You asked "want to see more of this trash?" and published several shitty Sponsored videos on the war with Ukrain😂😂😂. Turns out you are so greedy...not subsribed any more

There is nothing left over from oil refining. The heaviest fraction of the crude, called residium, is tar that is used to pave roads or make roof shingles, among other things. Some of it is sent to the Coker unit where it is converted into lumps of carbon. This is used to make steel. Do so research before you post your clickbait.

⁠@@TheMowsefanClickbait? All the title mentions is how bad is the wind turbine trash problem and whether or not we can solve it.

* angry USSR noise *

no, idgit.

It's how we've solved basically every difficult problem in modern history

BUT it still results in another set of problems that have to be solved. This company had a creative answer but how many benches do we need. How many birds and whales need to be killed how many farmer field have to be disrupted and I. Some cases destroyed? Maybe use these things for homeless housing or ports potties. This is an answer but is it good enough? The green new deal has its problems too. Lastly if they are being burned, how much CO2 is being released? Waste behind !! All of it does. So some people need to watch their high pedestal.

This strategy has not been going that well for governments.

Glass is not worse than plastic. Like why are you guessing.

The glass is less than the plastic that holds the glass together and glass fibers shedding will give you cancer 100% every time breathing it in. Not including breathing in the plastic micro fibers.

​@@Voidkom remember glass and resin. Also fiber glass is much more of a physical irritant than a grain of sand. It can slice up your lungs.

Do you have a source for this? I’d like to look into it.

@edwardliechti3359 Unfortunately not. I suppose I am the source as I make wind turbine blades and made the world's first commercial recyclable blade at Siemens Gamesa. It wasn't a large order, but I've heard that a larger one is in the works.

@@ronanboulton2965 How do those decompose only after the usual life cycle of a blade? Planned obsolescence?

@CTimmerman They usually last for roughly 20 years, so barring any major failures, I would imagine it would be around that long before they are broken down using a chemical. I'm not sure what it is, but it allows the solid materials to be reused. I'm not in the loop on all the life cycle and servicing side of the turbines, just production.

@@ronanboulton2965 Keep up the good work, mate! Appreciate efforts like this more than you know.

This is the epitome of a solution looking for a problem! The solution however, is the Rube Goldberg of fabrication that only works through subsidy

⁠@@orionbetelgeuse1937Exactly!! Seems to me the best solution to this problem is the grinding and conversion to fuel for concrete plants as it generates less CO2 than the coal that would topically be used. Also, no mention is made of the necessary foundations for windmills that are poured out of thousands of tons of concrete and steel rebar and that go many feet into the earth. The net zero emissions equation from the windmill generation of electricity is many, many years into the future, if ever. Of course, that is never talked about by the so called “green energy” zealots. This is the perfect example of central planning, special interests and the federal government picking winners and losers, all subsidized on the backs of taxpayers and ratepayers.

$42,000 for a few benches. Very cost effective

It ISN'T practical. It takes more energy to make these stupid eyesores than they will EVER produce in operation. We've known this for years, and since GOVERNMENT will subsidize these anyhow, they show up anyhow. Engineering doesn't matter.

Yeah I was having the same thought process. I know it's a subjective viewpoint, but to me those benches are quite ugly. Next time I'm at the science center I'll have to check them out in person and report back.

Coal ash may also be recycled into products like concrete or wallboard

@@ClydsdaleVI Coal ash also contains more energy in the form of radioactive thorium than was gained by burning the coal.

a n i m e n i m e

Does the thorium currently have commercial use? The reactors never seem to work

​@@32BitJunkie Nuclear reactors appear to take a lot of time to develop. Despite thorium having been used in a test reactor at ORNL and in Soviet submarines iirc, and many countries having thorium reactors in development, only India seems to have a working test reactor at the moment according to Wikipedia: KAMINI (Kalpakkam Mini reactor), is the world's only thorium-based experimental reactor. It produces 40MW of thermal energy at full power.[76] KAMINI is cooled and moderated by light water, and fueled with uranium-233 metal produced by the thorium fuel cycle harnessed by the neighboring FBTR reactor.

Not the PLANT, which is what the blades are. Very few nuclear gen site are ever remediated fully at end of life, they just get made less dangerous by removing the core, and fenced off indefinitely ? Only gas plants gen to my understanding get "almost fully removed" and even then the land is contaminated, and has limited use.

They are simply not financially viable. It is the most expensive form of bulk energy available. Plus nobody wants these things in their area making it a difficult proposition anyway.

​@@rogerk6180mma

@@rogerk6180 your opinion aside, you're not wrong. But the technology isn't stagnant. It can evolve and become more viable. I'm not saying we need to abandon other forms of green energy either. I just think nuclear has a crazy amount of potential.

@@jessechristensen1074 it is not just my opinion, lots of NIMBYism involved with nuclear even with people who are proponents of it. Nuclear made sense 20 years ago, that is when investment had to be made into it. Now it is simply to late. Who is going to invest into this technology? It's only viable if it is done with public money for national security purposes and only people building these things and selling the fuel are pretending it still has a future. No energy company is going to burn their fingers with it unless governments guarantee they will subsedise the whole shebang for the lifetime of the thing making it a risk free milk cow for decades for them. And when you concider the massive exponential advances in cost and efficienty that have been made over the last 25 years in green technology, imagine what the market looks like even a decade into the future, let alone another 25 years. Pv and storage will be omnipresent everywhere soon and will be generating electricity for fractions of pennies. No centralised solution that needs lots of management, infrastructure, highly educated and payed people babying it 24/7, security and especially a constant feed of expensive resources to run it is ever going to be able to ever compete with it again. Not to mention the fact that people and businesses now are able and are choosing to just generate all or most of what they need themselves for free instead paying some massive subsedised corperation pumping it into your house every month. There will be nobody willing to buy that extremely expensive electricity constantly comming out of a nuke by the time these things are permitted and build 15 years from now. It is 20th century technology. The ones running are still useful to aid during the transition but nobody is going to build billion dollar paperweights anymore.

🤔🫨🫨🫨🤣

Reuse is another form of recycling.

@@yayinternets you are only prolonging the inevitable, the trash dump

@@philphil5066 Yes, but almost every single thing we produce on this planet qualifies for that statement.

They just put that last piece in there to say oh well at least it’s not as bad as simple house trash…yet!

Roofing and house walls, now there's an idea! Fiberglass is strong af and if it's already built then it's cheap. Hope people don't mind curvy bulgy houses though

Yeah fiberglass is soo good for your lungs 🤣😆🤣😆 you fking 🤡 wehat do you think why old roofing materials got banned??? For the same reason fibrous materials blow in the wind when the roofing material got old. Now you want old decaying blades cut up even more to be used as roofing again???

How about not building or using them at all ????

@@user-wm1zt2mf8n Under your leadership we'd all be living in caves. How about finding a solution rather than giving up.

Finally! A real and practical use for Iowa.

Iowa is empty af at leasr it has a use.

This will happen in some years when all of the Lithium batteries of EV become useless and no one made a plan of how to dispose of them effectively

They done all that, it still made sense to continue

"Our Company has made NO profits this year...We see a BRIGHT future"...LULZ

@@kyleklmondwa9042 I'm guessing you never studied business

@@Ms666slayer lithium batteries are recyclable and are getting reused and recycled.

It degrades into the environment tainting the water supply in the local area.

I heard birds get caught in them too

​@boohere2 That's when they are moving, and the birds do not see the blades. Although I do not think the idea is not particularly good, a fence of blades would be no more dangerous to birds than a brick wall or wooden fence.

@@boohere2 Yes, I was thinking of the birds too. Nobody seems to care. That makes me mad.

Lol

Hey, if your attention span isn't enough for the whole video the only important part is 11:29 to 11:55. Or in writing: Just toss all the Turbine blades in a Landfill or burn them for energy, it still is a low waste energy source. The waste it does produce just looks a bit more spectacular.

Benches are just a small part of the waste solution. Benches *are* a source of local jobs, so not a bad choice.

THE PROBLEM HERE WHICH NOBODY PAYS ANY ATTENTION TO is - that the wind turbines require MORE energy to manufacture and build than they produce over their ENTIRE LIFETIME. If they DIDN'T, they would produce electricity more cheaply than conventional power plants. These things are a COMPLETE waste of money, and resources to make. This may change in the FUTURE, but CURRENTLY, these consume MORE conventional energy as a result of them ever being built. This is OBVIOUS, but since we now have a centralized energy policy where taxmoney is spent to make these eyesores and wastes of energy and resources, it's not going to stop any time soon. NOBODY wants to listen to engineers or economists.

Cars and all material in them can be recycled. Steel, aluminum, plastic, glass, rubber. Apparently you missed that part.

you ever been to a junkyard? those cars get absolutely picked clean of ANY usable parts and then they get recycled. Cars are literally one of the most recyclable mass produced item out there.

@@fuzzywzhe False. Various studies show that a wind turbine's energy payback period is 3-9 months. They produce energy for 20-25 years.

@@thegaymer86 WHAT studies? If this was true, wind turbines would REDUCE the cost of electricity, not increase it. It is so aggravating to be an actual engineer trying to argue against the liars you believe. We know what we're doing. You won't believe us. Our mission is to reduce cost and increase quality of life, and we have all these stupid politicians and liars between us and you and you don't believe us. It often times leaves me asking if it's worthwhile? We KNOW. But if it's not the tv stupid box, you don't believe us.

Not even close. The same fume that's been on the planet since forever

​@@GojosBackHand yes. But its ruining the atmosphere😅

No, no, no, no, no...people don't hate on wind while ignoring fossil fuels. It's the other way around. The scum bags that shit on oil and push hard for green energy that "doesn't pollute" are the ones that ignore stories like in this video about the massive amount of waste produce from the "green" energy. It's the same with solar panels, they don't last long, and have to be dealt with when they become trash but the anti-oil people never want to talk about that.

I really wish people would give tiidal more of a chance

You do know that there is like 2000 pounds of grease and lubricant in each wind turbine?? The chemicals for EV's are stripped mined and guess what they use Fossil Fuel trucks to haul it for processing. And then more fossil fuels to process it. There is no such thing as clean energy.

I heard those "eco" food trash bags break down into millions of tiny particles that end up inside our bodies . We buy billions of goods from China and have to dispose of huge amounts of packing like the white styrofoam . I bought some paint and was surprised to see the 'cans' are now plastic not metal . The empty ones are in the garbage . The 'eco' charade is nothing more than a money grab.

That's why you need a gas mask if you're going to cut, damage or shred the stuff. The lung damage can be permanent

A sensible person would have worn a respirator, goggles, and heavy gloves for a job like that. You can’t blame the material for your carelessness.

Get a tyvek suit and paint respirator from Menards. Grab a shop vac with double filter on it and cut it up to fit in trash bags. The fine particles that escape into the environment won't be much if you shop vac the ground where it was. Menards has everything, just get rid of it lol. You'd be in deeper trouble if it was asbestos board. You have to pay to get rid of asbestos.

lol amazing

I'm not a border wall lover, but I like your idea.

visually imposing, but easy to cut through. maybe fill them with concrete too.

Call Trump, he might like your idea.

Racist and dumb, a classic combo!

That was the first thing these where used for.

It doesn't look wide or comfy enough for homeless to sleep on, so it should be quite popular.

With a bit of creativity this can be turned into just about anything.

There are 8 billion people. Maybe everyone needs one. Then there is overwhelming demand.

It's much cheaper to build new boats and campers out if fiberglass than trying to make one out of a turbine. I reckon the turbine boat would cost 5x more for the same size, but less in quaility.

You can't reshape a fibergalss that are completed how would you make a boat shape????

@@maszkalman3676 Use the existing shape & add to it.

@@michaelbrinks8089 Yeah that would make the ships interior completely unaccessible and if you you cut out all the interior bits the glass fibers wil fly everywhere but likely into the sea or waterways and inside your lungs not a very pleasant way to get lung cancer. Also how would you secure it? It would needs bolts?? that would make it less water resistant no matter how good the glue or caulking material you use, taht's why they called monohulls they are made from a single parts so no palce for the water to go in.

@@maszkalman3676 lol Someone who's stupid could never make it work. But someone with half a brain could use sections of the blades to build a boat, camper or tiny house.Just like someone with half a brain can cut the end of a fiberglass 🛶 canoe off . Then cut a board to fit in place, seal it up so they can mount a trolling motor or small engine to it. Or repair a damaged fiberglass boat with fiberglass.

How many signs have you seen calling for a border wall in that same neighborhood?

True. Plus I bet the blades are pretty inert once in the ground. I would still love to have a wind turbine bench on my deck. I'll have to find a wind turbine landfill around me.

That’s a suitable solution!

So instead we should produce all the waste other power generation methods produce instead?

I'll stop when you stop

Find a way to not produce waste and become a billionaire. The world is waiting. The only viable way to not produce waste at the moment is stop using energy all together.

@@rogerk6180*this* kind of waste, Roger; being wind turbine blades. Which are not necessary, because we have perfectly working tech. Already able to provide energy at large scale, without having to burry blades...

Can't it degrades into tiny micro particles that get into the environment, they didn't care about anything but money when they made these things.

And make Mexico pay for it?

Why is that not green? That oil is not burned..

They leak often as well and that oil isn't repurposed either that is removed. The oil contains more toxic chemicals than car oils. Which means there is the possibility of millions of gallons of toxic oils running into water sources. No CO2, no good H2O either LMAO. Burning fossil fuels is the cleanest way to produce power, read about the bio scrubbers that was designed and never used. Algae tanks could of changed everything, but it's not where politicians invested. Nobody actually cares about the environment, they just listen to false information they're told and regurgitating it like programmed morons.

It saves the resources that would have been used to make the public seating otherwise.. If they did not do this both the blades and the seating made from raw materials would end up in landfill at the end of the seatings life.. So it still saves half the resources and waste..

By the time these upcrcled items reach refuse sites, hopefully someone will have figured out how to properly recycle the materials.

This furniture will probably last AT LEAST 20-30yrs if properly maintained....and in THAT FAR IN THE FUTURE im sure there will a better way if we ALL haven't been wiped out by some insane earth ending event inthe meantime. ID LOVE to have some these in my backyard!!!!

@@DurgaUsagi 20-30 years far into the future lol. Nothings changing

You’re increasing the service life. Repurposing means they replace something else that would also become trash. Sure, the blades eventually still become trash. But, if you make them into a bench first then you’re still only getting the blade as trash instead of the blade and a bench. The trash has already been made. But, might as well use it for as long as possible.

Seems easy enough. All you need is some creativity and an engineer.

Boats, campervans and car parts etc are also made from composites. Nobody seems to care about that.

Yep, the list is long. @@rogerk6180

But when there's no wind, there is no wave. It's in the same category as solar & wind.

@@DecrepitBiden There's still the moon moving it.

@@CTimmerman Tidal power and wave power are different.

@@HSFY2012 Yes, but the moon causes both.

They also need some sort of machine to capture that energy which in the end will also have a limited lifespan. It is just part of energy generation.

+ most catastrophic failed is all from incompetent working Maybe not for third country like us but first country like Germany should reconsider

Just to expensive and in no way competitive with other options.

Nope. These turbines generate multiple times the energy they consume to produce and decomission.

Grams of CO2 per kilowatt hour. Coal 870 Natural gas 464 Wind 14 Nuclear 12 I love how you can't tell that 14 is a smaller number than 870. Good try tho. But you need to work on your basic math skills. Remember this little guy from elementary school < do you remember which way it goes to tell which number is bigger?

True, but it has the dirty word in it, "coal" which isn't approved by "green energy" leftists.

And LFTR fuel as it's radioactive and contains more energy than the coal released.

Radioactive walls, just what i wanted

I like NZ's priorities.

Their first year. They will be profitable next year. Very few upstarts manage that.

Unfortunately, recycling is only part of the problem. Wind farms historically have consumed more resources and energy to build, maintain, decommission and recycle than they have produced. This is an inconvenient reality that needs to be addressed

@@ScoocumAF The LCOE of wind is lower than ALL other sources. Where do you get your data?

They're made out of glue and fiberglass. When they erode, they do leech those materials. Especially the glue is scary because it causes so many scary ailments in all living nature.

@@Habib_Osman Can you tell me where that has happened and the damage that was caused?

@@1964mcqueen Chemical products are super complicated. So.. anybody giving you any short answer is lying. Search emissions analytics - What's in a tyre? For an epic breakdown of the mind numbing amount of different chemical compounds in tyres. Sure, tyres are not windmills.. but, I suspect the exact makeup of windmill blades might be just as convoluted. So.. I'm not a chemist, but I do know simple answers in the chemical industry are lies.

Just how things go. New things are scary and must be resisted by any means possible for some reason.

No, it’s not “made up.” These issues have been with us since the Industrial Revolution. Entirely new industries have been created to deal with them, some effective and profitable and some not. The difference is that the self-righteous environmentalists have chosen to polarize the discussion into binary “either / or” solutions that are at best naive or at worst criminally misleading. Nobody talks about the benefits that have accrued to society from all forms of energy. Humans generally live longer, happier lives than at any time in human history. Without energy, we’d still be living in mud huts. Think about that as you type and watch these shallow videos on your device.

That must be the idea I don’t think their a naive

So, where would you put them?

Contaminate with what? Water streeking off a hard surface?

It is just one thing they can be used for. It shows how creativity can be used to solve issues.

Still a lot less then the turbine generates though.

😂😂😂

And they are not burned. Not releasing the co2 within it.

Grams of CO2 per kilowatt hour. Coal 870 Wind 14 Can you tell me which number is bigger?

@@rogerk6180 do you know how the raw materials such as resins are produced? Do you have any background in the field of manufacturing or engineering?

@Glacierlune lol ... this is obviously coming from someone with no education in manufacturing or engineering. Do you think, wind turbines just appear out of thin air? The metal you need for it is mined as ore then goes through an extensive manufacturing process using fossil fuels to make into what it is. The fiberglass, the resins, every component is made of raw materials that must be extracted, processed and manufactured as a finished good all using Fossil fuels. The biggest economies outsource the component manufacturing to other parts of the world where there is virtually no environmental regulation. Look at India, China air quality. Then after all that, all just to end up in some landfill at the end of the equipment life. I'm for 100% green energy, but this is all a scam. They could have collected wave energy. Used that to make cheap hydrogen. Most of human population live near water and wave energy is abundant. But no, they had to build complex wind and solar devices, all of which require more fossil fuels. Could have used thorium based salt nuclear reactors as cheap, safe, abundant energy, but once again went with pressure water reactors. It almost seems like people don't want a solution.

@@werewolf632 And you can't even pass a elementary level math class. Grams of CO2 per kilowatt hour. Coal 870 Wind 14 Can you figure out which number is smaller?

Firefighter here, I can assure you I'm not in the payroll of oil companies! Just got a few issues I'd like to highlight. Wind energy is intermittent, meaning it needs to be stored when there is a surplus to cover when there is a shortfall. This is usually done with batteries. Currently those are lithium based, and these are a MASSIVE headache for emergency services and one which will only get worse as these battery storage sites get more widespread and as they age. Lithium mining is also extremely environmentally unfriendly, and the impact of that also needs to be included in the impact report of the turbines they are being built for (it's currently not, because it would make the figures look worse). A lot of people have mentioned the airborne particulate hazard so I won't go into that too much, other than to say that once inhaled those fibres stay in your lungs for life. They can travel miles on the wind, so people living near those cutting/crushing centres might want to look into how well (if at all) the air is being filtered from those places, because I saw no water being used during cutting which would normally be a standard procedure to reduce airborne particles. The waste figures they showed are I believe a little misleading, since they only show the current rate of waste accumulation, and as described in the video the turbine blades can last a decade or more, and with turbines being erected at the ever-increasing rate that they are, we are only seeing the waste resulting from what existed 10+ years ago, not including the waste we are still due from the last 10 years of ever-increasing construction. By the time we do see those numbers in 10 years time, another decade of even greater volume of construction will have taken place. Fossil fuels produce their waste virtually instantly, and still account for the vast majority of our energy, so of course it will produce more waste because we use more of it, and it's being compared to turbine figures that are effectively a decade old, AND which don't take into account the waste and pollution of the lithium mining and battery production which is as essential to renewable energy as the turbines themselves. (Edited a confusing typo)

Which green solutions would that be?

Which ones would that be? Turbines like these produce less waste then any other viable option currently available. If you find an even better option you'd be a billionaire overnight.