Jump to content

Nils S

BST Users
  • Posts

    659
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. There has been some talk about these windmills being "fish magnets," comparing them to oil rigs in this sense. Keeping in mind that these are "active" installations, each having huge vanes with tip velocities approaching 200 miles per hour (you wanna fish 100 feet off a straight away at Daytona Beach on Memorial Day), I doubt that A) any boats not working for Big Wind are going to be allowed near the things, and B) no boats not working for big wind gonna are gonna want to be anywhere near them. Way different from oil rigs, that just sit there and pump away (until their piping blows out a la Deepwater Horizon). How much access do North Sea fishermen have to the their windmills? And the size of the windmills that are planned for the US coastal waters haven't yet been been put in service anywhere. But, if they do get installed and if they prove both safe and economically feasible, and if the electromagnetic fields their webs of cabling generate don't screw up the migrations of any "keystone" species out there (that's a whole 'nother issue that we don't have a clue about), they are going to open our coastal waters to more other industrial development than probably any of us want to see out there. And they probably won't be welcoming fishermen-commercial, recreational or party/charter-with open arms.
  2. Close, but no cigar! Up above I reported that Sweden is building 10 nukes. But I just saw a headline that 10 nukes are "on order" for Denmark. The following quote from World Nuclear News (Swedish nuclear: Government moves to change law, 10/05/23, https://www.world-nuclear-news.org/Articles/Swedish-nuclear-Government-moves-to-change legisl indicates there was either a glitch in the reporting (I can't find the links I used), or in my head. But I guess as it stands Sweden will have national legislation removing existing restrictions on nuclear power and Denmark will start building 10 nukes (see https://energywatch.com/EnergyNews/Renewables)./article16573322.ece). My apologies for any misinformation, regardless of the source (with a first and last name of Nils Eric I probably should done a better job on this).
  3. ErikT - I might be wrong on this but didn't Sweden announce a month or two back that they were going to build 10 new nukes? That sure doesn't sound like all renewables to me, but it surely appears as if they're on the right.
  4. ErikT - I think it kind of works like every dollar that goes into an investor's pocket comes out of a tax- or rate-payer's.
  5. ps - Pls excuse me "venturing" twice in one post. I've been up for several hours and need at least another coffee fix before I become fully conscious.
  6. msreif - you wrote up above "yes, this was a purely financial decision." As far as Oersted and the rest of Big Wind was (and is) concerned, it definitely was/is. As far as the pols were (and are) concerned I'd venture that it was almost entirely (80 to 90%) political. But what public policy decisions and/or machinations aren't? There are two definite party lines, with, I'd venture, only a handful of either very brave and/or very well informed, and/or very well briefed and/or very well funded elected or appointed "officials" crossing those lines. This is one of the primary reasons that we've gotten a well-deserved, almost totally ineffectual central government (whose leadership I increasingly associate with a bunch of Foghorn Leghorn sycophants). For a mention of NJ legislators "doing it right,"see the NJ Biz article yesterday, New Jersey reacts to Ørsted Ocean Wind cancellation shocker (https://njbiz.com/new-jersey-reacts-to-orsted-ocean-wind-cancellation-shocker/) by Matthew Fazelpoor. Under the heading Across the aisle he wrote: Meanwhile, Sen. Vin Gopal and his 11th District Democrat Assembly running mates, Dr. Margie Donlon and Luanne Peterpaul, called for action. “When I broke with my party to vote against the bill to give Ørsted subsidies this past summer, I criticized the administration and the Legislature for rushing this issue and I criticized Ørsted as a company for failing to be honest about the financial landscape and cost to ratepayers,” said Gopal on behalf of his Team Monmouth ticket. “We are formally calling on the Attorney General to sue Ørsted for fraud and negligence and to get back every dollar given to them from that horrendous subsidy bill. This was a bad deal for ratepayers and it is up to the Attorney General to recover every single tax dollar wasted” That’s doing politics the way it should be done. “Constituents first, party second,” regardless of the issue and the position on the issue. Kind of makes we wish I was still up there (but looking back on 50 winters in New Jersey and Pennsylvania kind of makes me not.
  7. “Therefore, as part of our ongoing review of our U.S. offshore wind portfolio,” Nipper added in reference to the company’s interim financial report for the first nine months of the year, “we’ve decided to cease the development of Ocean Wind 1 and Ocean Wind 2.” Spokespeople for Ørsted did not provide additional comment Tuesday night and the entire interim report won’t be released until Wednesday, according to the company’s website. Murphy said in his statement that Ørsted’s decision to “abandon its commitments to New Jersey is outrageous and calls into question the company’s credibility and competence.” “As recently as several weeks ago,” Murphy said, “the company made public statements regarding the viability and progress of the Ocean Wind 1 project.” “In recognition of the challenges inherent in large and complex projects, my administration in partnership with legislative leadership insisted upon important protections that ensure New Jersey will receive $300 million to support the offshore wind sector should Ørsted’s New Jersey projects fail to proceed,” the governor added in reference to the controversial law that had been set to give Ørsted tax credits for the wind farm. It’s unclear how much of the money state ratepayers will get back." Read the rest of the article on NJ dot com * and once again thanks to Borehead and the folks at *, US Congressmen Jeff Van Drew and Chris Smith, NJ Senate Minority Leader Anthony Bucco, Cindy Zipf at Clean Ocean Action and all of the other people and organizations who have been behind this effort to save New Jersey's bit of the NY Bight. How many more states do we have to go????
  8. I spent a bunch of bucks (can't remember how much but it was way more than a premium hard shell) 25 or so years ago. It was heavy, bulky and abysmal to paddle. I assume they've gotten better but I'd caution you to try any inflatables out before you buy. I used it once in Grand Cayman. Getting it there sucked, paddling it sucked, fishing from it worse than sucked. Packing it back up and carrying it home, you guessed it. When I got it home I gave it to a Boy Scout troop. It seemed like a good idea when I inflated it in my living room, the experience got worse exponentially from then on. Totally bad experience. I bought three more tupperware kayaks since then. One person, sit in, two person sit in and one person sit on. With all three the difference compared to the inflatable was like the difference between driving a car and driving a rock. Then I went back to real boats.
  9. When I went to the provided link I got "You have either already completed the survey (I haven't) or your session has expired (my session hadn't started four (4) times at that point). From someone' else's post, quoting from the survey "This survey is part of a research study that intends to improve outcomes from offshore wind development on recreational fishing." So you take the survey and you are already agreeing with Ørsted's/Murphy's idea to industrialize our ocean waters and are in essence suggesting to them how to "do it right." Do a quick search on "NEW YORK, Oct 12 (Reuters) - New York regulators on Thursday denied requests by European energy firms Orsted (ORSTED.CO), Equinor (EQNR.OL), BP (BP.L) and other renewable developers to charge customers billions of dollars more under future power sale contracts." That's how state governments with a serious interest in protecting their citizens' (rate payers) futures react to the "we didn't charge enough when we bid before, we NEED to rebid" demands. Now contrast that to New Jersey's/Governor Murphy's reply to Ørsted's ridiculous demands. Sort of like the old and possibly apocryphal "when I say jump, the only acceptable answer is how high, sir." In a previous life I spent some time-and some public $s-on hiring statistical researchers to do marketing stuff. They all started out early on in the negotiations asking "what do you want us to "prove?" No matter how you couch (or supplement) your survey replies, in the final analysis the odds are you are going to be supporting offshore wind power. How can you avoid that by responding?
  10. Mike - I'm sure that I don't have to tell you - or anybody else here - that you're father was one in a million. From his obit. I see that he and I were both circa 1945, but this thread in particular showed me that he had a much better handle on life, living and, especially, grace than I could ever hope to have. But I can for sure try to do a better job of it thanks to his inspiration. We never met in real life, did some back and forth over private messaging and email, but I'm going to miss his presence a bunch. I get the feeling that his final odyssey was as much for his family than it was for himself, and that says about as much as needs to be said about him. God bless you and yours, Nils
  11. Brother Brian - Make that one can and a string and you'll be on the right track.
  12. (I forgot one) or as a terminal liberal.
  13. Fisher has been inflicted on the world by them's that are "woke" and them's that are academics. Them's that are real people who do real fishing (and that includes both women and men who really fish) have been and still are ok to be fishermen. That's for people who commercially fish. I don't have any idea what is de rigueur for women who recreationally fish, but I'm kind of hoping that it's fisherman for them as well. (NHNH -it's actually (God forbid!!!) international. Another demonstration of the nanny culture. Heaven help us if if we offend anyone! In fishing stuff you're branding yourself as a bureaucrat or an academic if you don't call them fishers. I recommend against that for anyone wanting to gain credibility with the industry.
  14. Nils S

    Wind Junk

    "prominently by fossil fuel–industry funded opposition efforts" What in God's name does that mean? If there's ever a weasel words of the decade competition, good old Elham Shabahat should be one of the finalists. He's not calling what he thinks a spade is a spade is 'cause someone might think he has an opinion.
  15. Nils S

    Wind Junk

    Camhabib - You're hitting the nail right on the head. We don't know anything about the potential impacts of tens of billions of dollars of construction-probably the biggest offshore construction project ever attempted-and no one has any accurate idea. Remember the precautionary principle! And yet we can't slow any of that mess down to find out what's actually happening now, let alone what's likely to happen. For what? What's the hurry? I'd say that we're getting an idea of what the hurry is. The pro wind folks have done such a masterful job of convincing the populace that without windmills out there it's gonna be catastrophic, and they keep on hitting up Uncle Sam (that's you and me in the real world) for more and more public support and incentives. With totally unproven technology. Look at where the wind development has taken place up until now. Compare that too the (our) East coast. We've got 4,000 miles of fetch twixt us and Africa. North sea has something around 1,000 miles. How many hurricanes do they see in a decade? How many do we? So build a couple of Halide X (or equivalent) wind generators out there and see how they fare (as far as I know there's only one in operation now). Again, the question is what's the hurry? And the answer is without the doom and gloom hype that tax- and rate payers might wise up. The investment world, as we've seen over the last month or two, already have. And, without the public subsidies, so has the windpower industry.
×
×
  • Create New...