Looks like IanB went walkabout with some tools

I wonder why? Aren't they meant to last forever and free the world from all ills?

 

Wind turbines “apparently” have a 15 year life, and one report reckoned take 18 years to pay off, what ever that means.

 

The issue is that the CO2 generated by their manufacture is not recovered in their operating life.

A gas power station produces less CO2 per Kwh on the same basis.

 

Correct. That little factoid has been known for 20 years but it never seems to be discussed. Greta doesn't even seem to bring it up. Strange. I wonder why?

 

Would really like you to back the statement up with some figures such as these ‘lifecycle’ figures: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life-cycle_greenhouse_gas_emissions_of_energy_sources

 

The CO2 content of windmill manufacture has been documented by many people, along with their actual power output. Try reading the websites of Anthony Watts, Judith Curry, Joanne Nova, etc where you'll find many articles and papers on the subject. The excellent Shellenberger book "Apocalypse Never" also covers the topic.

The big lie of windmills (and solar panels) is that their power generation, cost and manufacturing return is based on plated capacity, not actual power produced. The best wind farms produce only 25% of their plated capacity and that figure declines as the windmill ages. Other tricks include ignoring the CO2 footprint of their concrete foundations, the cost and effort of recycling, transporting components, etc, etc.

Meanwhile the footprints of coal, gas and others include every imaginable factor. Who can tell, because there's no disclosure of the source data.

Not wishing to dismiss your regard for the IPCC (I meet very few people who actually read their papers, so it's a bit of a hobby of mine) I went off in search of the IPCC paper and it's source data. I quickly realised that every line item in the table was derived from a different research paper, from different institutions in different countries. Extremely unlikely that consistent metrics were used.

The source for the wind power data was Arvesen and Hertwich (2012). This paper is itself a collection of other people's assumptions. It also contains some statements which amused me:

"Releases of individual toxic substances in the life cycle of wind power systems are in some cases reported, but to synthesize these findings is difficult due to differences in what chemicals are reported and a lack of transparency on calculation methods and assumptions." [my note: consider the emissions from the extraction of rare earth minerals in China. Hundreds of thousand of tonnes of sand are chemically processed to make one magnet for a wind turbine]

"We identify weaknesses and gaps in knowledge that future research may address. This includes poorly understood impacts in categories of toxicity and resource depletion, lack of empirical basis for assumptions about replacement of parts, and apparent lack of detailed considerations of offshore operations for wind farms in ocean waters."

The consistent reality of IPCC reports is that the source papers contain fulsome disclosure of the uncertainties in the author's methods and conclusions. All of this careful qualification is ignored when the "Summary for Policymakers" is written and of course extracts are taken for Wiki articles. This is the corruption of science.

 

Nuclear or simply less overall power consumption. Neither are particularly palatable, particularly the latter as it requires a tiny bit of starvation and economic pain.

But what would I know.

 

Re Rare Earth Elements.
The REEs reside in sands that generally have a LOT of Thorium. The world demand for RADIOACTIVE Torium is pretty low, so the mines have to store it. In China I think they just dump it as it's too expensive to store. The West prefers to just buy the REEs from China to avoid that environmental issue.
Anyway environmental impact and REAL energy costs are complex issues and people with agendas tend to hide those inconvenient truths!

 

And speaking of RE material “apparently” there isn’t enough to make enough to replace all the cars let alone any thing else that uses the stuff