell us how it decarbonizes even a little bit.
quote
Originally posted by rinselberg: Think of a truck that shuttles freight between a container ship port and a close by rail yard, in an intermodal freight transport context. It creates a relatively short stretch of roadway where overhead electrification for trucks, or fast battery recharging infrastructure gets a lot of decarbonizing "bang for the buck." It also lends itself to an efficient deployment of "green" hydrogen infrastructure, for trucks that are electrified with hydrogen-powered fuel cells instead of (or as an optional mode, along with) batteries. The exact situation I describe. For trucks shuttling freight between a container ship port and a close by rail yard. I have some posts about it in some other threads.
I heard you spout this nonsense before. You mentioned a six mile electric zone. What are you trying to do ? Save the planet six miles at a time ? Now you are pipe dreaming about hydrogen fuel cells and green hydrogen infrastructure. With all the planet ingredients in batteries, Why didn't we start with hydrogen fuel cells, ?
Originally posted by cliffw: You mentioned a six mile electric zone. What are you trying to do? Save the planet six miles at a time?
That's a reference to one of the trucking routes that the California Air Resources Board or CARB has their (beady) eyes on, as one of the first trucking routes or corridors that they want to have decarbonized with electric and/or hydrogen fuel cell-powered trucks.
It's a route where trucks are shuttling freight from a container ship port, along a six-mile stretch of roadway to railroad terminals and distribution warehouses where the goods are loaded onto freight trains or other trucks for long distance and nation-wide distribution. And vice-versa. The same trucks move freight along the six-mile corridor in the opposite direction, from railroad terminals and distribution warehouses to the container ship port, for export.
It's decarbonization, and it also addresses the disproportionate exposure of the people in these neighborhoods to the harmful emissions from the currently diesel-powered truck traffic on this six-mile corridor and others like it. As I (tried to) summarize in the second post or first reply, way back on page 1: https://www.fiero.nl/forum/.../HTML/000377.html#p1
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 01-19-2023).]
Originally posted by rinselberg: ... California Air Resources Board ...
... decarbonized
Your a funny guy.
What should I or anyone else give a damn damn about CARB, ? Have you read their mission statement? The California Air Resources Board is one of six boards, departments, and offices under the umbrella of the California Environmental Protection Agency. Why only six ? How many OverLords do you want, ?
CARB is a self grandiose organization.
Again with "decarbonization", ! You never did define that word. Why is it that progressives make up words or re-define existing words ? I don't understand it. Now we are told "equity" means equality. It does not. What the Progressives mean is that everyone gets a trophy. When actually equity means an increase in outcome due to an increase in effort.
I could go on about Progressive word hijacks, but, that is not about this particular discussion.
quote
Originally posted by rinselberg: It's a route where trucks are shuttling freight from a container ship port, along a six-mile stretch of roadway to railroad terminals and distribution warehouses where the goods are loaded onto freight trains or other trucks for long distance and nation-wide distribution. And vice-versa. The same trucks move freight along the six-mile corridor in the opposite direction, from railroad terminals and distribution warehouses to the container ship port, for export.
BRILLIANT !
What you think will save the planet, does NOTHING ! Moving the trucks six miles away solves NOTHING. Tell me how you think it will.
quote
Originally posted by rinselberg: It's decarbonization, and it also addresses the disproportionate exposure of the people in these neighborhoods to the harmful emissions from the currently diesel-powered truck traffic on this six-mile corridor and others like it. As I (tried to) summarize in the second post or first reply, way back on page 1: https://www.fiero.nl/forum/.../HTML/000377.html#p1
"Disproportionate" . That's rich. Not as rich as "comprehension" blah, blah, blah. But it is rich. What makes those people in these neighborhoods "slaves" to those those neighborhoods, .
Originally posted by cliffw: What you think will save the planet, does NOTHING ! Moving the trucks six miles away solves NOTHING. Tell me how you think it will.
I'm talking about short stretches of roadway where currently, diesel-powered trucks load freight that's been offloaded from container ships and move it farther inland, where there are railroad and long distance trucking facilities to ship the freight to destinations nationwide. Imported goods.
The same diesel-powered trucks also move freight in the opposite direction, from the railroad and long distance trucking warehouses, to the container ship port where the freight is containerized and loaded onto container ships for export.
These diesel-powered trucks are shuttling back and forth over relatively short stretches of roadway. One such stretch is about six miles, but that's just the example that stuck in my mind. Six miles. Ten miles. Three miles. There's nothing "magic" about six miles.
So you have short stretches of roadway with a lot of traffic from the same diesel trucks all the time, shuttling freight in both directions.
These are the roadways that the California Air Resources Board or CARB wants to prioritize in terms of replacing the currently operating diesel-powered "shuttle trucks" with electric-powered shuttle trucks, or hydrogen-powered shuttle trucks.
You might want to go back to the very beginning of this thread and look at the brief article that was posted by MidEngineManiac when he started this thread.
$cientology founder, and drug crazed lunatic, L. Ron Hubbard was convinced that plants can communicate and that they are also infested with the spirits of dead space aliens.
Crazy people abound.
It must be something in the air.
[This message has been edited by randye (edited 01-24-2023).]
This (what I quote here from another forum member) is like 10,000 miles distant (so to speak) from the Original Post, which was about the California Air Resources Board or CARB's ideas about replacing diesel-powered truck traffic with trucks that could transport the same amount of freight over the same highways and service roads, but with lower carbon dioxide or CO2 emissions.
quote
The proposal would require medium and heavy-duty trucks entering ports and rail yards to be fully electric by 2035.
I wont say that I myself have not helped "defocus" the thread from what it was originally about.
But I think it's well to take stock of where this thread has arrived, relative to where it began. It's like one of those long distance tornados that touches down and starts doing damage, and then stays down as it moves along the ground for—I dunno—70 miles or something, doing damage all the way along its path... I'd have to check to see what's considered an upper limit for these kinds of storms.
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 01-28-2023).]
Originally posted by rinselberg: I'm talking about short stretches of roadway where currently, diesel-powered trucks load freight that's been offloaded from container ships and move it farther inland, where there are railroad and long distance trucking facilities to ship the freight to destinations nationwide.
Yeah. That would save the planet and all life forms on it, .
Move all the loading areas six miles away.
[This message has been edited by cliffw (edited 01-29-2023).]
Originally posted by cliffw: Yeah. That would save the planet and all life forms on it, Move all the loading areas six miles away.
No one is talking about moving any loading areas.
It's just a fact that there are locations in California (and likely in some other states) where there's a port facility that loads and unloads cargo from container ships or other cargo ships, and then, some miles distant ("six miles" is just one example, that I remember), a railroad terminal and/or long distance trucking warehouses and loading and unloading facilities.
These are already built facilities, where diesel-powered trucks are constantly shuttling and moving freight in both directions between the two ends of these road corridors.
The forum member who started this thread "five pages and nine score messages ago" posted a link to a report about the idea that's been promoted by the California Air Resources Board or "CARB", to replace these diesel-powered trucks with electric trucks. Just the trucks that are shuttling back and forth on these short corridors of roadway that are used for these intermodal transport operations.
So, the container is handled twice. Twice as many cranes, gantries, lifts and operators. Twice as much energy consumption. More money for the unions and the state.
Trucks which operate intrastate in Cal fall under a whole new set of Caltrans and CARB regs, and pay additional fees to the state. If you pickup and deliver within Cal once, you must now register with Caltrans. It doesn't matter that you are a 48 state carrier domiciled in another state. I learned this "the hard way". Think of California as a foreign country.
CARB already has a whole host of additional regulations specifically for trucks going into the ports.
So, the container is handled twice. Twice as many cranes, gantries, lifts and operators. Twice as much energy consumption. More money for the unions and the state.
Trucks which operate intrastate in Cal fall under a whole new set of Caltrans and CARB regs, and pay additional fees to the state. If you pickup and deliver within Cal once, you must now register with Caltrans. It doesn't matter that you are a 48 state carrier domiciled in another state.
I learned this "the hard way". Think of California as a foreign country.
CARB already has a whole host of additional regulations specifically for trucks going into the ports.
I can't imagine that California is the only state that has these "short road corridor" trucking scenarios, with diesel-powered trucks moving freight in both directions and "shuttling" between two long distance freight transport hubs, like a container ship port and a railroad or long distance trucking terminus. I guess there could be road corridors of the same kind, where one of the end points is a major airport. Air freight.
I'm sure that California's regulatory schemes would be "distinctive", but I have seen where Siemens has been trying to promote the idea of overhead electrification for short haul trucking in various places around the world. There has been a demonstration project of the Siemens "eHIghway" system for short haul trucking at the port of Long Beach, just south of Los Angeles.
Overhead electrification for trucks is not the only "play". CARB is part of a consortium that has been promoting a diesel truck engine design that is optimized for lower carbon dioxide and other kinds of emissions. I don't know where that stands, either. I could probably find a YouTube video about it. That's where I remember seeing it.
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 01-29-2023).]
When I worked for JB, we had separate fleets for ocean and rail cans.
The Ocean fleet picked up at the ports of Long Beach or LA and dropped in Phx or El Paso. These cities are the "other end", with big container yards.
It is similar with rail cans, where many cities have rail yards with container handling equipment. The can will go by truck from the rail yard to its destination.
Rail cans which come in on ships can go directly on the rail.
When CARB started putting the squeeze on container trucks at the ports, it put a lot of small, independent businessmen, many immigrants, out of work.
edit: Also, each time you handle cargo, it introduces additional delay in the supply chain. I don't know about you, but I am sick of hearing about supply chain delays.
[This message has been edited by williegoat (edited 01-29-2023).]
edit: Also, each time you handle cargo, it introduces additional delay in the supply chain. I don't know about you, but I am sick of hearing about supply chain delays.
A-yup.
That globalization, centralization, zone-specialization agenda worked out REAL well, didnt it ?
I recall 1st hearing the idea in the early-80's and thought "what a bunch of ****in idiots". My opinion of it has only gotten worse over the years. A 15-16-17 year old kid could see a million "what if that happens" holes in the concept, but all those willie-e-coyote geniuses couldn't. So now 40 years later we have millions of lost jobs, almost nil manufacturing capability, and rely on an communist enemy for goods supply.
"The UK is seen as a world leader in renewable energy technology such as offshore wind turbines."
The UK is uniquely situated, geographically, as one of the best spots in the world to take advantage of wind energy. About 25% of the country's electricity comes from wind power. The major source of power generation in the UK is natural gas, which accounts for about 40%. In addition, gas is used to heat water and living spaces.
You just know that the people who create and circulate memes or cartoons like this on social media (before it gets regurgitated here) don't have a clue. Even if there's some truth in a cartoon like this, it only comes out that way by chance. If you create an assertion by randomly stringing together words and phrases from current news stories, there's always some chance that it's more true than false. The Infinite Monkey Theorem:
quote
The Infinite Monkey Theorem is a proposition that an unlimited number of monkeys, given typewriters and sufficient time, will eventually produce a particular text, such as Hamlet or even the complete works of Shakespeare.
If someone were actually interested in the topic of that cartoon, they would find this YouTube video worth their time. It's more than 9 minutes for the entire presentation, but less than 10.
How could trading markets for Carbon Offsets be changed to better align with the goal of reducing carbon emissions as a climate mitigation strategy?
quote
In theory putting a price on carbon emissions should incentivise businesses to stop polluting. So why have carbon markets failed to achieve their goal of reducing global emissions?
From the Jan De Nul Group: 2022 was the year when France, already a powerhouse of onshore wind energy, took the wind energy "game" offshore. In France, onshore wind turbines have provided renewable energy for more than 20 years. There is almost 19 GW of capacity online, covering about 8% of the national electricity needs. These figures make the country one of the leaders in Europe in terms of onshore wind energy. But there is also a huge potential in offshore wind. With 11 million square kilometres of maritime area, France has the second largest maritime area in the world behind the United States. On 13 April 2022, we installed the very first wind turbine at the first offshore wind farm twelve km off the coast of the Guérande peninsula.
quote
The UK is seen as a world leader in woke political-correctness leftist stupidity.
Maybe, but the UK is also getting into offshore wind. So the UK (perhaps) is a nation of internal contradictions.
[This message has been edited by rinselberg (edited 01-31-2023).]
North Carolina v. EPA (2008), the D.C. Circuit struck down the EPA’s 2005 cap-and-trade program for being "arbitrary and capricious," "not otherwise in accordance with the law,"
Various private cap & trade / "carbon credit" hucksters and scam artists in the "greenie" shadow market haven't abated since then and generally act outside of the law.
Leftists cheer the scam because Leftists don't understand economics or law.
[This message has been edited by randye (edited 01-31-2023).]
, may sound warm and fuzzy to the Green Nuts but it is bunk. Go ahead, tell us how it decarbonizes even a little bit.
?
