WTF!!!

why would anyone approve this???

isn't there more spaces elsewhere to build a solar farm. how do people find location: have a few drinks, open map, close eyes, and point.

Of all the useless hundreds of thousands of acres of desert land that the sun shines on just as hard, why use such special unique land for this. I'm all for the project, but why do it anywhere that ANYONE would care about.

Quote:

Originally posted by BeamerBob Of all the useless hundreds of thousands of acres of desert land that the sun shines on just as hard, why use such special unique land for this. I'm all for the project, but why do it anywhere that ANYONE would care about.

No kidding- did we make somebody mad?

I guess it was a matter of time. At least I can remember the view from years past.

Susan (npw goddess)

Heard about this on NPR the other day.. BLM gave the approval so the project can go ahead..

http://www.solarindustrymag.com/e107_plugins/content/content...

Quote:

Originally posted by deanaoxo Solar Farm Info

Hey #@%$#! you with your eco-friendly sport - we need more electricity to power our internets, big-screen TVs and electric cars.



... as if windmill farms weren't bad enough. Has NOBODY heard of wave power FFS???

...! I can't say arse?

None of that is on the lake bed. all is on sloped rough land. Just a question of aesthetics, really.

Hope it doesn't end up affecting accessability to parts of Ivanpah for you guys. By the time they put up the endless power lines to and from this thing, the barbed wire fence around the solar panels, and the "Danger Keep Out" signs half a mile away from the barbed wire etc etc. there may not be any room left for us wind junkies:dunno:. Maybe I'm over reacting though:D. I'll have to try and make NABX in 2011 before this thing is complete

All the info about the solar farm states that it is on the other side of I-15 in the foot hills.

Susan (npw goddess)

OK, I don't really get the b$tching about this project.

DO YOU WANT ALTERNATIVE ENERGY OR NOT???

Well then, it has to go somewhere. OR Are you just another NIMBY!!!

There are several reasons that the project is being sited there. Proximity to high voltage through ways, highways, water, many other reasons. Other areas won't have the facilities available, or the cost to provide those facilities is not cost effective.

At most the site will affect some of the west side lake bed. but will have no affect on the part we buggy on.

No matter where you put these things someone will be able to see it. Where would you like to have it? Just so YOU don't have to look at it.

In a pristine area, just plopped down with all kinds of new support structures.

OR

In an area that already has some development and the facilities already developed or right-of-ways ALREADY defined???

Personally, the latter is much more appealing than placing it in an area that is pristine and hundreds of miles away from population, which would raise the cost of that clean power tremendously.

Right Bison, thanks. They need little more than jumper cables to hook into the power grid that already runs right across the lake.

The area is not my back yard but for once a year when I can make NABX but I appreciate the region with its splendor and beauty. Better the hills around Ivanpah than, say, Joshua Tree National Forrest? Yes there are more remote regions and there are reasons they are remote - and that usually means not near the grid.

so who will be the first one to get handles hung up on it guys. lol

Quote:

Originally posted by bison DO YOU WANT ALTERNATIVE ENERGY OR NOT???

There are far, far more suitable forms of alternative energy ... someone is trying to get back their investment in a crap technology. Like hybrids

Im all for wind turbines,

Also is not my back yard

Quote:

There are far, far more suitable forms of alternative energy ...

And what would those be? I follow alternative energy tech quite closely, could you provide links to this miraculous tech so that I may be enlightened.

Quote:

someone is trying to get back their investment in a crap technology. Like hybrids

Please elaborate as to WHY hybrids are, in your words, ...a crap technology.

Quote:

Originally posted by bison Please elaborate as to WHY hybrids are, in your words, ...a crap technology.

My 1984 Dodge Colt got 40mpg in town and 45mpg on the highway. Now it takes a hybrid to get that. WTF

The only wind power that really makes sence is a maglev turbine. All the others take up more land and block public access for use. For land impact this says it all.

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_JIYfpVgsTY4/TFB5FdzUnWI/AAAAAAAAEG...

http://maglevwindturbine.com/

100 acres = 0.156 square miles

Quote:

Originally posted by stetson05 Quote: Originally posted by bison Please elaborate as to WHY hybrids are, in your words, ...a crap technology. My 1984 Dodge Colt got 40mpg in town and 45mpg on the highway. Now it takes a hybrid to get that. WTF

The only issue with that statement is that no one wants to drive the kind of cars that are straight gasoline and get that kind of mileage. Like the Geo Metro. Sure, the mileage was excellent. But you couldn't put three large men in there with out overloading it's capacity.

Not directed at Maven454 or bison for that matter either. My Colt wasn't the coolest car for sure.

So with 26 years to develop improvements and the prius is what we get? Forgive me if I am not impressed. I am not impressed with using nuclear fuel for only 10% of its energy then storing it when the French use 96% then store it. That is thanks to EPA and government regulations. I am sure it is better for the environment to store it with 90% of its energy left. And then they just give away all this land to be developed into inefficient energy production under the guise that it is green? How much land is to be impacted? The local nuclear power plant produces and sells its electricity for $0.04 kw/h at a profit and is only using using 10%. It outproduces 19200 acres of of windmills on 10% of what it is capable of? I think we are fixing the problem with the wrong answer.

I wonder what people pay a kw/h in California?

Rant over, Sorry

Quote:

Originally posted by stetson05 Not directed at Maven454 or bison for that matter either. My Colt wasn't the coolest car for sure. So with 26 years to develop improvements and the prius is what we get? Forgive me if I am not impressed.

Yeah, the Prius doesn't impress me either, but I'd rather have that then a Metro.

Quote:

Originally posted by Maven454 Quote: Originally posted by stetson05 Quote: Originally posted by bison Please elaborate as to WHY hybrids are, in your words, ...a crap technology. My 1984 Dodge Colt got 40mpg in town and 45mpg on the highway. Now it takes a hybrid to get that. WTF The only issue with that statement is that no one wants to drive the kind of cars that are straight gasoline and get that kind of mileage. Like the Geo Metro. Sure, the mileage was excellent. But you couldn't put three large men in there with out overloading it's capacity.

Three statistically overweight Americans, no. (there might be another problem here...)

Quote:

Originally posted by geokite Quote: Originally posted by Maven454 Quote: Originally posted by stetson05 Quote: Originally posted by bison Please elaborate as to WHY hybrids are, in your words, ...a crap technology. My 1984 Dodge Colt got 40mpg in town and 45mpg on the highway. Now it takes a hybrid to get that. WTF The only issue with that statement is that no one wants to drive the kind of cars that are straight gasoline and get that kind of mileage. Like the Geo Metro. Sure, the mileage was excellent. But you couldn't put three large men in there with out overloading it's capacity. Three statistically overweight Americans, no. (there might be another problem here...)

Slightly overweight, granted. The load limit for the four cylinder engine (that's the larger of the two possible engines) was only 680 pounds.

I see a new challenge !

The out and AROUND and back ! :roll:

I don't suppose we will get the same beautiful sunset pictures with the solar panels in the back ground but your lake is drying up and Vegas needs it's power ? It's not a perfect world? :Ange09:

PAVE THE PLANET!!!!:evil:


dang I'm using my outside voice again.
I need to stop doing that.

Seriously, yes 20 years ago we had non-hybrid cars getting upwards of 35-40 mpg.
Then there was a push for more "eco" friendly tech in our beloved internal combustion engines that go zoom, zoom.

@ bison--- Now this is only my perception on the hybrid car. It is a inefficient gas engine using an inefficient battery.
Just my opinion, based on ownership of a prius. The problem with the prius's, etc, is the fact that you must reteach yourself how to drive.
They don't tell you this at the car lot. If driven like a normal car your mileage will not be that much better then a honda civic.
In order to get the posted (hyped) mpg you need to let your grandmother teach you how to drive!

Case in point. 560 mile trip to idaho. Wife (AKA Mario Andriette) got a whooping 35 mpg Newport OR to Sandpoint ID. Return trip me 51mpg
(let the grandmother jokes begin).

The biggest difference between the high mpg cars 20 years ago and today is the carbon footprint, and emissions.

Me..........PAVE THE PLANET!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Better power producing tech, more fuel efficient tech is out there, it's coming.
We just need to keep pressure on our governments to allow the tech to continue forward.

WHO PUT THE DAMB SOAP BOX UNDER MY FEET?

I thought I heard Bill sneaking around behind me! :moon:

The "hybrid" label and all of the hopey, changey, greeniness associated with it will be used by the marketeers to do what they do best--sell stuff. The guys selling you these cars have no desire to tell you this car is any way less awesome then you might think it is. They don't want to point out the need to drive less like Dale Jr. and more like Grandpa. They don't want to talk about the not-so-stellar gas mileage or the not-so-stellar carbon footprint. They just know you want something green and they are going play that for all it's worth.

As to the Prius, understand what it is and isn't. The Prius was optimized to reduce pollution. Part of that was achieved through great fuel economy, but mostly it was achieved by optimizing that engine to burn clean. It's a lot easier to do that when you run at a constant rpm with constant output. The batteries allow you to level all that power production out and turn off the motor as much as possible.

If you want to lower your carbon footprint, it's all about the MPG and the miles driven. A Ford F-150 driven 5000 miles per year and a Prius driven 15,000 miles per year have the same carbon footprint. So why sell the F-150 if you mostly use it to tow your boat on the weekends?

Really want to lower the foot print? Get a bicycle. Even an electric bike will blow the socks off your Prius' carbon footprint. Of course it's hard to carry your kiting gear 100 miles on bicycle to get to the beach. Which reminds me, this is a kiting forum, so I'll shut up now.

Philip

Or just let the wife total the Prius, and replace it with an Xtera like we did. :eureka:

The Prius was actually developed for inner city commuting, not long hauls as a vast majority are using it (at least in my neck of the woods).

And don't get me started on E85!

Quote:

Originally posted by stetson05 http://maglevwindturbine.com/

Concept only!!!

Has this been implemented in any type of test phase to verify all the claims. The website is dated 2008. In alternative energy that's decades.

Even the French FUSION power plant (ITER) will be online in about 10 years.

Whats the timeline for this particular design???