how come wind power doesn't work at low temperatures? does the lubricant get too thick?

how come wind power doesn't work at low temperatures? does the lubricant get too thick?

Beware Cat Shirt $21.68

Rise, Grind, Banana Find Shirt $21.68

Beware Cat Shirt $21.68

  1. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Just make it all nuclear. Frick off.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Nuclear doesn't work at all.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Just make it all nuclear. Frick off.

        Just stop consuming huge frick tons of energy. Ever considered that dick heads?

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          I will not eat the bugs and I'll not use the bike
          Make everything nuclear and death to oil barons and green cucks

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >just stop using technology!!!
          >REEEEEEEE!!!!!!

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >I'M GONNA CONSOOOOOOM

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            How come you're not posting images from your collection of fat fetish porn? Got banned too many times and finally learned your lesson? Are you ban evading right now?

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            most of technology is bloatware today. look at that gif you posted, a webm would be smaller and crystal clear, but noo you have to send this 90s abomination through the internet and waste everyone’s bandwidth
            any smartphone would last weeks if the computing it does (for nothing) were to be toned down
            nobody needs thousands of jscripts running on a website, their only purpose is to intrude your privacy anyways. what use is green energy if nothing is efficient

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        https://i.imgur.com/C7qkFwM.png

        >just use nucl-ACK

        >chernobyl series is about the dangers of lying and ignorance
        >no actually it's about how hecking dangerous nuclear power is :^)

        fission works just fine, unless you run it on crazy soviet engineering or ignore tsunami warnings

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Soviet engineering worked just fine, hohols were the only ones who had issues with that type of reactor.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >Fukushima
          >Three Mile Island

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            To anybody who isn't a big oil shill Fukushima proves how safe nuclear is, only a minor leak after a Tsunami because of a badly sited generator.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >only 164,000 residents were displaced. TEPCO is keeping you and your loved ones safe ^_^

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Nuclear has saved tens of thousands of lives and gigatonnes of CO2, only paid shills and idiots oppose nuclear.

            We could have been almost carbon free decades ago if it wasn't for people like you.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >only paid shills and idiots support nuclear.
            FTFY. Why invest in a dead technology that relies on a finite resource when you can invest in renewables instead? We have enough uranium for like 200 years and only get 4% of our primary energy from nuclear. If we went 100% nuclear, we'd run out of fuel before building the last reactor.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Renewables are just hiding the ball. Do you think the materials needed to maintain the battery infrastructure etc. necessary for solar/wind/hydroelectric are any more renewable than any of the other assets we are talking about here?

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            What happens when local tribes shut down the mines poisoning their forests and make energy transition materials too expensive, will these progressive greenies start saying we need to remove those people from mining areas and educate them about the benefits of green tech?

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            So just use plutonium lmao
            I thought anti-nuclears consider the nuclear 'waste' bad because it glows too much
            Just wring out these bad boys

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >oy vey we've reached peak uranium
            same lies have been circulated about coal gas and oil and they've never been true, everyone knows you're lying about >muh uranium

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            It was an severe over reaction that the residents weren't allowed to return home after a few days

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >164,000 residents were displaced
            That means absolutely nothing unless you can prove it was a reasonable response.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            The town was reinhabited immediately and a grand total of 1 person died if radiation exposure during the disaster. And all it took to cause this enormous travesty was to build the reactor infrastructure below sea level and for it to be undermaintained, unprepared, and to be hit by a huge tsunami. I don't think a person could even intentionally sabotage a modern reactor

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            it was keeping the reservoir of backup diesel fuel at sea level that ended up doing them in. if the emergency backup had been stored high enough to not have been underwater then then the incident never would have occurred.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >only a minor leak after a Tsunami because of a badly sited generator.
            No, this is a reateded argument in complete ignorancve of the site.
            Fukushima was a literal state terrorist attack against Japan carried out by a group of so called israeli engineers Magna BSP

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            So, you're arguing that we shouldn't have such easy targets for whatever Head Canon evil israeli cabal is blowing up power plants?

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Just don't let terrorist and hostile states near your infrastructure

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >Sellafield
            And while they didn't contaminate the area, the French nuclear power frickup (corrosion and driest summer in the past 500 years) in 2022 showed how utterly stupid it is for half a continent to rely on nuclear power. Look at the energy prices in all of Europe as they were trying to outbid each other on the spot market. I live in Switzerland and as the Swiss do, they tried to make the biggest profit they could. They drained their reservoirs to sell electricity to France and Germany (who would've bought French power usually), but then they also realised that it's a dry fricking summer. We've had government ads to save electricity, fearing for rolling blackouts because the reservoirs were depleted and we couldn't import from France. Frick nuclear power, unreliable piece of shit technology.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            wind power is still worse for the environment, they've destroyed more nature in the past 10 years by driving birds and bats to extinction than nuclear power has in it's 70 year history.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            ain't it funny how rightoids suddenly become so concerned about the environment when talking about wind and solar?

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            When demonstrating hypocrisy you must present inconsistencies in the values of others, not oneself.

            And what the frick is
            >the environment

            Solar is the future btw, wind frickers get the rope

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >how come wind power doesn't work at low temperatures? does the lubricant get too thick?

            Ice forms on the turbine blades and they get gunked up and stop working. Simple as.

            Those are clippings. They plant them to grow more turbines you silly billy.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >I don't know what actually happened at TMI, but I know I'm supposed to bring it up to show how nuclear is le bad

            it's all so tiresome.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Visited the outskirts a year or so ago and was incredibly surprised it is still operational. I'm pro nuclear but I'd managed to be led by propaganda into thinking the whole place was shutdown and was a no go zone. It's almost accepted as fact but the reality is so different.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >Zaporizha
            >biggest nuclear power plant in Europe
            >old as shit
            >operating inside the most corrupted country in Europe
            >literally in the middle of a warzone, got even bombed
            >still no problems

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >you should be happy about all the power plants that DIDN'T blow up in our faces
            >kids in Yugoslavia should be happy about all the land mines they DIDN'T step on

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Nice false equivalency, now kys

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        thats a clip from a Hollywood movie, numbskull. movies and tv shows aren't real, inability to differentiate movies and tv from reality indicates an IQ of under 110

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      That doesn't work when rivers get too warm though. Almost as if a diverse network of various non-polluting technologies works best.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Wrong. The only energy sources you need are wind and solar. Everything else is either suicidally polluting (coal, nuclear) or too disruptive (hydro, geothermal).

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          >hydro is le disruptive
          There's a hydro plant in a local river 400m from my home. Please explain how disruptive this is. It's part of a weir regulating the river.

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            Dams destroy huge areas of habitat by flooding entire valleys to form their reservoir, and block migration patterns of animals like Salmon.
            I think there's also an argument about the subsequent lack of seasonal flooding affecting plants and animals that have become adapted to the floods.

            Not saying we should get rid of all dams, but they do have an impact that has to be considered.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          you do realize they use gasoline to make solar cells right?

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          nuclear energy is the thing to obsolete mans mastery of fire and don't let any goddamn hippie or coal nut tell you otherwise, we are barely using the lowest tech shittiest form of it right now

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            >just use nucl-ACK

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          How is geothermal 'disruptive'?

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          I would love to see you try and run an industrial society on only wind and solar. How are you even going to power steel smelters to create all the steel for panels and turbines? If the weather sucks I guess society just shuts down entirely?

        • 1 month ago
          DoctorGreen

          >wind energy
          >not polluting

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        It's only regulations (same goes for coal btw) that prevent its discharge from heating the river too much. Not that it stops working only a moron would think that. If those hot river events happen more often the plant will simply build a cooling tower.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      nuclear energy discussions really show how powerful propaganda is. everyone had their middle school teachers telling them nuclear is the future in he early 2000s and they still get irrationally mad about it to this day, even though it obviously doesnt align with our current energy goals

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        >doesnt align with our current energy goals
        Because the goals are to create scarcity and artificially cripple western economies.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >current energy goals
        those goals being Talmudic in origin

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Nein!

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      fibby
      >verification not required

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      33GW of solar capacity was added last year. With a ~25% capacity factor that's close to the maximum added nuclear capacity in the heydays of nuclear power. Solar buildout is only accelerating. There is only one Vogtle unit that is scheduled to come online this year. After that no new reactors actually under construction. Nuclear is ngmi.

  2. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >why is wind power not working when there's no wind
    personally, I blame israelites

  3. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    well not much wind when cold

  4. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >Is it true that wind turbines don’t work in the winter?
    >No: with proper preparation, wind turbines can work in extreme cold temperatures and in snow and ice.
    https://climate.mit.edu/ask-mit/it-true-wind-turbines-dont-work-winter

    Oil shills caught lying again. Let me guess, the guy is a bluecheck.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      greta is a bluecheck

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      > proper preparation
      usually some form of fossil fuel generator for heating

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        What's with all the lying? It doesn't even make any sense. If they relied on external heating why not use electrical heating? I mean, they produce their own electricity. And even if they need a jumpstart, they're already connected to the grid. Why would they rely on fossil fuels to be cold-proof? Do you think that someone has to climb up with a canister of gasoline every winter and top up the tank? Or a sack of coals? When the power cable is already there?
        Also, even if they required a little bit of fossil fuels (which they don't, since it's ridiculous), the amount they use per unit energy they feed into the grid would be utterly negligible compared to a conventional power plant.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          because fossil fuel tanks don't shrink on low temperature and have been in use for over 100 years. Sure there are batteries that don't fare as bad but they cost a lot more.
          You are being very silly as if you had zero experience with the tech and didn't even bother googling. We had this discussion already last year because the people made fun of Texas having to heat their wind turbines.
          >Also, even if they required a little bit of fossil fuels (which they don't, since it's ridiculous), the amount they use per unit energy they feed into the grid would be utterly negligible compared to a conventional power plant.
          this depends on your viewpoint yes for the heating its negligible but if you see the required backups it quickly turns to shit in a real system. And no nothing you say will change my mind I have worked in the field and know the numbers its all bullshit propaganda a pipe dream that won't come true. Look up the calculations you will see what assumptions they make.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      And the preparations out cost the amount of power generated during cold.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >observing reality is 'shilling'

  5. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Ice probably accumulates on the blades.

  6. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    funny thing is if one spends just an hour researching nuclear power then there is nothing to be afraid of
    people who don't like it seemingly want to stay scared of supernova metal

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      you mean you spend just an hour brainwashing your brain? yeah, you're clearly smart enough to figure out if they're bullshitting you, innit?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >there is nothing to be afraid of

  7. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    If IQfy no longer supports nuclear then this board really has turned into a board of morons

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >REEEE YOU HAVE FALLEN FROM GRACE, DONT DISRESPECT THE HOLY NUCLEARRRR

  8. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Isn't wind caused by air moving from high pressure to low pressure. If there is no change in weather, there will be no wind.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      extremely cold weather in latitudes below 60º or so is almost always accompanied by high winds because the only way for it to get extremely cold at lower latitudes is via an intrusion of air from the arctic.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        got windy af here ones the temps dropped below 15ºF

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Why isn't the wind blowing in op pic rel

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          We don't know if it isn't. We don't know if the turbines are turned off because it's easier than ramping down nuclear power plants. We don't know if these turbines are designed in a way that they really don't work in extremely cold temperatures. It's possible that the operator saved some money when he built them because they are in a generally warm area and losing revenue for a few days per year might be the better deal for him. We don't even know if the turbines are really standing still, it's just an image. If you go outside and take a picture of wind turbines, they also appear standing still. It's just a picture on social media and people lie on social media all the time.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          it is, you can look up recorded wind speeds in that region at the time indicated on the pic via the rutger's university weather information database

  9. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    we should use nuclear but mostly to create shittons of weapon-grade fissionable material.
    solar, wind and thermal combined with energy storage would be enough for power generation but it doesn't help us with removing xenos when we humanize space.

  10. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Because wind turbines are a scam, they don't generate shit but use electricity to spin the blades, creating the illusion of working.
    Why do they do that? Scamming money and shilling for transition from oil/gas.

  11. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >Solar and nuclear are the only power options in space
    >You see fossil fuels are the most durable energy source

  12. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >how come wind power doesn't work at low temperatures?
    alberta has wind turbines that run 24/7. are americans too stupid to build them correctly?

  13. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    is there a term for smug ignorance?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      modern liberal?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      arrogance

  14. 1 month ago
    Anonymous
    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      Wind power is so lame and gay, I can't believe that science pushes this useless garbage on everyone for no good reason

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      So you admit that burning Oil is bad?

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        No, I don't think you can make that conclusion from his post, it merely points out the hypocrisy.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          Why is it hypocrisy? Per windmill the helicopter might need 10-20 litres and afterwards it will produce 5-10 MW. How long could you have operated a power plant based on burning fossil fuel? You get about 30MJ of heat per litre of gas. In a power plant you can convert maybe 1/3 to electrical power. So, you would have gotten maybe 100-200 MJ out of it. Or 28-56 kWh. Do you think it's hypocrisy because they are burning fossil fuels?

          • 1 month ago
            Anonymous

            windmills don't work in cold weather
            theres no wind when its cold

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      don't forget the turbine needs a 10000 gallon reservoir of lubricant oil to operate

  15. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    The future is LK-99 powered fusion reactors. In other words, we don't know what it is.

  16. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Just move somewhere warm and STFU

  17. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Like that time gas pipelines froze in Texas and the governor blamed it on wind turbines?
    https://www.theverge.com/2021/2/17/22287130/texas-natural-gas-production-power-outages-frozen

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      theverge.com is a fake news political propaganda website, nothing on there is true.

  18. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Wait until you find out that wind power doesn't work in windy weather either and they have to turn them off to keep the turbines from burning themselves up.

  19. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    things move slower when they're cold

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >windmills are cold blooded creatures

  20. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    this, solar power is the soiybean goyslop of the energy sector

  21. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    There could be many reasons. First of all, ice may form in the blades and that is bad for safety and balance of the machine. Some wind turbines have heating to prevent this (which of course eats some of the electricity produced), but not all.

    Then there is the fact that on a cold, clear winter day with a high athmospheric pressure (anticyclone), there isn't usually much wind. That is unfortunate, as cold weather usually means more demand for electricity.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *