"Peter" has some thoughts on wind farms. Laugh or cry. What this is, is a commentary on the sad state of science and what passes for scientific inquiry, scientific research, scientific methodology in this hyper-politicized "intellectual" atmosphere.
Researchers at the State University of New York at Albany analysed the satellite data of areas around large wind farms in Texas, where four of the world's largest farms are located, over the period 2003 to 2011.
The results, published in the journal Nature Climate Change, showed a warming trend of up to 0.72 degrees Celsius per decade in areas over the farms, compared with nearby regions without the farms.
COMMENT from a reader:
I think the warming is caused by methane generated from all the decaying eagle carcasses on the ground around the wind farms
When I was a college student, yes, we discussed the intellectual curiosity of an observation that the same rural area seemed to have gotten more rainfall after dirt paths were paved with black asphalt to become two-lane back roads. Of course we did not claim this to be proof of anything, because of the normal yearly variations in rainfall totals, and because of the difficulty of finding any area of significant size where the only change was the pavement, and absolutely not anything else...
One question: why do wind farms use wind mills with large, knife-like blades? Squirrel-cage fans are more compact, more efficient, less noisy and much safer - especially for endangered birds!
Another question: What is the environmental impact of all that wind being "harvested," of all that energy being extracted from the air flow? Don't we, by law, have to do environmental impact studies BEFORE major projects are undertaken, let alone completed...
Why are "green" projects exempt?