Sioux Falls Landfill Tightens Rules After Minnesota Dumps Dozens of Wind Turbine Blades

[PeteS in CA]

Argus Leader: Sioux Falls Landfill Tightens Rules After Minnesota Dumps Dozens of Wind Turbine Blades

American Experiment has been a leader in exposing the fact that wind turbines only last for twenty years, and after that time the turbines must be torn down as part of the decommissioning process. We have also detailed how wind turbine blades cannot be recycled, and must be stored in landfills.

Now, the Argus Leader reports that more than 100 wind turbine blades measuring 120 ft long have been dumped in a Sioux Falls, South Dakota, landfill, but there’s a problem: the massive blades are taking up too much room, according to local City officials. The Argus Leader article reads:

“A wind farm near Albert Lea, Minn., brought dozens of their old turbine blades to the Sioux Falls dump this summer.

But City Hall says it won’t take anymore unless owners take more steps to make the massive fiberglass pieces less space consuming.

The wind energy industry isn’t immune to cyclical replacement, with turbine blades needing to be replaced after a decade or two in use. That has wind energy producers looking for places to accept the blades on their turbines that need to be replaced.

For at least one wind-farm in south central Minnesota, its found the Sioux Falls Regional Sanitary Landfill to be a suitable facility to take its aged-out turbine blades.”

This year, 101 turbine blades have been trucked to the city dump. But with each one spanning 120 feet long, that’s caused officials with the landfill and the Sioux Falls Public Works Department to study the long-term effect that type of refuse could have on the dump.

Who in Hades thought turbines with massive, short-lived, non-recyclable blades would be anything but environmental disasters?!

In fact, these things are environmental "disasters" when they are built - ginormous installations usually in wilderness areas. They are environmental "disasters" when they operate, chopping birds indiscriminately, whether common sparrow or endangered eagle/hawk. They are environmental "disasters" when they are maintained, e.g. disposing of used blades. They are environmental "disasters" when they are torn down, because the operators tend to be bankrupt and simply abandon the sites ... until some (government?) entity takes on the massive task of removing the equipment and structures.

[mountaineer]

This wasn't addressed at CNN's climate change marathon last night, was it? 

[musiclady]

Argus Leader: Sioux Falls Landfill Tightens Rules After Minnesota Dumps Dozens of Wind Turbine Blades


Who in Hades thought turbines with massive, short-lived, non-recyclable blades would be anything but environmental disasters?!

In fact, these things are environmental "disasters" when they are built - ginormous installations usually in wilderness areas. They are environmental "disasters" when they operate, chopping birds indiscriminately, whether common sparrow or endangered eagle/hawk. They are environmental "disasters" when they are maintained, e.g. disposing of used blades. They are environmental "disasters" when they are torn down, because the operators tend to be bankrupt and simply abandon the sites ... until some (government?) entity takes on the massive task of removing the equipment and structures.

They are also ugly as sin, and mar the beauty of the environment.

[musiclady]

This wasn't addressed at CNN's climate change marathon last night, was it? 

 

[Wingnut]

FYI:  Wind turbine rotor blades are made from glass or carbon fibre reinforced composites and are extremely difficult to recycle.

I always thought they were aluminum.  Learn something new every day. 

[mountaineer]

They are also ugly as sin, and mar the beauty of the environment.

Quite true.

[Cyber Liberty]

We've decided we're paying too much for that expensive non-recyclable turbine lubricating oil, so we're cutting back....

[musiclady]

Quite true.

Not to mention that they're bird grinders......   

[InHeavenThereIsNoBeer]

Looks like pretty good material to build seawalls from.

[Cyber Liberty]

Looks like pretty good material to build seawalls from.

I'd like to know what they're made from that can't be recycled.

[Wingnut]

I'd like to know what they're made from that can't be recycled.

I answered that up thread.   

[EdJames]

Looks like pretty good material to build seawalls from.

I like the way that you think!

 

[Cyber Liberty]

I answered that up thread.   

Proudly posting without reading the whole thread since 1998!   

[InHeavenThereIsNoBeer]

On second thought, if you cut those in half you'd have a 60' panels, each weighing several tons.  Instead of burying them in a landfill, they could dig a trench maybe 20' deep and bury them standing vertically.  Having them out of the ground would save a lot of landfill space, though they'd make one heck of an obstruction if you buried them too close to each other

[Sanguine]

Proudly posting without reading the whole thread since 1998!   

 

I saw several of those headed out to west Texas yesterday afternoon.  They're enormous!  Seems like they'd have to have a plug and abandon plan like for oil wells.  I guess I'd be wrong.

[Cyber Liberty]

I saw several of those headed out to west Texas yesterday afternoon.  They're enormous!  Seems like they'd have to have a plug and abandon plan like for oil wells.  I guess I'd be wrong.

I remember seeing a documentary on the Science channel about truckers moving a set of blades somewhere.  Those loads are beyond the "oversized loads" that we see normally on the freeways.  Absolutely yuge.  The ones in the story are 100 feet long. 

You make an interesting point, in that there is no apparent decommissioning plan.  Satellites in orbit have such plans.  When a private company makes the investment to launch a satellite (say, a telecom), there must be money in Escrow to pay for de-orbiting the birds at end-of-life.

[PeteS in CA]

I'd like to know what they're made from that can't be recycled.

Maybe plastic straws too far from the ocean so fish can't eat them?

Maybe those Mc Donalds straws in the UK that can't be recycled?

Maybe plastic bags banned by all the enviro-better cities?

Maybe styrofoam take-out containers banned by all the enviro-better cities?

[Fishrrman]

In heaven... you beat me to it.

Use them for border wall construction!
They'll last a long time.

[Joe Wooten]

Argus Leader: Sioux Falls Landfill Tightens Rules After Minnesota Dumps Dozens of Wind Turbine Blades


Who in Hades thought turbines with massive, short-lived, non-recyclable blades would be anything but environmental disasters?!

In fact, these things are environmental "disasters" when they are built - ginormous installations usually in wilderness areas. They are environmental "disasters" when they operate, chopping birds indiscriminately, whether common sparrow or endangered eagle/hawk. They are environmental "disasters" when they are maintained, e.g. disposing of used blades. They are environmental "disasters" when they are torn down, because the operators tend to be bankrupt and simply abandon the sites ... until some (government?) entity takes on the massive task of removing the equipment and structures.

A 1200 mw nuke uses  less concrete, steel, copper, aluminum, and rare earths than thee equivalent number of windmills. Much, much less.

AND is a more reliable source of power to boot

[Sanguine]

A 1200 mw nuke uses  less concrete, steel, copper, aluminum, and rare earths than thee equivalent number of windmills. Much, much less.

AND is a more reliable source of power to boot

I believe that is probably right. 

[Bigun]

I believe that is probably right.

I'm sure of it. We should stop subsidies to these foolish wind and solar boondoggles right now.

[Joe Wooten]

A 1200 mw nuke uses  less concrete, steel, copper, aluminum, and rare earths than thee equivalent number of windmills. Much, much less.

AND is a more reliable source of power to boot

AND.... even the current designs could be licensed for 100 years, putting their lives on par with hydro dams. The new ones being built in Georgia have 60 year licenses and is Southern Nuclear wishes to in 60 years, they could be licensed for another 40. Might have to replace the turbines, condenser tubes, FW heaters, and pumps, but those cost chump change compared to the total cost of construction.

[IsailedawayfromFR]

A 1200 mw nuke uses  less concrete, steel, copper, aluminum, and rare earths than thee equivalent number of windmills. Much, much less.

AND is a more reliable source of power to boot

I'd venture to say all of that is true for the equivalent power generated by natural gas including the wells, equipment and power plant.  The big bonus is one can situate the plant nearby users so as to mitigate a lot of that transmission infrastructure

[Joe Wooten]

I'd venture to say all of that is true for the equivalent power generated by natural gas including the wells, equipment and power plant.  The big bonus is one can situate the plant nearby users so as to mitigate a lot of that transmission infrastructure

There is an even better ratio for  a gas fired plant. They use less steel and concrete than a nuke. much ess

[PeteS in CA]

Unfurling The Waste Problem Caused By Wind Energy

While most of a turbine can be recycled or find a second life on another wind farm, researchers estimate the U.S. will have more than 720,000 tons of blade material to dispose of over the next 20 years, a figure that doesn't include newer, taller higher-capacity versions.

There aren't many options to recycle or trash turbine blades, and what options do exist are expensive, partly because the U.S. wind industry is so young. It's a waste problem that runs counter to what the industry is held up to be: a perfect solution for environmentalists looking to combat climate change ...

At the end of a long gravel road on the southwest Nebraska prairie, the state's first wind farm, Kimball Wind Project, is caught in the breeze. But the turbine scrap area looks more like a sci-fi drama set. Rob Van Vleet climbed atop a 127-foot-long turbine blade and walked the length like a plank.
...
Ninety percent of a turbine's parts can be recycled or sold, according to Van Vleet, but the blades, made of a tough but pliable mix of resin and fiberglass — similar to what spaceship parts are made from — are a different story.

"The blades are kind of a dud because they have no value," he said.

Decommissioned blades are also notoriously difficult and expensive to transport. They can be anywhere from 100 to 300 feet long and need to be cut up onsite before getting trucked away on specialized equipment — which costs money — to the landfill.

Once there, Van Vleet said, the size of the blades can put landfills in a tough spot.

"If you're a small utility or municipality and all of a sudden hundreds of blades start coming to your landfill, you don't want to use up your capacity for your local municipal trash for wind turbine blades," he said, adding that permits for more landfill space add another layer of expenses.

EvenNPR is taking notice. But I have to call out one error in fact in the article. The "U.S. wind industry" is not young. There were operating bird choppers in the windy hills near Benicia, California when I moved to the SF Bay Area in early 1978. That they were operating means they were built no later than some time in 1977. The bird-chopper farm in the Altamont Pass near Livermore was built or became operational in 1981. IOW, the bird chopper industry has been around over 40 years, not old, but certainly not new.