Slashdot Mirror
World's Largest Wind Farm Gets Green Light
cliffski writes "According to the BBC website the UK govt has just given the go ahead to two large offshore wind-farm projects.
Between them the schemes would produce enough renewable electricity to power about one million households.
The larger London Array project covers 144 sq miles (232 sq km) between Margate in Kent and Clacton, Essex and will be the world's biggest when it is completed. The £1.5bn scheme will have 341 turbines rising from the sea about 12 miles (20km) off the Kent and Essex coasts, as well as five offshore substations and four meteorological masts"
Last time I checked, 144 square miles would be 373 square kilometers. Remeber is 1.609*1.609 *144...
The Law of Unintended Consequences in full effect: http://www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?artId=14562
Lisa, in this house we obey the laws of thermodynamics!
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum sonatur.
These guys are now trying to cross the channel with the whole island!!!
"Enough to power about 1 million homes."
How about a MW output. That's a specific number that can be compared to other forms of electric generation.
Is that one million homes in the late spring (mildest time of year), when no one is running a/c or heat?
Or is that one million homes in the middle of summer when whole power grids collapse from the strain?
Specifics please.
From TFA this is the worlds biggest windfarm but will generate 1% of the UKs electricty needs. If you want a viable answer to the worlds energy needs I think we need to think outside this particular box.
Why don't they put these wind farms on barges floating around the seas offshore, where the winds blow steady and reliable? Relocated when economical according to satellites tracking the seasonal winds.
Barges covered with solar cells. And reverse-gyroscopes that generate power from waves and currents. They anchor landmines, don't they?
--
make install -not war
But it will only kill off the stupid sea birds. I for one welcome our... oh god just shoot me....
I've never understood why the power of tides is not exploited more. In a short streach of coast around the UK, hundreds of millions of tons of water must be moved every 24 hours. I'm sure there must be a lot more energy in that than in the wind in the same area. Why isn't that exploited? Anyone know?
Personally, I'd stick the windmills on barges, tether them to the Houses of Parliament and wait for a good strong westerly - release the anchors and tow the politician buggers to Holland.
One swallow does not a fellatrix make
Gee. Take that much power out of a surface wind? Makes you kinda wonder what happens when you take that much energy out of a system that determines a lot of weather and water temperature and moves it inland to, say, make toast.
Doh.
Personally, at the moment, I quite like Wind Farms because they're unusual and interesting to look at but once every square metre of the countryside is covered in them I suspect this opinion might change.
They're also a great place to get "chicken" burger. Catch it before it hits the ground, so you know it's fresh.
Who would win this election: Andrew Weiner vs Andrew Weiner's weiner.
Won't somebody please think of the birds!
Will we be getting hundreds of horror movies from this, like they do with nuclear power plants?
"Sheltered from the destroying wind by the turbine farm, the flesh eating larva thrived in the darkness created by the solar panels, coming out at night to feast on human flesh...."
Who would win this election: Andrew Weiner vs Andrew Weiner's weiner.
Annoy? It's 12 miles offshore. You can barely see them at that range let alone hear them.
Personally I think they're great when I'm sailing along as they usually mark sand banks and make navigation much easier. I like the look of them too.
the more they over-think the plumbing the easier it is to stop up the pipe
Uhhhh... Run that by me again.
From the article:
The larger London Array project covers 90 sq miles (232 sq km) between Margate in Kent and Clacton, Essex.
The second wind farm, called the Thanet scheme, will cover 13.5 sq miles (35 sq km) off the north Kent coast.
I'd call it 103.5 sq miles (267 sq km).
There are 0x40000000 types of people: those who understand 32-bit IEEE 754 floating point, and those who don't.
Learn it, use it, love it -- the incredible new unit fresh from the SI, the house.
One house is roughly equivalent to 1 kilowatt, but here the resemblance to the watt ends.
Because, if the reporter likes the way the energy is made, a house can be as little as 500 watts. So the reporter can double the number of houses powered by the project!
"One million households" sounds like a lot. But, using the maximum allowable value of 1kW/house, it is really only about 1 gigawatt, which is stupidly tiny by today's standards.
Using the minimum discovered value for house, the windmill scheme might be as small as 500 megawatts.
I am looking forward to the fair and balanced press to begin using the "blow dryer" and "microwave oven" SI units, which are bigger (!) than a house, and used only to describe coal and nuclear plants.
The global energy market disagrees with you, that is why you are seeing this article instead of your alternative which is ...nothing. Ignoring the problem doesn't work, actually doing something about it beyond talking is the only solution that can possibly work right now.
The alternative energy solution is "all of the above", solar, wind, geothermal, biofuels, etc, etc, all of it in total. There will probably not be any one solution any time soon, we need the combination of vastly more energy efficient buildings and vehicles (really the number one place we should be working on) combined with alternate sources of energy combined with the traditional energy sources. That's the only silver bullet. Backyard mr. fusion is here if you recognize that the Sun works, it just works, and it is our only practical fusion power. Solar PV, Solar thermal, biofuels, and wind are all mostly factors of the Sun's output. If you are waiting for man-made ITER type reactors to save you you'll be shivering in a cold dark house for decades to come. Not to say we shouldn't still try and develop it, but reality indicates we need solutions to start now, not wait until it hits OMG crisis mode.
Of course, many do not. Probably more do not. However, Al Gore (the anti-enviros favorite whipping boy) does. That was one of the things I really liked about him in 2000. He understood technology and respected the environment. (Not that I want him to run in '08. I think it would detract from his current campaign.)
Ben Hocking
Need a professional organizer?
... made by people who refuse to think clearly!
Talk about immediate environmental impact. WAKE UP people - wind farms take energy directly out of a very complex self-regulating system. Let's see how long it takes the greenies to realise this is NOT a long term solution,
As I have repeated said, energy efficiency is the only soultion to our energy problems. Until manufacturers are required to produce more efficient products, we are on the wrong path.
They already have.
If a baby duck is a "duckling," why would anyone want to eat "dumplings?"
will power this green light?
The problem with wind energy is that it's output is unreliable and unlikely to match demand. For electricity, it is essential that supply match demand very strictly. Essentially, this means that wind farms have to be backed up with other, reliable, fast-switching power sources. This, of course, means you've still not solved the energy problem - what do these other plants run on? Also, it adds to the cost of electricity from wind - which is already very high.
Please correct me if I got my facts wrong.
but it's certainly worse than nuclear power
Facts, anyone?
I'm sorry this experience seems to have stunted your brain growth but with modern technology events such as 3 mile island will be an awful lot less common.
Birds don't really often get killed by wind turbines, the blades move quite slowly and predictably and are clearly visible so the birds can avoid them. Some birds even have nests on top of turbines.
t ml?dcb=personals.salon.com
Rather birds tend to fly into ordinary power lines and die. Climate change and pollution are also big threats to birds as other wildlife too, and their effect is often global.
Furthermore, bird enthusiasts even in America are supporting wind power, here is a link to a statement from the Audubon Society:
http://personals.salon.com/blog/1976/post_32241.h
It's one of the perpetual myths against wind power that surface every time the public discusses about it, I was sure it'd pop up here on slashdot...
Now just waiting about the "will the turbines ever recoup their construction energy cost?" (They will in a few months.)
In Denmark around 20% of our power come from wind, expected to grow to 25%. That is probably the maximum, as you need power when the wind isn't blowing as well. Wind power is not the answer, or an answer, but can be a significant part of answer.
I wonder why so many people (in particular Americans for some reason) feel that such a complex issue as energy supply need a single source as an answer. Some even dismiss all discussion of conservation with the "argument" that you can't totally eliminate the need of energy that way. Even though just going to EU/Japan level of conservation would eliminate 50% of the energy consumption. Maybe it is because people have been brought up in a world where only answers that can be expressed as sound bites are considered relevant by the media.
Luckily these windfarms are off-shore - so no square metres of countryside to worry about.
maybe he/she was talking about fusion.
There is a spark in every single flame bait point.
Is it worth it? Over the complete lifetime of this windfarm, are we going to get energy out in amounts greater than what we had to put in? Manufacturing uses energy from burning coal. Is putting that energy here a waste like with solar power? People talk about green energy without checking to see just how green it really is.
I see your informative link, and raise you a pithy comment.
hear them ??? Windmills are silent.
http://www.bwea.com/ref/noise.html
"the sound of a working wind farm is actually less than normal road traffic or an office"
Yes, I'm left. You have a problem with that?
The turbines will be out at sea so endangered land based birds are safe unless they try to migrate through the blade paths. As far as I'm aware seagulls are not endangered. If a few die I don't mind. Less smelly gull poo on the pier. http://bymyreckoning.com/
Gee, how did I know that this wasn't going to be in the US? Deep down I knew this was going to be another story from Europe, but for some reason I still had a little glimmer of hope when I clicked the link.
You might think that making all the concrete, metal, plastics, etc, involved in the manufacture of all the generators will put a large burden on the environment, but actually compared to the energy investment in building, running, and decommissioning a nuclear power plant, the environmental burden is quite light: http://www.eoearth.org/article/Energy_return_on_in vestment_(EROI)_for_wind_energy
Not to mention the effects of all the anchors and mooring cables on the seabed.
So your point is that it require more than just basic education to realize that cost is rarely linear? Providing 100% of the power in Denmark would be much more than 5 times as expensive than providing 20%. Does that concept really require a higher level of education to understand?
Anyway, EU could probably get its entire energy supply covered cheaply by buying gas from Russia. Somebody whose level of intellect is on pair with a 1D linear program might think that would be a good idea.
> When will people realize that being "alternative" is not the same as "environment friendly" as power sources go?
Probably the moment you invoke the word "dam".
> One would think that making all the concrete, metal, plastics, etc, involved in the manufacture of all the generators will put a large burden on the environment.
One would think that. But we're talking about 341 turbines and the electrical cabling necessary to link them together. It probably only requires a fraction the materials of needed to put up, say, your average skyscraper.
Bird kills aren't nearly as big a problem for modern installations as they are for first-generation installations (like California's Altamont Pass, which still uses 80's-era turbines with fast rotors, and just happens to be located on a major migration route). Modern windfarms constitute an inconsequential fraction of the bird deaths resulting from human activity.
Before warning us about the potentially huge consequences of removing wind from the ecosystem, would you mind estimating for me just what percent of the total available windpower this installation will be pulling from the surrounding area? Consider the fact that only the wind hitting the blade itself is actually contributing. If you came back with a number as high as 0.1%, I'd be suspicious of your math. In short, I can't imagine this being a serious objection.
> This is at least one thousand times as big as a nuclear plant with the same capacity.
If you want to tout the benefits of nuclear energy, go right ahead. But of the objections I've heard to nuclear power plants, I've never once heard anyone grousing about how much land they take up.
Surface area estimates aren't terribly informative, because nothing about this wind installation prohibits other uses of the area, by people or by wildlife.
If you're going to push nuclear energy, then try and actually make a positive case for it. The "windfarms will eat our babies" routine is hardly convincing.
You want the truthiness? You can't handle the truthiness!
"All "renewable" energy has an environmental cost."
." ." ."
"Solar panels . .
"Tidal generators will destroy ecosystems . .
"Fission power generates nuclear waste . .
So, where does the electricity you're using to power your computer come from? Got a life-cycle hooked up to a generator under your desk? Careful! Don't you know about the butterfly effect? Your breathing and movements are causing environmental catastrophies a hundred thousand years from now!!!
There is a contingent within the so called "environMENTAList" movement that is against EVERYTHING. Everything except giving up their personal technological comforts and automobiles. I get really pissed at these people who obstruct any sort of energy project, bemoan the fate of the environment, and yet demand cheap electricity and gasoline for themselves. In my neck of the woods people are obstructing wind power projects on grounds that it will be "unsightly" and wreck the "scenery". Oh yeah, it's going to kill a few birds and bats too. Bunch of bloody whiners. Go live like an animal out in the woods, come up with an energy proposal of your own, or STFU.
Thanks. It's an interesting article but it misses the point. Just because something is louder doesn't make it more annoying.
All it takes for noise to annoy some people is for it to be above their threshold of hearing. If they can hear you they can complain about it. It doesn't matter in the slightest that the noise isn't louder than anything else they can hear. People get used to that and tune it out. But if you decide a noise is annoying you focus on it.
It's the same with planes. Most of the time I don't hear them where I live and I don't find them annoying. But I do hear them most days and I know that other people do get annoyed. Sure they're overreacting but that's irrelevant because you end up with a noise complaint.
If you can't hear the wind farm at all, ever, then you can't be bothered by the noise (no matter how hard you try).
the more they over-think the plumbing the easier it is to stop up the pipe
They will complain that its being built too far away to complain about.
liqbase
Yes, I have noticed that some people post such original thoughts quite frequently. If I thought he'd win, I'd love to see him (Gore) run. However, I don't think he'll win, so I think that if he ran it'd just detract from his environmental message. As for Kerry, I didn't like him in '04 (although I preferred him to Bush), and I don't want to see him run in '08. Not sure who I do want in '08, but that's how it freakin' should be in 2006!
Ben Hocking
Need a professional organizer?
Hmm..ok, so it is the noise of them that causes people to object to them?
I'd always wondered why people were against them. I mean, I'm FAR from being a tree hugger, but, I'm all for new sources of energy, and if it can be done at a low pollution factor, I'm all for it.
I guess it all comes down to a "Great idea, but, not in my backyard!" thing. That kind of thinking is big time in the US. How many decades has it been since the last oil refinery was built?? From what I understand in the States...it isn't a lack of oil, but, lack of refining capacity we have here that kills us so much on gas and other energy pricing.
Down here in southern LA, we easily provide 1/3 of the oil product needs for the nation...and often we pay the price for that. Much of the devestation caused by Katrina, was due to the erosion of our wetlands that used to serve as a natural barrier to hurricanes...erosion caused in no small part to channels cut in for shipping (the MR-GO for instance), and all that cutting up of the wetlands for laying all that pipe for oil to come onto shore for processing. Thankfully...we just recently got legislation to allow the Gulf states, in particular LA, to collect more fully on the royalties from oil drilling out in our part of the Gulf. At least now we have a steady flow of funds earmarked for rebuilding the wetlands, and also for enhancing our other hurricane protections.
That being said...it is a shame that more states don't share in that burden...no one wants a refinery in their state. No one wants drilling in their coastal waters (Hello, CA and FL?).
At some point, in the US, the rest of the states are going to need to stand up, and do their share of energy production..oil, wind, gas, nuclear....etc.
If not, then quit bitchin' when a storm comes through the gulf, and knocks out a significant chunk of your current (oil) producing/refinement needs...and then tell everyone in the area to just 'move your city somewhere else safer'.
[rantmode off]
Sorry...back to topic...go wind power!
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
I can't believe they're even considering this. It is intuitively obvious that these wind farms will slow down the rotation of the Earth. Or maybe speed it up-- I dunno, I'm not a details guy. Anyway, either would clearly trigger massive global climate change.
However, the link you pointed seems to be rather suspect: "The motivation behind the Encyclopedia of Earth is simple. Go to Google and type in climate change, pesticides, nuclear power, sustainable development, or any other important environmental issue. Doing so returns millions of results, some fraction of which are authoritative. The remainder is of poor or unknown quality"
In other words, "don't try to get all the facts, come to us for the truth".
The funny thing about the birds angle is that it is probably just being used by the RSPB as convenient publicity. Birds, and sea birds in particular, have two perfectly good eyes and are quite capable of avoiding great hulking windmills. It's not like they're transparent, and the blades don't move that fast.
I did read one study a few years ago - and apologies for not having any details of it - but someone looked into the actual evidence of bird kills and it was globally something like 6. No, not thousand, not hundred... six... just 6.
Probably they represented the avian equivalent of the Darwin Awards. Named after Darwin the Galapagos Finch who discovered scientists.
All in all, wind farms are hell of a lot better than oil slicks for our feathery friends.
If you came back with a number as high as 0.1%, I'd be suspicious of your math.
But that will cause GLOBAL WARMING! Total destruction of the Earth in 7 years! Massive extinction rates! We must think of the children! We have a consensus! Brad Pitt says so, so we must believe! What if it were true! We cannot take a chance and wait for proof! Stop the madness!
Who would win this election: Andrew Weiner vs Andrew Weiner's weiner.
>I wonder why so many people (in particular Americans for some reason) feel that such a complex issue as
>energy supply need a single source as an answer.
Americans don't really care where the energy comes from. They, like everyone else, just want to turn on the light switch and watch the lights come on.
The drive for a single source energy comes from the energy companies who currently enjoy the benefits of a monopoly on a single source of energy - oil. They want a neat package they can control and profit from.
Once the technological genie is out of the bottle for how to cheaply harness alternative energy sources, anyone will be able to do it. And the people with the money to invest in alternative energy technologies are afraid of that.
Steve
A work that expires before its copyright never enters the public domain and thus enjoys eternal copyright protection.
What everybody forgets is these darned things are attached to the Earth! We have prevailing winds that blow from the west to the east and the new fangled bird shedders are attached to the EARTH which is going to shorten our days! The only way this is going to work is for every wind turbine in the Northern hemisphere to have a counter-ballancing wind turbine in the southern hemisphere where the prevailing wind blow east to west just like we do with flush toilets.
Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
Any bird stupid enough to fly into something that moves so slowly and gracefully was a brain-damaged genetic flaw deserving of it's Darwinian end. :p
Apparently there were proposals to build a similar facility off the shores of Connecticut, but the NIMBYs with their mansions complained it would destroy the view. How sad. Your view is more important than the environment. :(
I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
On a calm day, the wind farm will only generate enough power to illuminate the green light itself, because it is of the incandescent variety. They had considered using an LED green light, but the initial outlay was too much.
I hate call waitin`~+~~~
NO CARRIER
Does anyone know who got the contract to build this wind farm. I look forward to seeing something on a project of this magnitude on Modern Marvels sometime in the next few years.
Off-shore wind farms are a key part of the solution to global warming according to George Monbiot's book Heat.
This is a very easy target if it is just floating out there with protection.
I'm not sure they are including the cost of providing military security in their costs but they probably need to.
She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
You are totally missing out the fact that these reactor:
a) needs space on secure land, not in the see
b) need uranium mining/element building/ect facilities, all with large space needs
c) waste disposal are needs
and last but not least the fact that the houses that use those GW need far more space.
HI O WISE PRINCE. WHT TOOK U SO DAM LONG?
NIMBY isn't good enough. It's BANANA now (build absolutely nothing anywhere near anything) ;)
On the subject of oil refineries one of the main reasons no refineries were built was due to tough environmental restrictions on NEW refineries. It was cheaper to just expand the existing refineries.
the more they over-think the plumbing the easier it is to stop up the pipe
It's good news that should be applauded, but seeing something like this makes me think: what was all that wind energy doing before? I mean, now that all the energy in the wind is being used to turn windmills, what's missing out? And is it something important?
I know it sounds stupid, but it's a serious question. And waves being used to power turbines, same thing. What were the waves doing before that they're not doing anymore?
Why do we crank the air-conditioner, instead of using better insulation materials/tehniques? Because we are brain-washed consumer americans. Insulation is a buy once item... power consumption (derived from our favorite word "CONSUME" ) is a buy constantly service. Not to mention owning an air-conditioner is a status symbol. And of course if you own one, then you must use it as well... or you are just a wanna-be.
actually, i've been hearing about a growing PIIMBY (put it in my backyard) with the new suspended wind power rigs they're developing. i've heard of a number of farmers in the centeral states jumping to lease land to these.
upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
There's a big difference between fast moving rotors (old tech) and much bigger, slower moving ones.
...this guy has announced
http://www.kucinich.us/
personally, I won't vote D or R, but I might make an exception for Ron Paul, but he has said he doesn't want to.
My sort of political wish list is a stealth third party coup, where a lot of already elected folks (fed/state/local) who are Constitutionally bent and 100% pro *middle* class in outlook all decide one day to withdraw from their various parties and form a new centrist/populist/nationalist party, then run their own candidate for prez and shake things up. And I don't mean they just join an existing third party, but start one from scratch with guys already in office.
I'm honestly not sure if you're trying to be funny or are just clueless.
There are certainly a lot of places with well-constructed and well-insulated buildings. They are in the vast minority once you visit the average American home or apartment. Double paned windows are quite rare in all of the locations I have lived in or visited in California and a lot of the Western states. Sure, a certain small percentage of new buildings have the double panes, but not many. The use of a more insulating gas in between the panes such as argon is remarkably rare.
Fiberglass insulation is a bit more common, but older houses and apartments are still in the majority in America, and few have been refitted with better insulation. Furthermore, not all new buildings are built to these specification, especially in lower priced areas.
You are one of those people that when they cut themsleves just a bit when shaving, start slashing themselves with the blade to quench their anger.
Or something like that.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
The thousend of civilians killed there as well in order to protect your interests?
Or the people in countries that will dissapear when sea levele raise?
We do know you guys in the US don't give a damn mostly. but that does not mean nobody cares.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
Which country is this building a giant windfarm again?
Real Daleks don't climb stairs - they level the building.
*sigh*
It's not East/West in either hemispehere, It's Clockwise/Counterclockwise. Which means that for every Easterly, you have a Westerly.
I hope you were joking, but judging by other serious comments saying pretty much the same thing, I'm doubtful.
Ceci n'est pas un sig.
Ballot access differs state to state widely, and in no state do either the D or R party have to pay a plugged nickle or gather signatures to be included, whereas all third parties have to jump various hoops. Now I am not sure which constitution you read, but mine has no mention whatsoever of two for-profit organizations that are allowed to hijack and own the government like they do now. No place does it say we are supposed to have a locked down gerry mandered carved in stone "two party system" or racket as I prefer real words.
It is a power sharing jobs racket..that's it. And if you doubt me at all how crooked and corrupt and bogus it is, just remember,and you can go over and argue with these folks, it was the League of Women Voters who sponsored the national debates for generations, and then *quit* doing that because they said it was unfair what the Ds and Rs did to the requirements after Perot scared the shit out of the Ds and Rs with his populist showing. Heck, they wouldn't even let some third party candidates into the audience when they had legitimate tickets, let alone on the rostrum, had them "detained" by the bulls.
Screw that, tha't s obvious police state action, along with their "free-speech zones" that both parties used to stifle and minimize dissent.
Sorry, I'll repeat my statement-you will see no cleaning up of government or a return to government of and for the people until the D and R gangs are out, destroyed, smashed, gone, exiled, run out of town on a rail, the leaders arrested and impeached for serious crimes and malfeasance in office, and the political process yanked back to the people. Just the entire concept of full time career politicians is bogus.
Both parties have said they would clean up their act as long as I can remember, over and over and over again, and neither has. There is no differing of the levels of crime and corruption today then there as in the 60s. We had a full d president and combined D legislature back then, and lookee here at the history books, a big fat war for profit based on outright lies.
Not seeing any difference whatsoever, no matter the so called "balance of power" in the branches or anything. There's a globalist party with two slightly different wings, both out to pick your pocket and strip your rights in favor pf themselves and someone else. If one party doesn't want to rip you off and give your loot to some big corporation, the other wants to do it for illegal aliens or the three eyed flying toad. if one party doesn't want to strip you of your self protection tools, the other one wants to tap your phone and read your mail and make you smile for the street corner big brother camera. And so on, I could run a huge list right now. Up and down and sideways with the huge list of *crap* from those goons. ENOUGH! I do NOT trust organizational liars any longer, it is beyond ludicrous to think it is going to change with the way the system is setup now and with the folks in power.
Charlie Brown-football-Lucy. That's it in a nutshell. Charlie Brown is an idiot if he keeps falling for Lucy's promise to hold the ball nice.
Comes a time one has to call it like it is in reality. I used to think, for around 25 years or so before I had to sit down and start from scratch thinking about it and be honest with myself based on all the empiricial data-I used to think it was possible to try and patch-up the system or at least one of those parties, now I think for the most part all it is is a crooked power sharing jobs program, a big fat mafia like organization, and they use their grassroots activists as the aforementioned "useful idiots" and throw those phony elections as political drama to keep the rubes amused and faked out that there is an honest political process. Others may still think it is possible to "reform" it, but I don't from the longer range perspective. If I thought it was possible, I am certainly not shy at all and would say so,and I would be advocating and working towards something quite different, but I just don't see it as even being remotely possible at this time.
That's why I threw in the toilet thing, so it woould be obvious anybody with with any education.
Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
All new homes should be installed with small wind turbines, solar panels by law and properly insulated by law.
THe more power can be produced close to the source were it is needed, the better.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.