A modern turbine blade is up to 80-85 meter long from root to tip

If u understand all units u can convert fast Everyone will share vdo in wht the maker is comfortable

This is America we measure shit by seeing how many bald eagle wingspans fit.

r/MetricMasterrace

Sounds like a first world problem.

Don't be taken in by politicians TELLING you How to Think Wake up an Smell the Coffee you daft Muppet!..

@@garysmith5025 No, the oil and gas industry has been building largely concrete structures w mass 100,000 tons for decades, immune to sea state, generating cash flow on the order of 1-5 million euros per day, justifying very large maintenance budgets. That problem has been solved. These little 200 ton stick in the mud steel foundation turbines are a very different problem, with fast moving blades eaten up by salt spray in 10-15 years.

@@garysmith5025 Why would you imagine I’m interested in what you say is low cost for a major marine operation? I supplied an independent report. If you have contrary data, please post.

@@garysmith5025 Do you listen to yourself? Claiming some scientists are “sell outs” , with no investigation of their evidence, while you champion giant multinationals as all knowing, and you’re smug about it. Then you put words in my mouth about what “people like” me believe. Just go sod off.

@@Nill757 I have never seen a single concrete rig in the North Sea, you're thinking of the Arctic.

@@krashd Not sure what you’re talking about then. Statoil Troll A is the largest platform in N Sea, in Troll field off Norway. , using Condeep (reinforced concrete foundation) design. There are another dozen Condeep designs out there. “Condeep is a make of gravity-based structure for oil platforms invented and patented by engineer Olav Mo in 1972,[1] which were fabricated by Norwegian Contractors in Stavanger, Norway.[2][3][4] Condeep is an abbreviation for *concrete* deep water structure. “

And for being cleaner ; those fires say bullschitte

Hard to believe 1kg of uranium generates millions of time the energy of 1kg of coal, but it's the reality.

A bit like a gas, coal, biomass, or nuclear power station you mean? Except on top of the 10-15 years to build the power station, then add the rail & road connections and paying for the fuel day after day, week after week, year after year

@@TAttiusMaximvs anything that generates steam , produces more energy than a wind turbine . I don’t have any numbers , but I’d guesstimate that wind is a tiny fraction of the electricity created by coal, gas, or nuclear . BUT , you have shifted me into defending those fuel sources . My original question is how much energy does it take to build a wind turbine farm ? And how much do they actually create ? Also do they all eventually fail and burn up ?

@@psychiatry-is-eugenics I think what sells these is FREE power

10 years and then another 15 years of operational gains.

@@paxundpeace9970 so you mean 25 years in total ?

Yea then after 25 years gotta rebuild all over again most likely , plus would be maintenance cost over its life time aswel

The oldest wind turbine farm in the UK is now 31 years old. It changed hands 20 years ago and installed 4 more turbines (doubling it's output), enough for about 7,000 homes.

Check out The Engineering Mindset video on wind turbines

Phil, on the contrary, we don't need any of them. They destabilise the grid with their uncontrolled and variable power, and while people seem to be impressed by their size, their output is miserly and that is why so many are required.

@@iareid8255 don't be so sour.

Blades cannot be recycled, full of toxic glues etc. The huge amounts of balsa comes from the rain forests. It all ends up in landfill. The enormous amount of concrete and steel is left in the ground. A wind turbine can never save as much carbon as it takes to make it.

They are ugly, completely destroy the beauty of the environment and require the burning of the same fossil fuels they claim to eliminate in the entire manufacturing process. Most environmentalist are blind to the reality of what it takes to manufacture "green" products. Truth be told, there is only one way to solve the worlds problems..all of them. Eliminate the source of the problem.

Generally monopiles, installed direct into the seabed with giant hydraulic piling hammers. You can see the MENCK hammer in the video @4.20 (the yellow thing on the crane with a blue M).

i have worked on the norwegian project those are floating, with 3 anchors at the bottm

The video mentioned some types, TLPs and spars.

@@alabamacoastie6924 A spar would have to be enormous to offset the sheer size and height of a wind turbine, that's insane!

The funny thing. The damage they do to the earth. Most you can’t reuse. Land based. 30000 tones of cement. Over 60 plus truck loads. And some bigger ones use much more. So ? Is. Can a wind turbine work long enough without any issue to offset the fuel. Cement. CO2 from cement etc. the answer is simply no. Here’s the really funny thing. There are systems out there that are better but big companies don’t want them. The little guy has zero chance unless they sell it. I made a system at my house that catches moisture in the air. I water all plants etc free. I can even use it for the house if I wanted. Solar has many issues also. Our tech just isn’t there yet for most uses. Still by far nuclear is the best way to go. Short of long term storage being a issue. I personally think the sun is the best best. But on a grand scale. Pick a nice flat area. Utah. Nevada. 100 sq miles. Solar. Even if we’re not running 100% on it That amount would be a large dent in power use. Sadly government won’t just go that way yet. Why. Power. Greed. Corruption.

@@mikek3951 Yes solar is better than wind but useless in places where not sunny all year, like the UK, where it is really windy most of the year and only sunny in the summer! And many places when wet and cloudy is very often windy, or windy overnight, so solar and wind can complement each other. And compared to coal wind is just so much better! The 3.6GW Dogger bank wind farm off the UK east coast will have 277 wind turbines each weighing 2800 tons of materials, plus infrastructure, so around 2 million tons to be installed, yes you would say, very bad for the environment! Now compare to a 1 GW coal power station. 0.6 million tons to build (mainly cement) yes better less to construct you would say. BUT the coal power station will need 9000 tons of coal per day!!!! which have to be mined somewhere else in the world: massive open cast mining machines, trucks, trains, ships, conveyor belts etc, all-consuming massive amounts of energy and resources. To sum up, the coal power station would consume over 30 years: Around 1 million tons of resources to build the power station and infrastructure to supply the coal and freshwater. 100 million tons of coal Use hundreds of millions of gallons of oil (to mine and process the coal and freshwater) Use 1 trillion gallons of fresh water in the cooling towers (globally 1/6 of all freshwater is used by fossil and nuclear power generation) Produce 6 million tons of highly toxic cancerogenic slag to landfill Produce 0.5 million tons of infrastructure to landfill Produce 300 million tons of CO2 gasses and numerous other toxic gasses. Now the offshore wind farm: About 2 million tons of resources to construct Requires No fuel No Freshwater No Oil to produce the above Produce no CO2 gasses or other toxic emissions Produce around 0.3 million tons to landfill Only need maintenance, but no more manpower than needed to run and maintain the massive coal infrastructure. Basically over its life, a wind farm will generate 1000th of the pollution and damage to the environment compared to a coal power station! So yes a wind farm does get its environmental construction damage back compared with fossil fuels, in a matter of months!!!!!!!!!!!!!

@@mikek3951 even power plants uses cement for construction.

@@kasperkjrsgaard1447 And?? I know this. When people say go wind. Go solar. It’s free. Zero footprint. It’s a dam lie

@@mikek3951 nothing is for free, but when the windturbine has been erected there’s only the regular maintenance to take care of. The power is free.

If you believe that you must also believe in Santa Claus and the Easter bunny.

thats nothing rly new, if u were to ever drive through germany villages here are plastered with solar pannels everywhere but it still wont be enough..

Solar panels are not enough. They can generate too little energy.

Solar panels cannot produce enough power for a whole house most of the time. Wind farms are the absolute most eco friendly source of energy.

Solar panels are cheaper then windfarms but we need both. Solarpanels should only be on homes but on the ground too.

@@bigKARTOFFEL- Germany does have solar on many buildings but still they haven't utilized their maximum capacity. They could get a lot more from rooftop solar as well as solar on parking lots and agrovotaics.

Go buy yourself some brain cells then use them to acquire knowledge and understanding.

Is it hard to get a job out there doing that mate ? What was the hours like ? And what was the money ?

@@ribena9585 If you have a trade electrician or fitter from a maintenance background you have a good chance of getting in. I would pay to do my gwo offshore qualifications before applying just to boost my application. Hours wise if you are offshore it's 12 hours a day minimum on rotations of anything from 7 on 7 off,14 on 14 off,10 on 5 off,21 on 7 off, it just depends on the project you are on and the site you are working at. Working onshore wind farms has better working hours but as a result lower wages. Pay varies however I earned over 50k a year back then however that included working lots of overtime you generally worked all the time.

Mostly lies

I agree. Nothing has changed about energy needs, we just need more of it. Also, climate change is a myth. The earth will return to mostly water at some point. It's history.

Yea good luck with that 😂

Blades cannot be recycled, full of toxic glues etc. The huge amounts of balsa comes from the rain forests. It all ends up in landfill. The enormous amount of concrete and steel is left in the ground. A wind turbine can never save as much carbon as it takes to make it.

@@garysmith5025 “expected …25 years” Data is in. After 10-15 years, generation falls below maintenance costs. If this can be hidden, industry can still get a pay day by continuing to install new wind farms and walking away later when nobody is looking, and expensive gas must be used to pick up the shortfall. Wind developers love gas, esp imported, and vice versa. “Far from falling, the operating costs per MW of new capacity have increased significantly for both onshore and offshore wind farms over the last two decades [maintenance of newer larger turbines grows exponentially] “ From:The Costs of Offshore Wind Power: Blindness and Insight

@@garysmith5025 What matters is the energy output over time vs wind speed, which *always* goes down over time, sharply after 10 yrs, not some hand waiving story about a an old turbine someone saw down the road. It’s an age old story for long term suppliers of this or that to arrange terms so they get paid mostly up front when dealing with naive or kick back receiving clients, and then the supplier walks later. So, stories of new installs don’t necessarily mean industry knows what’s best for all. I earlier supplied an independent report on the numbers, which you dismissed in favor of industry like they were the church. Yes fossil fuel is a big grasping industry, but make no mistake so is big wind, now $100B revenue per year globally.

@@garysmith5025 Lol. Of course you’re funded by big wind, and think your BS doesn’t stink.

@@anglosaxonmike8325 Wrong, they get recycled.

Are you about 5? Calling it stupid because it is easier to build?

Turbines near me in southeast of Ireland have lasted over 20 years and they have recently been granted a 20 year extension. So they probably last as long as convention fossil fuel plants.

@@brendancooney9401 Blades cannot be recycled, full of toxic glues etc. The huge amounts of balsa comes from the rain forests. It all ends up in landfill. The enormous amount of concrete and steel is left in the ground. A wind turbine can never save as much carbon as it takes to make it.

@@anglosaxonmike8325 not true, they are running 20 plus years and easily give more power than they need to be build. As for coal, gas or oil power generation, well they never stop giving off carbon during their lifetimes. Never!!!!!! Ever!!!

@@anglosaxonmike8325 actually, it takes only 6 months to compensate the carbon needed to manufacture and build it.

@@anglosaxonmike8325 It only takes a few months of opertation to compensate all of this.

Nonsense. In UK offshore windfarms are entirely commercially driven - no government subsidies anymore. The builders are hard-nosed business people employing the best engineers. They've done their sums, you haven't.

They are really effective and efficient.

BS.

@@honesty_-no9he that was a weak argument 👏😂

So you didn't listen to the commentry then?

"Let's leave the empty oil and gas reservoirs to future generations". Right wing selfish stupidity!

@niels lund Si quieres energía barata, pues tienes la nuclear.

Nah, renewables are the past few years producing cheaper energy than fossil fuel plants

@@brendancooney9401 No they’re not. If you removed government imposed regulations that force power companies to use “green energy” and the millions of tax dollars used to make the industry profitable to companies, the entire industry would collapse.

@niels lund Wrong.

Simply not as efficient.

Those would take up all the power 😅

It must be true. This video tells me that your country is technologically advanced

@@jiawei6777 thank you

@@charlenemartin5899 It's very kind of you.

Around 6:00-6:30

Wow! How could the huge corporations that fund these giant things all over the world, employing the best accountants and designers, have not thought of that! :)

I think Id rather get rid of a turbine in ten, twenty years, over the course of a few days than any other power generating facilities that I'm guessing would take much much longer, and not guaranteeing leaving any pollution in its wake. End of the day, my opinion is these sun and wind power generators are just stop gaps between coal, gas nuclear etc before we finally crack fusion power generation.

The video focuses on offshore turbines... which if you listen to the video are dozens to hundreds of miles off coast. I don't know what type of eyesight you have but unless you're looking for theses, you're not going to find them

Lmao this is like 100 miles out to sea, the Earths curvature makes them pretty invisible unless you are on a boat with binoculars staring out on the flat horizon claiming it's "ruined"! Either way do you ever go outside of a city? Its full of industrialised farming, electricity pylons and roads.

Best storage solution we have to date is pumped hydroelectric. There are emerging technologies like power to gas and liquid air storage. We need to do more on balancing the grid via dynamic pricing to encourage a new generation of smart appliances which can tune their loading to the grid state. It will also incentivise consumer level storage of heat and cold to allow AC systems to take advantage of super cheap off peak electricity.

Batteries, Batteries, Batteries.

Usually the company, but it will be subsidised by governments. You then still need to pay for the energy, but it will be at a lower comparative cost to most sources of energy.

???

maybe 10m each

How dare anyone invest anything in green energy!? I don't understand why you kids try to just complain about green energy and giving off vibes that you're in distress over it.

@@TheFramer38 except I'm not a kid and haven't been for 30years. And I agree, how does anyone dare to invest in, well I call it brown energy, cause it kills everything living near it. And the metals that is required are very expensive and hard to come by, like neodymium for the magnets comes from China and no one is talking about it.

@@jimmyandersson4599 you do know the metal is good for wildlife right? Why do you think underwater creatures make giant living mansions from sunken ships. The iron also helps enrich the waters so even microscopic living things benefit from them. But go on and cry that we are generating energy freely. As you said you're not a kid so I'm sure you won't be alive be the time the wind turbines have to be dismantled. It doesn't affect you so I honestly don't see why you're inconvenienced by it.