.png)
Here is an incomplete list of the sustainable energy and climate change books I read in 2009 (actually, a few also scraped in from late 2008). I’ve provided a 2 — 3 sentence summary of each book (from my perspective) and a Rating out of 5. Some books have been reviewed in more detail on BNC already — enter from the title of the book in this website’s search box to find the review.
Climate science
James Lovelock. The Vanishing Face of Gaia: A Final Warning. Basic Books, 2009, 288 p. — Lovelock is a wise old man who’s seen it all, and he pulls no punches here. His ruthless pragmatism on nuclear energy and climate adaptation was what I most enjoyed about this book. Chapter 4, “Energy and Food Sources” is a wonderful summary of the energy problem and the rest of the book explores the many uncertainties in climate science, and why they’re generally pretty bad news. We’re not in for a smooth ride this century. Rating: 4
James Hansen. Storms of My Grandchildren: The Truth About the Coming Climate Catastrophe and Our Last Chance To Save Humanity. Bloomsbury, 2009, 320 p. — For a scientist, Hansen has an exceptional knack at writing for a general audience. In exploring the climate’s sensitivity to human forces, he draws on three principle lines of evidence — Earth history, modern observational data, and models/physics (the latter as integrators and predictors, the first line of evidence he considers to be the most compelling). In Hansen’s exploration of solutions, he (rightly) derides cap-and-trade shell games and points towards a technological solution with a clear timetable for closing out coal by 2030. Rating: 4.5
David Archer. The Long Thaw: How Humans Are Changing the Next 100,000 Years of Earth’s Climate. Princeton UP, 2009, 180 p. — Excellent summary of the study of palaeoclimates and why this field of science points to long residence times of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, with the implication that we are truly committing to change that will last ‘forever’ (hundreds of millennia). The right way to write popular science. Rating: 4
A. Barrie Pittock. Climate Change: The Science, Impacts and Solutions. CSIRO Publishing, 2009, 350 p. — Thorough, up-to-date review of climate science from a well-know Australian scientist. It examines whether things are worse now than we anticipated 5 to 10 years ago (answer = yes), and considers adaptation and mitigation solutions, with a focus on Australia. Barrie doesn’t think much about nuclear power; his dream is solar. Hmmm. Rating: 3.5
Sustainable energy
Tom Blees. Prescription for the Planet: The Painless Remedy for Our Energy and Environmental Crises. Booksurge, 2008, 411 p. (Chapters 1, 4 and 5 are free online) — Superb articulation of the environmental problems we face and an obvious solution that’s staring us in the face: the Integral Fast Reactor. A lot of space is also spent considering what could stymie the goal of a clean energy future and what international steps must be put in place to ensure that sustainable progress proceeds rationally and fairly, for all nations. Tom is now President of SCGI. Rating: 5
David Mackay. Sustainable Energy: Without the Hot Air. UIT Cambridge, 2009, 384 p. (free online) — Numbers, not adjectives. A brilliant breakdown of the facts and stats on renewable and nuclear energy, in the context of examining how the UK could wean itself off fossil fuels. It’s only real weakness is a lack of analysis of system cost, which matters greatly when trying to understand storage and overbuilding. Rating: 4.5
Bernard Cohen. The Nuclear Energy Option. Plenum, 1991, 338 p. (free online) — Without doubt the best book ever written on the science, engineering and economics of nuclear power and radiation. An absolute MUST read for anyone who wants to engage in this debate. It’s hard to describe how much I liked this book. Simply outstanding. Rating: 5
James Mahaffey. Atomic Awakening: A New Look At the History and Future of Nuclear Power. Pegasus Books, 2009, 344 p. — Actually, it’s almost all about the history of nuclear power rather than its future. The author (a nuclear engineer) goes right back to the 19th century scientific breakthrough, describes the wartime engineering steamroller, and relates some personal experiences of the heady, high-risk days of wild experimentation and ‘try anything’ of the 50s and 60s. Beautifully written, very hard to put down. Rating: 4.5
Zachary Moitoza. The Nuclear Economy: Why Only Nuclear Power Can Revitalize the Economy and Environment. Xlibris, 2009, 173 p. — Useful, short introduction to energy and 4th generation nuclear power and an exploration of its links to economic and environmental well-being. A good introduction to the topic, for people wanting to dip their toe into this big pond. Rating: 3
Howard Hayden. The Solar Fraud: Why Solar Energy Won’t Run the World. Vales Lake Publishing, 2004, 281 p. — Sharp critique of ‘technosolar’ energy sources, considering scaling problems and historical under performance (this is the focus). If you want to know the difference between the technosolar ‘hype’ (30+ years of it, embodied in 100s of quotes) and the pedestrian reality, you owe it to yourself to read this book. Rating: 3.5
Gwyneth Cravens. Power to Save the World: The Truth About Nuclear Energy.Knopf, 2007, 464 p. — A long and detailed description of the author’s journey from anti-nuclear protester to strong nuclear power advocate, with commentary from her many technical advisors. A wide range of topics — radiation, nuclear waste, safety, plant design — are explored in a personal style that ‘artsy’ people will enjoy and ‘technos’ will sometimes find too meandering. Rating: 3.5
Joe Shuster. Beyond Fossil Fools: The Roadmap to Energy Independence by 2040. Beaver’s Pond Press, 2008, 402 p. — Clear-headed examination of the limitations on supply of fossil fuels, the environmental damage they cause (the author is ambivalent on anthropogenic climate change and focuses on the other problems), a rational exploration of the likely mix of renewables and nuclear power in forging America’s energy independence. Needless to say, in the author’s mind, 4th generation nuclear power plays a major part. Rating: 3
Ted Trainer. Renewable Energy Cannot Sustain a Consumer Society. Springer 2007, 197 p. (free 40 page summary available online) — A critique of renewable energy from the perspective of how it fails to scale — mostly in terms of system backup and storage, but also in materials usage and cost. Has some excellent (albeit simple) analysis and lots of good data sources. Chapter on nuclear energy is pretty awful, and the conclusion that we must all return to a ‘simpler way’ is unrealistic (I think Ted reluctantly realises this). Rating: 3
————————————
Other books I read this year (and mostly enjoyed — or at least got something worthwhile from them) included “Total Energy Independence for the United States: A Twelve-Year Plan“, “Greenhouse Solutions With Sustainable Energy“, “Collapse: How Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed” and “Plan B 3.0“. I’m currently reading a couple of books off-and-on: “Megawatts + Megatonnes: The Future of Nuclear Power and Nuclear Weapons” and “Energy in a Changing Climate“. Perhaps I’ll review these, and some new additions, on New Year’s Eve 2010!
Of course I also ploughed through a slew of scientific papers (both peer-reviewed and grey literature) as any active research scientist must do to keep up with his field. Forgive me if I don’t list all of these…
Happy New Year for 2009 and the Noughties, from Barry W. Brook at BraveNewClimate. Thanks a million to all the guest writers this year — Tom Blees, Peter Lang, Geoff Russell, Tim Kelly, Steve Kirsch, Tony Kevin, Blair Trewin, Stewart Taggart, Ian Dunlop, Michael Lardelli, Andrew Glikson. Thanks to the many active and regular commenters that make the blog what it is. May 2010 be a productive and intellectually pragmatic year for you all!
Filed under: Clim Ch Q&A, Emissions, Future, Impacts, Nuclear, Renewables
Thanks (from the blog’s resident librarian) for the excellent reviews Barry.
Well that’s my reading mapped out for the future:0 – if I live long enough:) How do you keep up? More pertinent – how do you remember all the facts?
Thankyou also for the work you have put in (mostly in your own time I know) to making BNC a compelling blog on AGW/CC and more importantly on pragmatic and realistic solutions to the problem. You have given me hope that there is a way out of this diabolical situation allowing us to hand over a sustainable planet with a vibrant future, to all our children and grandchildren.
My New Year’s resolution is to promote GenIII and IFR technology (and your excellent blog) to all who will listen (and those that don’t want to!) Much more useful and more likely to be kept than my normal previous resolutions ( eat well, get fit, lose weight)! Although (sigh) they make the list yet again:)
A happy and healthy New Year to you all!
That’s my reading list for 2010. Thanks Barry.
Thankyou for these strong additions to my post christmas gift list
Thanks for a year worth of excellent blog posts, discussion and commentary… to Barry, guest authors, and all comment authors.
This post is, in and of itself, a useful reading list of good books on these subjects.
As a technical person who is already familiar with the science and technology of nuclear power, I didn’t learn much from “Power to Save the World” – but I think it’s an extremely valuable book for getting the information out there to the non-technical wider public in a form that they will digest, but still covers all the information that should be laid out there.
Another interesting book recommendation is ‘Energy from Heaven and Earth’ by Teller – one might be surprised to find the infamous Edward Teller, some 30 years ago, impressing on the readers the importance of switching off lights and conserving energy.
Furthermore, although it’s not really about peacetime energy generation at all, “The Making of the Atomic Bomb” by Richard Rhodes is an extremely good book, extremely readable, which chronicles the development of nuclear energy – for peacetime or for war – in its full scientific, political and historical context, explains quite a bit about how nuclear technology has come to be treated politically, and also explains a lot about the fundamental science and technology of nuclear energy in a very readable way.
Thank you, Barry, for the reviews, and most especially for the pointer to Bernard Cohens’ free book. I don’t know how you find time to read all that and also to write the high-quality material that you do, but I’m glad you do..
Your blog has been the most valuable resource I have found for my own education, both for its own content and for the material it links to. I look forward to reading more in 2010. Happy New Year!
I thought I’d share with you all a wonderful quote from James Mahaffey (Atomic Awakening, p XVII). It sums up perfectly the way I feel about nuclear energy:
Having realised, during 2009, the truth of a statement like this, what do I perceive as my role — and your role? To expedite matters. Reality will take care of itself, but for many reasons, our collective perception of it still needs a swift kick up the rear end.
Thanks Luke, I ordered “The Making of the Atomic Bomb” this very morning! I enjoyed Rhode’s introduction of Craven’s book and had been meaning to read this — you’ve provided the prompt to do so.
Luke Weston writes “the infamous Edward Teller”. Would that be this infamous Edward Teller, the one who foresaw Chernobyl and ensured it couldn’t happen anywhere except the former Soviet Union?
(How fire will be domesticated)
I can also vouch for Richard Rhodes’ book, “The Making of the Atomic Bomb” as well as his sequel or continuation of the story in “Dark Sun: The Making of the Hydrogen Bomb”. They are both extremely good.
Can I suggest “Whole Earth Discipline: An Ecopragmatist Manifesto” by Stewart Brand. His views on nuclear power are strongly influenced by James Lovelock, so you probably won’t find much new information in his chapter on nuclear power.
I found his discussions of urbanification and genetic engineering and Metagenomics quite interesting. The book on Metagenomics he references: “The New Science of Metagenomics: Revealing the Secrets of Our Microbial Planet” is available as a free download here: http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=11902
A very happy and prosperous New Year to all who frequent this place
Maybe I will be the last person to add HNY wishes on 2009 EST. Have a good one DV82XL whoever you are. I also expect GRLC to not worry too much about my interpretation of Godwin’s law. Both of you and many others like you are why I visit this blog and others (well mainly thoriumenergy, nucleargreen, talk-polywell) concerned with adding the right kind of energy to all our futures.
Impressive list. Of the >a dozen energy-related books I reviewed on Nuclear Street (www.nuclearstreet.com) last year, three match yours — Atomic Awakening, Power to Save the World and Beyond Fossil Fools.
My reviews:
http://nuclearstreet.com/blogs/nuclear_power_news/archive/2009/12/24/ns-book-reviews-a-2009-compendium-12242.aspx
Barry, you seem to have left Heaven and Earth off your list ..
I’ll add a few more I read (almost) in 2009:
Heat, by George Monbiot. This was Monbiot’s attempt to create a 90% emissions reduction scenario for the UK, without nuclear power. He made it, just, but the required changes in consumer behaviour more or less convinced me it wouldn’t work. (This was just before I found Brave New Climate).
The End of Oil, by Paul Roberts. Superbly researched geopolitical history of oil, and the enormous challenge that displacing it presents.
Also by Paul Roberts, The End of Food, a similarly deeply researched piece on how stretched our global food system is, and how vulnerable it is to shocks including climate change.
The Omnivore’s Dilemma is also worth mentioning in this context, as it explores issues related to productive ecosystem sustainability.
Why food? I like food, and diminished range and quality of food will certainly reduce my quality of life. Its a measure of the health of our ecology present even when I’m not out in the bush. From Roberts’ TEOF,
The injustices that have been perpetrated in Australia under the banner of meeting our Kyoto targets are beginning to penetrate the mainstream media. Such a pity that somebody had to go on a hunger strike and imperil their life to get it there. Peter Spencers demand for a royal commission are well founded. The broader picture is that our constitution is broken.
There is a good overview of the issue at the ALS blog.
http://blog.libertarian.org.au
Great bunch of books Barry. Some books I would add to this list are :
1) THE WIND FARM SCAM
by Dr John Etherington
2009 Stacey International
Excellent intro to how industrial wind got started and what is behind it (i.e. money not climate change). The final chapter I still have to read, which is his view on climate change. Personally I would have left this chapter out. Apart from that though it is a very readable & shocking account account of the dark side of industrial scale wind development. Anyone who thinks wind farms are great should read this book.
Order online at http://www.countryguardian.net/ & also note that much of what is in the book is also available as free pdf downloads.
2) Managing and Conserving Grassy Woodlands. Edited by: S McIntyre, JG McIvor & KM Heard Publisher: CSIRO PUBLISHING 2004
Very important book to understand the dual task of management & conservation of Australia’s Grassy Woodland ecosystems, which are now critically endangered & targeted for industrial wind development. This is a MUST READ. Find out what is there before its gone!
http://www.publish.csiro.au/nid/18/pid/4749.htm
3) Nina Pierpont, MD, PhD, Wind Turbine Syndrome: A Report on a Natural Experiment (Santa Fe, NM: K-Selected Books, 2009)
Oops accidently pressed submit, post continues ->
Nina Pierpont’s book is available from http://www.windturbinesyndrome.com/
Essential reading regarding negative health effects of industrial scale wind developments that are built too close to rural communities. Pre publication draft is available for free download. This book is hated by the wind industry, however many well respected physicians & professionals support this work. We should be calling for a full scale independent inquiry into negative health effects of industrial wind NOW!
4) Australian Energy Regulator, State of the Energy Market 2009.
Not exactly a book more an annual report. However, this is essential reading for anyone who wants to understand just how the Australian electricity system works (generation, grid and financial market). I really cannot recommend this highly enough to get a real understanding of the current state of play of electricity in Australia.
Available as a free pdf download at ->
http://www.aer.gov.au/content/index.phtml/itemId/732297
5) Clive Hamilton, The Freedom Paradox. Towards a post-secular ethics. (2008) Allen & Unwin
This book was given to me as a Christmas present, and I am just about to start reading it. I would suggest that policy makers and engineers also have a look at some of the ethics side of things. This was a point that David MacKay made at the start of his Sustainable Energy Without the Hot Air book i.e. once we’ve looked at the technical possibilities we then have other considerations before we start building. Also note that Hamilton is about to publish a book on Climate Change titled “Requiem for a Species” in March 2010 with the same publisher, although I have not seen any of the content of Requiem as yet..
http://www.clivehamilton.net.au/cms/index.php
6) THE BATTLE FOR CEFN CROES, BY THE CEFN CROES ACTION GROUP, Edited by Kaye Little, Publisher – (2003) Cefn Croes Publications, ISBN 0-954 5341-0-7.
This book cover covers the destruction of Cefn Croes in Wales, UK in the name of industrial wind / climate change. This is what can happen with bad planning & policy. Also available free as a pdf from ->
http://www.users.globalnet.co.uk/~hills/cc/book/index.htm
7) Force 10 (Political Will v Landscape Protection), by Elizabeth Mann.
Another book covering the process of wind farm construction & the failure of the planning and political systems. This and further works are available as free downloads from ->
http://www.wind-farm.co.uk/
8) National Research Council of the National Academies. (2007) “Environmental Impacts of Wind-Energy Projects”, The National Academies Press: Washington, DC. Available on
line at :
http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=11935
It is important to note also that since this National Research Council report was published in 2007 there have been a number of important papers published on the further negative environmental impacts of wind energy. The report also does not cover human health effects in depth. However, it is a comprehensive and wide ranging report up to 2007. Also covers planning issues. We need more of this type of study and in greater depth, particularly in an Australian context.
One of the National Research Council authors, Rick Webb, has made the pre-publication version of this important report available for free on line at :
http://www.vawind.org/Assets/NRC/NRC_Wind.htm
Webb has also summarized his personal concerns regarding industrial wind powers lack of GHG emissions reductions, particularly in SO2 and NOx, and the cumulative impacts to wildlife, available on line :
http://www.vawind.org/Assets/Docs/Perspective/Key_Points_About_Wind_Development.pdf
&
http://www.vawind.org/Assets/Docs/Wishful-Thinking.pdf
I don’t agree Terje. Mr Spencer ought to have known when he purchased his land that the rules might change.
In any event, on his own account, he looks likely to concede the land to a company called CBD chaired of all people, by Mark Vaile (yes the Mark Vaile) which is going to build a windfarm there when they acquire the land from the bank
$200m wind farm planned for Shannons Flat
Why if this is so he ought to be allowed to clear the land or compensated for not clearing it is hard to work out. Apparently Spencer ruined himself by engaging in a series of vexatious and costly legal actions. Why anyone outside of his family/heirs should be troubled by that is also hard to work out.
An interesting sidebar to this is that he claims to have been done over in 2004 after Howard changed the MRET rules covering wind turbines in 2004. Oh the irony …
CBD Energy have also recently secured a deal with China for wind turbines :
http://www.cbdenergy.com.au/media/CBD%20Signs%20Wind%20Turbine%20Supply%20Agreement%20with%20Tianwei%203%20pages.pdf
I am not aware of any industrial scale wind turbines actually being manufactured in Australia. Anyone ??
Imagine the amount of shipping required for all those turbines coming from India and China and elsewhere? I wonder what the energy source for manufacturing them is ??? Dirty coal power stations perhaps ? I wonder how that factors into the energy payback time, especially as the figure is often put at 3 to 6 months in the planing apps?
According to this paper ->
Eduardo Martínez & Félix Sanz & Stefano Pellegrini & Emilio Jiménez & Julio Blanco (2009), Life-cycle assessment of a 2-MW rated power wind turbine: CML method, Int J Life Cycle Assess, 14:52–63
they state :
“From this basis and with an average annual production of
wind turbine of up to 4,000 MWh (Troen and Petersem
1991), an energy payback time of 0.58 years…”
The figure of 3 to 6 months energy payback time is plonked into wind farm planning apps all over, as well as their press releases.
BUT I would urge people to get a copy of this paper and read ALL the assumptions section in detail.
For that study the turbine was manufactured in SPAIN and shipped to its destination in SPAIN a sum total of 156km!
There are MANY other assumptions made in this study too. I will write more on wind turbine energy payback / LCA at some point, but thought I’d quickly point that particular key assumption out.
What is the distance from the manufacturer in China / India / Denmark / etc. to the wind farms in Australia? I would think it would be a bit more than 156km…
IIRC cargo vessels don’t burn (per tonne of freight) a lot of fossil fuels and shipping things on rails is fairly minimal in terms of its CO2 intensity. Once you amortize the Co2 over the life of the turbine, this cost is pretty low, which is not to say that each turbine produces enough useable power to make it rational in prefernce to the same amount of power coming from a relatively modern nuclear plant.
We humans are far more CO2-intensive when we move about because we demand comfort, service convenience, personalised maintenance, speed and personal safety.
Ewen – if the just compensation clause of the Australian constitution applied to state law instead of just federal law then he would have a strong case for compensation (as would most of Australias farmers). The fact that our constitution is flawed in this manner is a traversty. The Howard government effectively stole carbon credits from Aussie farmers when any such imitative should have been paid for by all Australians.
I agree the CO2 figures for shipping and rail are less. However wind turbine parts, as far as I’m aware, are always shipped by road when on land NOT by train, certainly for delivery from seaport to the wind farm. But these costs have still not been worked out properly in the LCA. The distance from the port of Sydney to Broken Hill for example is much more than 156km. Its 1,159km according to this site ->
http://goaustralia.about.com/od/australiantours/a/distances8.htm
Then of course there is the internal distance in China or India or wherever to the shipping port.
There are a number of other factors not taken into account & assumptions made in the paper sited above (which the authors admit). I dont have the time now to go into detail but briefly (these are noted by the paper as being part of a proper LCA requirement) :
Associated access roads on the wind farm site, new powerlines, transmission, substations and infrastructure at the wind farm were not included, this is quite significant given the size of the wind farms being planned e.g. 100 to 200 turbines being more common, Broken Hill is @ 600. Also there will be the need to modify existing roads to handle the large oversize lorries as they have to trundle up minute rural roads to get to the site.
No account has been taken of environmental damage e.g. to human health & welfare and ecosystem health, wildlife impacts. These are very real and do happen. For wildlife issues for example see this 18 page document :
Wind and Wildlife: Key Research Topics, May 2008 (18 pp.)
by the USA’s National Wind and Wildlife Collaborative available as a pdf at ->
http://www.nationalwind.org/assets/publications/NWCC_ResearchPriorities.pdf
which is just one of many documents outlining wildlife issues alone.
No account of impacts on water systems from poor construction.
The wind turbine in question is a Gamesa G8X, there has been no examination of any other manufacturers turbine because turbine manuacturers do not like to release this information.
Maintenence operations only pertaining to this paraticular wind farm in Spain were accounted for, it it has been reported recently that much of wind farm maintenance in the USA is well behind schedule
Possible emissions from concrete foundations during project lifespan have not been considered & it is assumed the foundation will be removed at the end of its useful life. Hint : read the wind farm planning apps to see if this is going to happen, short answer : no
Assumes that decommissioning will take place. Decommissioning funds are practically non-existent for wind farms, the likelihood of decommissioning happening is somewhat remote. This is a very significant issue.
Blade size in study is 39m, modern turbines are getting larger 3 to 5MW, and greater, blade size is increasing. The blades are made of environmentally unfriendly prepreg and are sent to landfill or burnt when at the end of their useful life, these represent a significant part of the LCA figure. The entire fleet of Suzlon blades (1251 blades!) in the USA had to be replaced recently due to a fault in the design.
Wind turbine lifetime is assumed to be 20 years based on Manufacturers warranty. This is not always the case, some catch fire, some fall over. Manufacturers warranties are apparently about 2 years now.
Doesn’t take into account changing the gearbox or blades, or idle time. The generator is assumed to be replaced once during its lifetime. One replacement generator assumed in turbines lifetime, however, according to Allianz insurers, gearboxes in wind turbines are often replaced within the first 5 years. Wind turbines can stand idle for up to 18 months waiting for replacement parts. Also in this report Jan Pohl of insurance firm Allianz in Munich, who faced about 1000 claims in 2006 stated : “an operator has to expect damage to his facility every four years, not including malfunctions and uninsured breakdowns.”
Does not take into account the emissions generated by fossil fuel power stations required for backup. This has been acknowledged recently as having a significant effect on LCA. See for example :
Katzenstein, W & Apt, J, “Air Emissions Due To Wind and Solar Power”, Environmental Science & Technology (2009) Vol 43 No 2 pages 253-258
&
Katzenstein, W & Apt, J, “Incorporating Wind into a Natural-gas Turbine
BaseloadPower System Increases NOx and CO2 Emissions from the Gas Turbines”, (2008), Fifth Annual Carnegie Mellon Conference on the Electricity Industry, Future Energy Systems: Efficiency, Security, Control available on line at :
http://www.ece.cmu.edu/~electriconf/2008/PDFs/6-2%20Katzenstein%20and%20Apt.pdf
The LCA paper itself calls for further research. In other words, its a fairly acceptable first effort LCA for a Gamesa G8X 2MW wind turbine manufactured 156km from its final destination. But in terms of this translating to an LCA for wind farms in general around the globe, I seriously doubt its use. The wind industry & the developers however quite happily state the energy payback will be 3 to 6 months, but offer no scientific evidence to back up these claims.
Phew, well thats a very quick rundown, hope that helps to get a handle & perspective on what is missing from wind farm LCA, there’s more of course and some of it is beyond my level of knowledge so I’ve only mentioned above what I understand.
Also of course building wind farms on peat bogs as has happened in the UK causes significant CO2 to be released into the atmosphere which further lengthens the energy payback time for those installations, quite significantly!
you cite Pierpont’s work as worth noting, while I have yet to read it and have not ruled out any health issues from living to close to wind turbines, I find that her claims of a detailed study and peer review from her website & numerous tabloid media “press release” articles raise serious concerns as to her credibility and scientific rigour.
Her book appears to be self-published, her peer review team includes herself, husband and two others, and her “detailed ” study is interviewing 23 people from 10 families spread across several countries that self-report problems that go away. Then unlike her availability to the tabloid press as a martyr to the cause of intellectual suppression by “Big Wind”, when the American Wind Energy Association ask for an interview to publish in their newsletter, her husband, goes into a diatribe of irrelevance and then says there would be no point.
If there are any truths to her claims of ultrasound damage to the inner ear, her “loose with the truth” approach is not contributing to the credibility of the issue
A number of other anti-wind “experts” have unquestioningly accepted Pierponts self-proclaimed expertise and “detailed peer reviewed study” and in turn she quotes them quoting her….
You really should read the newspaper instead of all of those books which are pure claptrap.
The underlying station data has been cooked. Which part of that do you people not understand?
An even bigger laugh is the end of oil. Seriously, what planet do you people live on. Has no one paid attention to the finds in the Gulf of Mexico, off of Brazil, the Canadian tar sands, the US oil shale, the massive new finds of natural gas, the ability to liquify coal, etc.
Don’t any of you feel like idiots when your repeated doomsday scenarios don’t play out? The planet has cooled in the past decade. The station data is abysmal. The ability to have an accurate global temperature reading one hundred and fifty years ago is a fantasy. You are comparing current global temperature readings at cherry picked locations, to computer modeling from 150 years ago. It is mental masturbation and has no relationship to actual science.
To the moderator,
Do you actually allow a dissenting opinion on this webpage, or is just a place you and your friends get together and tell each other how smart you are?
dear bruce:
there are no dissenting opinions allowed here. We get together and tell each other how smart we are. You are really smart, Bruce.
[…] Several comments here by Bryen give a great rundown on a number of wind farm life cycle issues. To quote a few of his points: Wind industry developers suggest a 20 to 25 year lifespan for an industrial wind turbine .. However, due to the majority of these installations being new developments, few turbines have been around to test these lifespan assumptions under real world conditions .. Gearboxes in wind turbines are often replaced within the first 5 years .. Jan Pohl of insurance firm Allianz in Munich, who faced about 1000 claims in 2006 stated : ‘an operator has to expect damage to his facility every four years, not including malfunctions and uninsured breakdowns.’ […]
[…] Energy and climate books I read in 2010 Posted on 21 December 2010 by Barry Brook Here is a selection of sustainable energy and climate change books I read in 2010. I’ve provided a few sentence summary of each book (from my perspective) and a Rating out of 5. Some books have been reviewed in more detail on BNC already — enter from the title of the book in this website’s search box to find the review (or click links provided). For my 2009 list, go here. […]