Slashdot Mirror
British Court Rejects Donald Trump's Attempt To Block Wind Farm (nytimes.com)
HughPickens.com writes: Sewell Chan reports at the NYT that Britain's highest court has unanimously rejected an attempt by Donald J. Trump to block the construction of a wind farm near his luxury golf resort in northeast Scotland. Trump has vowed to stop further development on the project if the offshore wind farm — 11 turbines, which would be visible from the golf resort 2.2 miles away — goes forward. Trump spokesman George A. Sorial denounced the ruling as "extremely unfortunate for the residents of Aberdeen and anyone who cares about Scotland's economic future" adding that the wind farm will "completely destroy the bucolic Aberdeen Bay and cast a terrible shadow upon the future of tourism for the area. History will judge those involved unfavorably, and the outcome demonstrates the foolish, small-minded and parochial mentality which dominates the current Scottish government's dangerous experiment with wind energy."
Nicola Sturgeon, first minister of Scotland, withdrew Trump's status as a business ambassador to Scotland last week after Trump called for Muslims to be barred from entering the United States. Robert Gordon University in Aberdeen has stripped Mr. Trump of an honorary degree it awarded him in 2010. Trump's mother was born in Scotland and moved to the United States in the 1930s. " I think I do feel Scottish," said Trump at one time.
Nicola Sturgeon, first minister of Scotland, withdrew Trump's status as a business ambassador to Scotland last week after Trump called for Muslims to be barred from entering the United States. Robert Gordon University in Aberdeen has stripped Mr. Trump of an honorary degree it awarded him in 2010. Trump's mother was born in Scotland and moved to the United States in the 1930s. " I think I do feel Scottish," said Trump at one time.
It seems much easier to undo the damage of a wind farm than it does, say, a coal plant.
Very true. Also, it seems much easier to undo the damage of a bumbling ineffective government than it does, say, an idiotic megalomaniac fascist dictator.
That's because he's a lunatic with a dead cat on his head who stands a dangerously high chance of being the Republican candidate for president. But least he doesn't think the pyramids were grain storages and can spell "poverbs" [sic] correctly.
SJW n. One who posts facts.
You can - and people do - decommission nuclear reactors safely. That's not the point. The point is how much it costs to do so. Nuclear reactors are really expensive to safely decommission.
Although to be fair if you include the cost of damage to the environment that coal produces, then there's no comparison, coal is far far more expensive than any other form of power.
A fool and his hard drive are soon parted.
You asked what's so hard about tearing down a coal plant. Cleaning up toxic waste is hard. Besides, the Minimata convention on mercury set a date of 2014 for new coal plants and 2019 (not here yet) for old coal plants to control their emissions. So basically every coal plant in the world except those finished being built sometime in the last 11 months which won't be decommissioned for a couple decades. And that's only for coal plants in nations that follow the Minimata convention. And those controls will still only stop 90% of mercury emissions and 40% of sulfur dioxide emissions. So there will still be mercury contamination. For wind, you might be left with a few concrete mooring anchors or a concrete foundation if the company goes bankrupt. And a concrete foundation would be pretty easy to clean up with little toxic risk.
She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
I wonder what it looks like when you have to add the steel, concrete and other materials to mine the coal, transport the coal, dispose of the ash, fuel to move the coal to the "resource price" of the coal-fired power station comparison? The thing about wind is the fuel delivers itself.
Oolite: Elite-like game. For Mac, Linux and Windows