To construct the base alone, a single small wind turbine requires the burning of 170 tons of coal just to make its steel components, namely the rebar. Then on top of that you have 140 cubic meters of concrete, this is just for the base remember, and of a... small turbine. It ignores the hundreds of tons of fiberglass, aluminum and copper that go into the turbine itself. You also have to consider that the majority of turbines standing today will need replacing before 2050, with the majority of those materials including the concrete for the base almost impossible to reuse. As governments continue to chase Net Zero, millions of wind turbines will be built just to replace the ones we already have - tearing up land, burning coal and pouring billions of tons of concrete. This is far from clean energy. It's a dirty illusion.show more

And making concrete from limestone releases *a lot* of C02 into the atmosphere, so the whole operation is a big net negative for the climate change zealots.

fun fact about concrete. to make cement, you need fly ash, that comes from burning coal. An alternative is steel slag, which is a byproduct of steel production. Burning coal for electricity is the cleanest process, for all waste can be used in other processes. Including CO2

Hier sind einige Zahlen leider etwas ungenau. Es gibt keine Millionen von Windturbinen, die ersetzt werden könnten, da es nach Grok weniger als eine halbe Million Windturbinen mit über 1 MW installierter Leistung gibt. - Grundsätzlich aber richtig, Windkraft benötigt einen irren Materialeinsatz und der Recyclingrad ist tief und lässt sich wahrscheinlich nicht wesentlich erhöhen. Die Fundamente, von denen hier gesprochen wird, mit 140 Kubikmeter Beton, sind sehr viel kleiner als die Fundamente, die in Europa üblicherweise für Windkraftanlagen verbaut werden. Für eine 3 MW-Windkraftanlage für mittlere Windgeschwindigkeiten ist das Gewicht eines durchschnittlichen Fundaments im Bereich von 2000 Tonnen. Das sind somit im Bereich von rund 800 Kubikmeter Stahlbeton.

None of it makes any sense in a normal world, but I guess we’re not living in a normal world…!

Saw this when I was a member of the liaison committee for a large development in South Wales. That area now suffers severe flooding, I wonder why.

Yet even after you factor all that stuff in, a kwh of energy produced by wind only emits 11g of co2 compared to 820g for every kwh produced by burning coal..

Wind turbines take groundwater resources and disturb natural environment including marine life. They are also built along migratory routes and kill birds. They cannot be recycled. WindKraft and the Nazis.

Not to m e ntion all the emissions from the transportation and machinery used.Follow the money .All the trillions could have been used to improve present systems or dev e lop better nuclear options,thermal,other better alternatives.

The material footprint of renewable energy is worth discussing. Steel, concrete, copper and composites don't appear out of nowhere, and their production has an environmental cost. But that doesn't make the comparison complete. The better question is: what is the full lifecycle impact per unit of energy, including manufacturing, operation, replacement, recycling and the emissions avoided over the asset's lifetime? Clean energy shouldn't mean zero impact. It should mean **dramatically lower impact, with the footprint improving as technology and recycling improve.** 🌱 #CleanEnergy #CircularEconomy #RenewableEnergy #ClimateAction

Et dire que cette INEPTIE nous est vendu comme le «  net zéro »

And the Cour des Comptes counted €26.3 billion in renewable subsidies 2016-2024. For infrastructure replaced every 20 years, concrete left permanently in the ground. Nuclear already does the job, better and cheaper.

talk to me about local bird deaths

can you do the full cradle to grave calculation for the energy consumption for a standard sized oil rig drilling oil in say the Atlantic Ocean up till the time it pulls the first barrel of oil out of the ground and then specify how many barrels it must draw up before it theoretically has evened out it's own energy production cost and operational costs.... include all factors both for construction as well as for initial manning/staffing and supplies needed for the period.

I remember reading that roughly 10% of energy consumption was from burning rocks to make cement. Not sure if the percentage is correct but making cement for concrete production certainly belongs in your energy calculation.

And the ones at sea destroy the oceans eco systems!

What a complete and total joke. The climate hoax is to bankrupt the West, not stop climate change @KensingtonRoyal, stop shilling leftist BS @RupertLowe10 @RestoreBritain

This insane policy of centralizing everything is the downfall of humanity.

You just made up your own facts. The specific numbers and overall framing are not accurate; they mix outdated or selective figures, exaggerate scales, and omit energy payback and lifecycle context.

The dirtiest delusion ever. People are so sheep like!

Truth

Massive waste.

Oh no! They lied again!

Think what you are doing New Zealand. This is not the answer.

Yeah turbines need steel and concrete. Coal plants need that too AND burn coal every single day. The comparison is laughable

“Millions of turbines will need replacing… tearing up land, burning coal, pouring concrete.” You’re describing infrastructure maintenance like it’s a unique sin of renewables. Fossil plants also get rebuilt. Transmission lines get rebuilt. Roads get rebuilt.

The site of a wind turbine cannot be fully remediated due to the sheer size of the concrete in the base.

What is disgusting is so many people have said it is the cheapest option for electric production, even Ai trumpets the obvious lies. We have more NG than anyone and should be changing the grid with fuel cell technology and this solves the problem with transformers.

But "green energy" is a great grift for the rich and connected. I once happened on an article about Berkshire-Hathaway's wind farm deals. Warren's lawyers and accountants arranged it so that selling woke power made Warren Buffett a bundle while ratepayers took all the risk.

Y no hay garantías de suministro de electricidad.

99% of all heat is caused by the sun radiation. At night anyone can feel it .... next day warm again ?

Why couldn't we reuse the concrete?

Dummies...

We should put these off the coast of Greenwich so our governor can enjoy his climate policies all year long

When you imagine you are smarter than a climate scientist, but energy budgets are not your strong suit.