Open Season On Bald Eagles

jhblaze1 said:
they're overpopulated.

It's a bird, not some sacred shrine of patriotism. Ben Franklin wanted the official bird to be a turkey.

I'm willing to bet most eagles are smart enough not to fly into the turbines.


This story is contrived horseshit, Obama being a total piece of shit notwithstanding.
Click to expand...

"It's not a sacred shrine of patriotism"? HUH Say what???
 
edmorseiii said:
I hate things and Obama doesn't look like me.
Click to expand...
*******I don't hate him for his looks or race, I hate him for his far left liberal ideology and the demeaning, condescending words that come out of his anti-American mouth. I've NEVER hated a pol or public figure like I do that MF'er. My regret is that he's younger than I am and He'll probably out live me so I won't be able to celebrate his death..
 
knfmn said:
Doesn't surprise me at all. I work in Gloucester and have friends that live there. The town decided to approve three wind turbines a few years ago. The turbines make an awful sound when they are actually running. The majority of the time they are standing idle. It is not the future of energy by any means.
Click to expand...

Not criticizing you but the term "wind turbines" is neurolinguistic programming. Makes 'em sound all futurey an' sh!t.

They're not "turbines." There is no turbine involved. They're windmills.

Electrical power generation should be left to engineers.
 
Last edited:
mibro said:
Not criticizing you but the term "wind turbines" is neurolinguistic programming. Makes 'em sound all futurey an' sh!t.

They're not "turbines." There is no turbine involved. They're windmills.

Electrical power generation should be left to engineers.
Click to expand...

Umm... no.

http://wind.jmu.edu/communityengagement/millvsturbine.html

There is a difference between a windmill and a wind turbine. What we're talking about are wind turbines. They aren't grinding corn. They're generating electricity.

Turbine (noun): a machine for producing continuous power in which a wheel or rotor, typically fitted with vanes, is made to revolve by a fast-moving flow of water, steam, gas, air, or other fluid.
 
modernhamlet said:
Turbine (noun): a machine for producing continuous power in which a wheel or rotor, typically fitted with vanes, is made to revolve by a fast-moving flow of water, steam, gas, air, or other fluid.
Click to expand...

My guess is you're no engineer. If you are, you have no excuse.

Steam turbine. Produces continuous power from fast-moving, high pressure steam.

Gas turbine. Produces continuous power from fast-moving, high pressure gas.

Wind mill.

Here's a steam turbine (rotor):

tm-3-6-steam-turbines_620x230.jpg
 
Last edited:
modernhamlet said:
Umm... no.

http://wind.jmu.edu/communityengagement/millvsturbine.html

There is a difference between a windmill and a wind turbine. What we're talking about are wind turbines. They aren't grinding corn. They're generating electricity.

Turbine (noun): a machine for producing continuous power in which a wheel or rotor, typically fitted with vanes, is made to revolve by a fast-moving flow of water, steam, gas, air, or other fluid.
Click to expand...

there is no turbine attached anywhere on what people call a wind turbine. propellers are attached to a gear box and generator or directly to a generator. whats going on is people are calling the propellers the turbine which they are not. its all marketing
 
todd c said:
there is no turbine attached anywhere on what people call a wind turbine. propellers are attached to a gear box and generator or directly to a generator. whats going on is people are calling the propellers the turbine which they are not. its all marketing
Click to expand...

Thank you, sir.

I wish it were only marketing. As I said, calling it a turbine is an attempt to get the muppets to buy into its scienciness an' sh!t.

A wind mill is a set of blades, a gearbox, generator and inverter. No turbine anywhere to be found.
 
Last edited:
mibro said:
Thank you, sir.

I wish it were only marketing. As I said, calling it a turbine is an attempt to get the muppets to buy into its scienciness an' sh!t. Works well as we can see above.
Click to expand...

ya i cringe when i hear it, but i think it was for marketing reasons. wind turbine sounds more high tech than wind powered generator.
 
So the verdict is that it's not actually a turbine, even though literally the entire internet calls them that. Damn you, internet!

They're obviously not a mill.

I guess the accurate phrase would be: aerofoil-powered generator?

Doesn't exactly roll off the tongue.
 
modernhamlet said:
So the verdict is that it's not actually a turbine, even though literally the entire internet calls them that. Damn you, internet!

They're obviously not a mill.

I guess the accurate phrase would be: aerofoil-powered generator?

Doesn't exactly roll off the tongue.
Click to expand...

I will accept wind generator.

They're called turbines for the precise reason that turbines are capable of generating continuous power, something a wind generator most emphatically cannot do.

I hope you can now see how the term "turbine" was intentionally selected to shape your thoughts. Now you have the information you need to break this small piece of the matrix.
 
Last edited:
mibro said:
I will accept wind generator.

They're called turbines for the precise reason that turbines are capable of generating continuous power, something a wind generator most emphatically cannot do.

I hope you can now see how the term "turbine" was intentionally selected to shape your thoughts. Now you have the information you need to break this small piece of the matrix.
Click to expand...

To be honest, I'm still confused. What is an example of an actual power generating turbine? The definition of "continuous" is unclear to me here.
 
todd c said:
Hydro turbines and steam turbines fit. Then there is turbine engine's for thrust.
Click to expand...
Right.

So you've got water flow based turbines, which work continuously, so long as the water flows.

And you've got steam turbines hooked up to nuclear or fossil-fuel burning plants, which work continuously, so long as the steam flows.

So is the "continuous" part just a matter of it being human controlled? Obviously nothing runs truly continuously. Maintenance on the turbine or maintenance on the systems that drive it would require shut down. What about tidal turbines? They stop working briefly every time the tide shifts in or out, right? Or hydroelectric dams, which obviously don't always have adequate water to run their turbines continuously?

Is the issue that wind power is naturally intermittent vs human controlled continuous? Or is there some other physical difference inside the wind power generator?

(Thanks for taking the time, btw. This thread definitely checks off my daily "learn something new every day" box.)
 
I don't think anyone believes wind turbine produces continual power just because it says turbine. I'm pretty sure sure people realize if it isn't spinning it isn't doing shit.
 
Last edited:
todd c said:
Hydro turbines and steam turbines fit. Then there is turbine engine's for thrust.
Click to expand...

Gas turbines can be designed either to do work via the output shaft or to generate thrust via the exhaust gases. They are fairly similar machines nevertheless. Obviously if the goal is to generate electrical power you want to turn a shaft not produce high velocity exhaust gases.
 
knfmn said:
Doesn't surprise me at all. I work in Gloucester and have friends that live there. The town decided to approve three wind turbines a few years ago. The turbines make an awful sound when they are actually running. The majority of the time they are standing idle. It is not the future of energy by any means.
Click to expand...

Those are the ones I work around.
Go over to Applied Materials parking lot around 9-10 am.
The shadow those things throw would drive you batshit crazy if it was on your house.
And each one makes a different sound.
That one makes a whoop whoop whoop noise and the one across the way by Intershell makes a howling noise.
 
modernhamlet said:
Right.

So you've got water flow based turbines, which work continuously, so long as the water flows.

And you've got steam turbines hooked up to nuclear or fossil-fuel burning plants, which work continuously, so long as the steam flows.

So is the "continuous" part just a matter of it being human controlled? Obviously nothing runs truly continuously. Maintenance on the turbine or maintenance on the systems that drive it would require shut down. What about tidal turbines? They stop working briefly every time the tide shifts in or out, right? Or hydroelectric dams, which obviously don't always have adequate water to run their turbines continuously?

Is the issue that wind power is naturally intermittent vs human controlled continuous? Or is there some other physical difference inside the wind power generator?

(Thanks for taking the time, btw. This thread definitely checks off my daily "learn something new every day" box.)
Click to expand...

Turbines generally have axial flow and use a high energy working fluid with the fluid flow contained inside the device. They are also dispatchable. i.e. you can turn them on when you need them - hence "continuous power." Steam turbines do run for literally years at a time at varying power levels without being shut down.

In my opinion the only devices that really qualify as turbines are steam and gas turbines with hydro turbines a weaker contender.

The ONLY point I am trying to make is wind generators were intentionally named wind "turbines" with the goal of shaping the perception of their level of technology. "Turbine" sounds cool, yes? Very futuristic. Gives you the warm and fuzzies about beating that evil glubbuh wubbuh wif da hi tek.

But:

Axial flow? Sorta kinda.

Contained axial flow? Nope.

High energy working fluid? Nope.

Dispatchable? Nope.
 
Last edited:
DarthRevan said:
People actually believe this shit? Animals are far smarter than most of us give them credit for. I have a very hard time believing you'll see any real number of birds being killed by those things. God the stupid in this is staggering.
Click to expand...
Well in fact wind power generators do kill birds. However, the number of eagles they kill (vs. say seagulls or starlings) is, I would agree, much lower than the "standards" they came up with.

More importantly, wind power generators kill a TINY fraction of birds when compared to other sources:
http://http://www.usatoday.com/stor...l-fewer-birds-than-cell-towers-cats/15683843/

Wind turbines kill between 214,000 and 368,000 birds annually — a small fraction compared with the estimated 6.8 million fatalities from collisions with cell and radio towers and the 1.4 billion to 3.7 billion deaths from cats, according to the peer-reviewed study by two federal scientists and the environmental consulting firm West Inc.
Click to expand...
(I'm guessing not many bald eagles in the "deaths from cats" category though!)
 

Similar threads

Next round of CMP 1911s open...
Replies
2
Views
171
dfritz
D
California Non Res Carry Permits open! Sort of...
Replies
0
Views
107
rogersmithiii
R
Original open carry
Replies
0
Views
179
watchman
W
Epping Open Carry
Replies
26
Views
955
slap shot
slap shot
Desert Eagle in 50AE vs Squib. Guess who won?
2
Replies
58
Views
1K
wcorey
W
Back
Top Bottom