David Bidstrup: NIMTAS (Not in my Tasmania)

The chief Earthian is upset about a proposed wind farm in North West Tasmania. Apparently the 1,000 MW scheme will affect the pristine beauty of his island because the 200 metre tall structures, all 200 of them, will be visible “from 50 kms out to sea and elevated landlubbers will see it, like it or not, from greater distances on land”. I am no fan of wind farms, partly because they are a visual blight on the landscape but mainly because they are useless in providing reliable electricity.

Having lived for 2 years in Queenstown Tasmania I understand that there is some magnificent scenery to look at in Tasmania if you are lucky enough to be there on the day they have summer and that the place has a certain rustic charm if you can stand the sound of Banjo’s plinking in the background.

Another source of grief is the proposed transmission line that will be needed to connect the 200 turbines to the grid. The route takes it across Leven Canyon, another beauty spot, on its way to Georgetown substation to enable connection to the Basslink cable so Tasmania can be “the battery” of Australia.

I wonder if the Earthians have ever heard of the h word. I do not recall them making any noises about the plethora of unsightly wind farms that the “mainlanders” have to look at, or intervene in any of the cases where people opposed the siting of wind farms but were run over by “progress”.  Think Waubra for one and perhaps Waterloo in SA amongst many others. I have never heard them ask about the recommendations from the report by the then senator Madigan, (which seems to have suffered the fate of all other senate “reports”), in fact they were against his recommendations. Nor do I hear them making any noise about the research into wind farm noise and its effect on people living nearby or raising any concerns about the death of birds shredded in turbine blades.

Also, if they are so concerned about the global environment, they might make a noise about the catastrophe in Batou China where environmental devastation has taken place as a result of refining rare earths that are vital to wind turbine manufacture or perhaps raise a protest about child labour mining cobalt in the Congo. Not a peep, but when the chief Earthian has his paradise threatened it is a different story.

In 2018 the 2 wind farms that call Tasmania home had a capacity factor of 40%, which is not bad for a wind farm. They operated at less than 75% capacity for 80% of the year, below 50% for 65%, below 20% for 34% and produced zero for 2%. If I am charitable and allow the 1,000 MW proposed wind farm a 40% capacity factor then its output in a year will be the equivalent of a 400 MW “conventional” generator, so it is two and a half times oversized but still unreliable.

It seems that it does not matter whether any “renewable” proposal makes sense just as long as some carpetbagger says it will “reduce emissions” and some dim witted and desparate politicians believe them.

This entry was posted in Guest Post. Bookmark the permalink.

46 Responses to David Bidstrup: NIMTAS (Not in my Tasmania)

  1. stackja

    Many dim wit about ‘AGW’.

  2. egg_

    The chief Earthian is upset about a proposed wind farm in North West Tasmania.

    E.T.: “Suck it up, Princess!”

  3. notafan

    Inevitable that all beautiful coastal locations are the first to fill up with wind farms

    BB how about demanding that this private project on private land be freed from all government subsidisies and have to compete with coal for access to the grid

    then it along with all its fellow travelers will die a natural death

    on the other hand

    haha

  4. Fred

    It’s not just in Tassie. I was diving up the Western Highway near Ararat and there were huge windmills blighting the landscape.

    I’d always wondered why Greenies support windmills, when they destroy the scenery.

    And being so inefficient, tens of thousands of them would be needed to replace coal power stations.

  5. Karabar

    I abhor windmills for a variety of reasons, not the least of which is that their intermittent and unreliable performance necessitates a fossil fuelled backup. If it were mandatory for every vehicle owner to purchase, insure, and maintain a second vehicle that can be used only 25% or the time, it would be exactly the same as the current approach to ruinables.
    Having said that, I have to admit that if they make any sense whatsoever, it is in this instance. Regardless of the claims of insane Earthians, Robbins Island is a place rarely seen by humans. More to the point, an existing hydro scheme is excellent backup for them. (Except that since hydro as well as wind depend on nature, a backup is necessary for both of them, as Tassie found out in December 2015).
    That is not to say that an honest cost/benefit analysis would suggest this project is a good idea. Unless of course the object is to milk the mainlanders profusely because of their climate religion.

  6. Roger

    I’d always wondered why Greenies support windmills, when they destroy the scenery

    The Greens were never really about the conservation of nature, Fred.

    That was merely a helpful vehicle to drive their real agenda, which was and remains the subversion of capitalism in the West.

  7. Genghis

    Tasmania will have the most reliable wind in Australia as it is the Roaring 40’s. Has anyone thought that the undersea cable to George Town and then across Bass Straight the ‘loss of power’. If direct current (less loss in transmission) it losses 10% changing to AC. If AC then the trip is about 4 times longer than Melbourne to Yallourn so losses are much higher. So David your 40% unreliable is probably in the order of 25% unreliable.
    I think the average Australian is waking up to this nonsense and may even been a factor in the last election. Interesting article by Judith Sloan today in the Australian showing the RET is being reduced making these stupid things uneconomic, but who will pay for their removal?

  8. Tim Neilson

    I’d always wondered why Greenies support windmills, when they destroy the scenery.

    Fred, most greenies live in the inner suburbs of big cities. They rarely ever venture out of town except to
    the international terminal at the airport, the snowfields, or ecotourism resorts, so wind turbines don’t actually affect their lifestyles at all.

  9. Roger

    Interesting article by Judith Sloan today in the Australian showing the RET is being reduced making these stupid things uneconomic, but who will pay for their removal?

    Whoever is deemed responsible in the contract.

    Unless they go broke, of course, in which case it’s likely to be you and me.

  10. Slim Cognito

    I never thought I’d see the day when Brown agrees with Abbott and Hockey about the aesthetics of windmills.

  11. Turtle

    The greens need to be reminded of this again and again. The real win here is that the Greens most respected elder has admitted that turbines spoil the view and kill birds. We need to freeze this, Alinski style, and make it a popular image of the greens. Hypocritical NIMBYs.

    They are trapped. This event makes them very angry.

  12. notafan

    GEM director Tristan Edis said the focus was now firmly on state governments given the Federal Government has declared it does not intend to implement additional policies to reduce emissions in the electricity sector.

    Good

    bizarrely Tasmania will only slip below 100% if there are further droughts but the climate mongers have told us that we will never get sufficient rain again

    Renewable energy is growing, but NSW and Queensland are still undershooting their targets

  13. JMH

    I abhor the rent-seeking wind industry for all the logical reasons. It’s pointless. My concern is for the fate of many avian species (including bats) that are being slaughtered. I doubt the f/tard Greens or retarded decision-makers will even blink an eye when the WTE is declared an endangered species – along with other avian species.

  14. Terence Brennan

    A blight on the landscape, a blight on the taxpayer.
    My guess is the bulk of the greens don’t care because they are not net taxpayers.

  15. BoyfromTottenham

    Roger,
    “The RET is being reduced…”
    The Australian is paywalled for me – any chance of posting a few extracts or a summary?

  16. Roger

    Roger,
    “The RET is being reduced…”
    The Australian is paywalled for me – any chance of posting a few extracts or a summary?

    Quoting Genghis above, Tottenham Lad.

    Ditched my Oz sub some time ago; I only read it on my weekly visits to the local library now.

    But this was announced back in the days of the Turnbull govt, iirc, so there should be other articles to be found..

  17. Dr Fred Llenin

    If windfarms need “Real Power Generators “as back up for most of the time ,what is the purpose of them ?
    Use the “Real Power Generators and scrap the windmills ,making the carpetbaggers responsible for their environmentally correct re cycling and restoration of all sites to pristine condition .
    I hope the windmills are close to brown to drive him up the wall with their noise ,and every to[ime you look out of his house one of the ugly things is visible as an eyesore ,serve the mongrel right if he empnded up in the foolish house . (Psychiatric hospital ) _\

  18. The Greens live in a world of contradictions, verging on insanity.

  19. notafan

    Abbott reduced the RET

    Rather, Abbott declared the RET amendment for what it is – a “capital R” Reduction, aimed specifically at limiting the growth rate of the wind energy sector “as much as the current Senate would allow

    .”

    Abbott says RET policies designed to reduce ‘visually awful’ wind farms

  20. notafan

    Of course MV would have it that Abbott introduced the RET

  21. Mater

    The only comment Judith made about the RET:

    “The sector’s nightmare has become reality. Not only has the Coalition been re-elected with no intention of rebooting the RET – it will run out in the early 2020s – but the sector’s bete noire, Angus Taylor, remains Energy Minister with additional responsibility for emissions reduction.”

  22. BoyfromTottenham

    bemused – I disagree – the Greens are not insane, they just live in the same mental world that gave us Karl Marx’s Communist Manifesto in 1848, leading to the Marxist October 1917 Bolshevik Revolution in Russia. All they have done is replace ‘the evils of capitalism’ with ‘the evils of CO2’ (which is code for the evils of fossil fuels, which of course made the industrial revolution possible) in their ‘dictatorship of the climatariat’ manifesto. Same aim, different means. Unfortunately our conservative pollies either haven’t read and understood Marx’s Manifesto and/or the history of the Bolshevik revolution (well worth a read, BTW), or haven’t joined the dots between Marxist Communism and the Greens’ policies.

  23. RobK

    so it is two and a half times oversized but still unreliable.
    It will need conductors sized to carry the occasional peak load, 2.5 times its average. It still doesn’t get around the problem that when it’s very windy everywhere, all the storage soon fills up and curtailment follows, dragging the capacity factor down further. Sometimes everything will go just fine.
    The other tragedy is that a lot of superannuation funds are vested in this folly of subsidies.

  24. Helen

    Yes, wind turbines use a lot of rare earths. So do mobile phones, iPads, laptops, televisions, hybrid cars, and solar cells. There are about 10 billion mobile devices in existence – not sure if that includes all the old ones thrown away ( https://techjury.net/stats-about/smartphone-usage/). To be consistent, we need to get rid of all this technology to save the people in Batou.

  25. Dr Fred Llenin

    Going to be interesting watching the alp union gangsters explaining to their union members where their superannuation money has gone when it vanishes into the accounts of the iternatioal climate capetbaggers after the bubbble bursts . Still soros and turnbull and the rest might make small donations from their Caymann accounts to the Poor Funds the retired. unionists will rely on to eat . The lying excuses will be creative no doubt ,spin doctors will be flat out .

  26. Rafe Champion

    notofan provided an interesting link

    Renewable energy is growing, but NSW and Queensland are still undershooting their targets

    That leads to another one on the amount of random RE that is coming without “holistic planning”, missing completely the elephant in the room that is the need for every bit of coal and gas power we can find for decades to come.

    And that leads to another one on the Chinese demand for good black coal and its impact on local coal prices especially in NSW. And on to power prices.

  27. Rafe Champion

    Don’t anyone mention stranded assets:)

  28. egg_

    Interesting article by Judith Sloan today in the Australian showing the RET is being reduced making these stupid things uneconomic, but who will pay for their removal?

    Whoever is deemed responsible in the contract.

    If they’re on leased land, it’s usually the landowner, per the contract, I believe.

  29. hzhousewife

    It’s not just in Tassie. I was diving up the Western Highway near Ararat and there were huge windmills blighting the landscape.

    These will be the ones of special benefit to the ACT government, whose green citizens do not have to put up with a blight on the local landscape.

  30. Howard Hill

    And being so inefficient, tens of thousands of them would never replace coal power stations.

    I fixed it for you, Fred. We must be accurate when making such statements.

  31. Tim Neilson

    Going to be interesting watching the alp union gangsters explaining to their union members where their superannuation money has gone when it vanishes into the accounts of the iternatioal climate capetbaggers after the bubbble bursts .

    Dry your tears for the unfortunate union leaders Dr Fred. I’m sure that there’ll be a taxpayer funded bailout, and the union reps on the super fund boards won’t be expected to repay any of their fees.

  32. Interesting article by Judith Sloan today in the Australian showing the RET is being reduced making these stupid things uneconomic, but who will pay for their removal?

    Not just the removal of the towers, that’s the easy part. Those things are anchored in a huge block of solid concrete. I think about 10m x 10m x 10m
    In thousands of years, archeologists will dig these things up and surmise about religious cults or secret messages to aliens.

  33. Iva Right

    Human offal these greens.

  34. …the Greens are not insane, they just live in the same mental world that gave us Karl Marx’s Communist Manifesto…

    Isn’t the definition of insanity doing the same thing over and over again, hoping to get a different result? Whether it’s Socialism (the Greens are strongly in favour) or Greenism, it’s repeating these ideals in the hope of getting a different result.

  35. Tim Neilson

    In thousands of years, archeologists will dig these things up and surmise about religious cults or secret messages to aliens.

    They’ll be correct.

  36. egg_

    Those things are anchored in a huge block of solid concrete. I think about 10m x 10m x 10m

    Similar to the Sydney Harbour Bridge (30 feet deep concrete IIRC) and about 100 m higher at blade tip.

  37. Rafe Champion

    Very informative little piece on windmills written to scare people with some facts.

    Massive areas, including tracts of high quality farmland, are scraped clean of living things to make way for wind factories and fields of solar panels. The windmills have awesome dimensions that contrast with the rather cute picture postcard image seen from a distance. The latest models of wind turbines standing 80 metres high with blades up to 50 meters sweeping 1.5 acres. The blade assemblies can weigh 40 tons, the tower over 70 tons. The nacelle at the top is the size of a bus and the total can be over 300 tons. The base contains a thousand tons or more of reinforced concrete. Contemplate the dollar cost and the CO2 generated in the manufacture and transport of that amount of material multiplied many times over for a substantial wind farm!

    New roads are required to access to remote sites because old logging roads cannot carry the massive pieces of machinery. There will have to be more clearing for hundreds or even thousands of kilometers of high tension transmission lines with associated substations to connect to the existing grid.

    The combination of road building, clearing and installation degrades and fragments wildlife habitats and impacts on water flow and erosion.

    As the first wind factories reached the end of their working life the problem of disposal emerged as a major issue. Already there are forests of abandoned machinery in parts of the US and there will be a lot more unless contractors are required to decommission the sites and return them to a semi-natural state. That could cost as much as the construction, not to mention the disposal of the heavy metals inside. The same concern about heavy metals applies to the disposal of solar panels as they reach the end of their working lives in the next few years.

    https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelshellenberger/2018/05/23/if-solar-panels-are-so-clean-why-do-they-produce-so-much-toxic-waste/#5325a239121c

  38. egg:

    Similar to the Sydney Harbour Bridge (30 feet deep concrete IIRC) and about 100 m higher at blade tip.

    I wonder how many of these lumps of concrete are actually 30 feet deep, and not just 29, or even – Heaven Forbid! – 20′. The excess concrete having gone to build driveways or pools, or even apartment buildings…

  39. … or concrete barriers – bollards to you – under contract of certain people.

  40. …The latest models of wind turbines standing 80 metres high with blades up to 50 meters …

    80m with 50m blades? The Delburn windfarm is proposing turbine 250m tall: https://australianimage.com.au/the-winds-of-climate-change/

  41. Nob

    No surprise in Brown’s actions.

    Greens were founded on opposition to renewable energy (in the form of hydro).

    They don’t want clean energy. They want low or no energy.

  42. Rafe Champion

    Thanks bemused! Amazing developments, if the smaller old ones had a thousand tons of concrete in the base how much will the bigger ones need to resist the bending moment of the massive weight at the top and the leverage of the very long tower?

  43. Bemused:

    The Greens live in a world of contradictions, verging on insanity.

    The situation with the Greens is this:

    When people are forced to remain silent when they are being told the most obvious lies, or even worse when they are forced to repeat the lies themselves, they lose once and for all their sense of probity. To assent to obvious lies is to co-operate with evil, and in some small way to become evil oneself. One’s standing to resist anything is thus eroded, and even destroyed. A society of emasculated liars is easy to control. I think if you examine political correctness, it has the same effect and is intended to.

    The Greens are that section of our society that have no probity. They have no ability to observe or comment on the ludicrous philosophies they espouse.
    They are the Outer Party, duckspeaking their way to their doublethink insanity.

  44. Up The Workers!

    “There was movement at the station
    For the word had got around
    That the Mung-Beaning Luddite from Cygnet
    Had got away
    And had joined the coal-fired power-generating crowd.”

    Always a worry when there’s movement in the “Brown Movement”

  45. W Hogg

    No surprise in Brown’s actions.

    Greens were founded on opposition to renewable energy (in the form of hydro).

    Weren’t they actually founded BY St Bob??

    That would make him Australia’s leading Renewables Denier wouldn’t it?

Comments are closed.