A reader sent me this article in Scientific American that suggests the possibility that wind turbines contribute to global warming and requested my response.
It seems to me that the first commenter nailed it: “the article also seems to forget warmist theory discounts the concept of local climate having any affect on the globe, only the average global temperature matters.” Moreover, let’s do a bit of math here. Could the waste heat produced by a wind-driven generator offset the benefit derived from not burning that amount of coal? Forget about the negative effects of mining and transporting the coal, and think of the thermodynamics in the coal plant itself, where you have waste heat from both the burning of the coal and the generation of electricity.
Also keep in mind that climate change is only one of half a dozen reasons to migrate away from fossil fuels.
Overall, this sounds silly. But apparently, Scientific American isn’t held in the esteem I thought it was; those comments really shredded them.
Thanks Craig… I woke up to this in my email at 5-am, had to jump out of bed and get to LAX, had not had a chance to read it. Perhaps this is being paid for by the Committee to Elect Romney (the Limbaugh Slush Fund).
ROQ
Ha! Who knows?