Controversial wind project gets green light (Grouse Mountain)

[djmk]

Originally Posted by nova9

the turbine is not operational yet, that's why it isn't spinning.

ahhh, i see.

[twoNeurons]

Well, that's because it's not fully operational yet...

Unless... perhaps this sums up some residents worries:

• Video Link
"I Assure You, The Death Star Is Fully Operational"

[Metro-One]

I think it is hilarious that people are describing this as an eye sore, really, it is so mute compared to the big picture it is puzzling. I agree that the huge bald patches of mowed trees for the ski runs are far bigger blights on the mountains than this wind turbine. Also, is not the entire city of vancouver an eyesore compared to the once natural forests that covered the entire area? What about all the cell phone towers, transmission lines, etc...

I forget whose pic it is, but in the national section of this forum someone took a picture of the North Shore mountains and says "if you look hard enough you can see our new wind turbine." Honestly, it was one of the last features to stand out. Also, painting it blue or green is a terrible idea for air safety.

[vanman]

Originally Posted by twoNeurons

A bright blue certainly would gaudy against our typically grey skies.

Anyone know when it goes operational? Apparently it will be travelling ~17RPM. That's about one revolution every 3.5 seconds. It'll look slow... but the blade tips will be speeding along at 250km/h. (77m rotor diameter).

I wonder how many eagles this thing is going to kill every year?

[Millennium2002]

I sort of doubt it will be that bad... if it is then just add on bird guards between the blades.

[twoNeurons]

Originally Posted by vanman

I wonder how many eagles this thing is going to kill every year?

Probably very few. But I guarantee that the first one killed sparks a protest.

[Spork]

Yep, because killing a couple of birds a year by a wind turbine is worse than killing hundreds with greenhouse gases and other pollutants.

[deasine]

It's funny how some think it's an eyesore: but when you move to many other parts of the world, such as Copenhagen, seeing wind turbines are normal. I think with projects like these, you have to look at the net benefit. Yes, there are some cons to this project, including killing of animals, but compared to the pros you get out of this, I say there's a positive net benefit since the pros out weight the cons.

[nova9]

wind turbines line the countrysides of the UK and France. I couldn't drive to Normandy without seeing some on the horizon.

[WarrenC12]

I've seen fields of wind turbines in the midwest USA too. People who are complaining about this are the same people who complain about everything.

"The view sucks from QE Park now"

"Don't cut down any trees!"

"blah blah blah.

[djmk]

Originally Posted by deasine

It's funny how some think it's an eyesore: but when you move to many other parts of the world, such as Copenhagen, seeing wind turbines are normal. I think with projects like these, you have to look at the net benefit. Yes, there are some cons to this project, including killing of animals, but compared to the pros you get out of this, I say there's a positive net benefit since the pros out weight the cons.

yes, but this is not a wind farm producing energy for a country, this is a single turbine producing a tiny bit of energy for a tiny part of the year for a single company. As well, BC has some of the cheapest electricity in the world, and in the winter time when Grouse mountain needs its power the most, our dams are overflowing.

let us be realistic here, this is a tourist trap.

[LeftCoaster]

Originally Posted by Metro-One

I think it is hilarious that people are describing this as an eye sore, really, it is so mute compared to the big picture it is puzzling. I agree that the huge bald patches of mowed trees for the ski runs are far bigger blights on the mountains than this wind turbine. Also, is not the entire city of vancouver an eyesore compared to the once natural forests that covered the entire area? What about all the cell phone towers, transmission lines, etc...

I forget whose pic it is, but in the national section of this forum someone took a picture of the North Shore mountains and says "if you look hard enough you can see our new wind turbine." Honestly, it was one of the last features to stand out. Also, painting it blue or green is a terrible idea for air safety.

I agree with everything you said except this comment about air safety... if you are in any position to hit this windmill, a mere hundred feet off the peak of a mountain, you are in serious trouble already. A 100ft windmill surrounded by 70ft trees on a 4000ft mountain makes absolutely no difference to air safety.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by djmk

yes, but this is not a wind farm producing energy for a country, this is a single turbine producing a tiny bit of energy for a tiny part of the year for a single company. As well, BC has some of the cheapest electricity in the world, and in the winter time when Grouse mountain needs its power the most, our dams are overflowing.

let us be realistic here, this is a tourist trap.

I won't argue that this is great marketing on the part of Grouse Mountain, but who cares? It will be producing zero emission electricity right? I call that win-win.

The reason BC has cheap rates is because of the massive investments made in the last century on dams that would probable never be built today due to environmental and cost reasons. We either need sustainable energy sources, or to use less energy (not likely in the coming age of more electrified cars).

[djmk]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

I won't argue that this is great marketing on the part of Grouse Mountain, but who cares? It will be producing zero emission electricity right? I call that win-win.

there are other ways to produce "zero emission electricity".

I believe there is a solar project somewhere in North Van that is producing more energy. There is also run of the river projects like the one powering whistler.

my point is that a single tower does not proving reliable power on demand, it only provides supposedly 25% of the resorts power (this i do not believe), and i think it takes away from the natural beauty of the mountain.

personally i believe, (and i know i'm probably the only one) that in the quest to go "green", we are missing the forest from the trees.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by djmk

there are other ways to produce "zero emission electricity".

I believe there is a solar project somewhere in North Van that is producing more energy. There is also run of the river projects like the one powering whistler.

my point is that a single tower does not proving reliable power on demand, it only provides supposedly 25% of the resorts power (this i do not believe), and i think it takes away from the natural beauty of the mountain.

personally i believe, (and i know i'm probably the only one) that in the quest to go "green", we are missing the forest from the trees.

PV solar is waaaay more expensive. And in this climate? What a joke. Any PV solar in this area is a way bigger PR gimmick.

Takes away from the natural beauty? That was done long ago with the ski resort opening. Sorry I just don't buy it.

[djmk]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

PV solar is waaaay more expensive. And in this climate? What a joke. Any PV solar in this area is a way bigger PR gimmick.

Takes away from the natural beauty? That was done long ago with the ski resort opening. Sorry I just don't buy it.

Vancouver get about the same sunshine hours as Miami and the bulk of which is in the summer. That's when our dams run empty and Vancouver needs the energy.

Winter time has excess energy due to our lovey rain.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by djmk

Vancouver get about the same sunshine hours as Miami and the bulk of which is in the summer. That's when our dams run empty and Vancouver needs the energy.

Winter time has excess energy due to our lovey rain.

Nice cherry picking... ever been to Miami? It rains a lot, and is overcast a lot.

Southern CA and NV/AZ areas get over 200 days of sun a year, those are prime spots for PV solar. Vancouver and Miami get in the 70s-80s.

We are still a net importer of energy, so what are you trying to say?

[Metro-One]

Also, the solar energy they do receive in Miami is far stronger than here in Vancouver due to their near tropical latitude.

[djmk]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Nice cherry picking... ever been to Miami? It rains a lot, and is overcast a lot.

Southern CA and NV/AZ areas get over 200 days of sun a year, those are prime spots for PV solar. Vancouver and Miami get in the 70s-80s.

We are still a net importer of energy, so what are you trying to say?

what am i trying to say?

well, there is solar energy produced at the Lynn Valley Care Center producing 9MWh. There is another at SFU producing about 10MWh. Again, more solar ontop of the Olympic Village. Solar works in our environment

This tower will produce 1.5MWh in a season in which Vancouver does not need extra energy.

all i'm saying, is that Grouse mountain could of gone "green" by using better technologies. But Grouse mountain really does not care about being green, it cares about making profit. Generally I would say, "good for them", however I think they are just playing with our enviro heart strings when they really wanted was a look out tower.

[Metro-One]

Because a solar farm would look so much better on Grouse Mountain! Also, run of the river projects are also very damaging to the environment and are very controversial.