When wind turbines are no longer useful: They get explosive demolition

Video follows.

Controlled Demolition, Inc. (CDI) of Phoenix, Maryland, USA (acting as Explosives Design and Performance Subcontractor to Main Demolition Contractor, Dallas Demolition of Houston, Texas who was working for RiverCap Ventures of Rocky River, Ohio, the General Demolition Contractor) performs the successful explosives felling of 90, Mitsubishi 1000A Wind Turbines in New Mexico.

No effort was made to preserve foundations or other wind farm infrastructure. CDI’s crew felled the 90 Units in two (2) mobilizations to the site, permitting the Wind Farm Owner to complete salvage of blades and drive-train elements from some of the wind turbines to provide replacement parts for similar Units they operate at other wind farm locations. The Units were safely felled, exactly per plan, and ahead of schedule.

4.5 27 votes
Article Rating
169 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Rich Davis
May 22, 2021 3:17 pm

Yeah, but those were built 100 years ago with obsolete technology, right griff?

UNGN
Reply to  Rich Davis
May 22, 2021 4:01 pm

Modern life cycle on low volume, high tech stuff is less than 20 years, no matter what it is. Nobody wants to be on the hook for storing the spares inventory. For things meant to “last 25 years” without spares, its even worse, because when spares are needed, there aren’t any, and the OEM has moved on.

Blow it up and repeat the cycle.

StephenP
Reply to  UNGN
May 22, 2021 11:58 pm

But what happens to all the bits they can’t use for spares or recycle?
Blades etc to landfill?

StephenP
Reply to  StephenP
May 23, 2021 12:12 am

Are they going to replace the windmills with new ones, or will there be 90000 tons of concrete left dotted around the landscape?
Presumably all the copper wire connections to the grid will have some use/value?
They will have to be quick before the local villains cotton on and nick it.
In all it would remind me of the concrete bases from derelict WW2 A-A and radar sites left on some heathland where I grew up.

Richard Page
Reply to  StephenP
May 23, 2021 1:20 pm

From the article above “…no effort was made to preserve foundations of other wind farm infrastructure…” Blown up, rubble removed for whatever rebar might be salvageable I presume. Whatever bits remained would either be removed at the landowners instruction or left in pieces.

Last edited 23 days ago by Richard Page
AC Osborn
Reply to  StephenP
May 23, 2021 1:16 am

I don’t believe that after that fall many parts would be salvagable. Watch what happens to them.

StephenP
Reply to  AC Osborn
May 23, 2021 1:39 am

I agree completely, most will have to go for recycling.
After all, I wouldn’t expect to reuse many parts from a car that had fallen 150ft off a cliff!

John
Reply to  StephenP
May 23, 2021 5:00 pm

not recycling land fill

Crispin Pemberton-Pigott
Reply to  John
May 23, 2021 8:31 pm

More likely, “land cover”.

henry Chance
Reply to  John
May 24, 2021 5:56 am

Oh no.They can be shipped to the ocean and used to build jettys and reduce erosion coming from “rising oceans”.

David A
Reply to  StephenP
May 24, 2021 3:14 am

The article said “No effort was made to preserve foundations”

I think the foundations will be there for a very long time yet.

henry Chance
Reply to  David A
May 24, 2021 5:57 am

10 years left till it is all over, we are told.

Reply to  Rich Davis
May 22, 2021 8:26 pm

A post from 2018:

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/12/24/a-2019-resolution-honesty-in-energy-policy/#comment-2566340

Green energy (wind and solar) requires almost 100% spinning reserve, due to intermittency. That is why it is uneconomic energy nonsense.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2018/11/16/stacking-concrete-blocks-is-a-surprisingly-efficient-way-to-store-energy/#comment-2520849

Here’s an even better solution:

1. Build your wind power system.
2. Build your back-up system consisting of 100% equivalent capacity in gas turbine generators.
3. Using high explosives, blow your wind power system all to hell.
4. Run your back-up gas turbine generators 24/7.
5. To save even more money, skip steps 1 and 3. 

Eric Vieira
Reply to  ALLAN MACRAE
May 23, 2021 1:01 am

I suppose, that after the subsidies dried out, it was no longer profitable, to run and
maintain those wind turbines…
It’s a pity for all the wasted energy, steel, concrete, other materials … and taxpayer money.

Reply to  Eric Vieira
May 23, 2021 8:27 am

You are correct Eric – wind power was always a mandate-and-subsidy scam.

Do you know that wind power gets “first access” to the grid, and reliable, dispatchable, cheaper gas turbine power is routinely backed off to make room for the wind power? Could any idea be more absurd? Scam.

Now add to that the fact that increased atmospheric CO2 is not causing dangerous global warming. Scam x Scam = Scam^2

Now add to that the high probability that the cause of increased atmospheric CO2 is primarily natural, not man-made. Scam x Scam x Scam = Scam^3

Reply to  ALLAN MACRAE
June 5, 2021 5:09 am

All correct except the last paragraph, Allen. There is zero probability that the cause of increased atmospheric CO2 is primarily natural.

Nature is a net REMOVER of CO2 from the atmosphere. We know from measurements that that has been the case every year since at least 1958. Mankind’s CO2 emissions are currently about double the rate at which nature removes CO2 from the atmosphere, but as mankind’s emissions decline, that will no longer be the case.

Nature’s accelerating removal of CO2 from that atmosphere is a looming problem, because it means that when mankind’s CO2 emissions decline by more than about half, the atmospheric CO2 level will begin to fall, with negative consequences for agriculture. If mankind’s CO2 emissions dropped to “net zero” then the atmospheric CO2 concentration would fall precipitously, which would be a slow-moving but ever worsening disaster for mankind and nature.

Last edited 10 days ago by Dave Burton
Gunga Din
Reply to  ALLAN MACRAE
May 25, 2021 3:38 pm

And if they decide to not skip steps 1 and 3, they could still save some money by just installing the demo charges during step 1!

R.T.Dee
Reply to  Rich Davis
May 22, 2021 10:37 pm

There are still plenty of windmills -using the old technology – standing in Europe after several hundred years. Progress?

H.R.
Reply to  R.T.Dee
May 23, 2021 5:37 am

Yeah, they don’t make ’em liked they used to.

In The Real World
Reply to  Rich Davis
May 23, 2021 9:34 am

Just like in Germany . When the subsidy finishes , [ 20 years I think ], they pull them down as they can only make any money from the [ large ,] subsidies . And because Germany has so many , they also have the most expensive electricity in the world .
https://www.thegwpf.com/german-wind-farms-to-be-terminated-as-subsidies-run-out/

May 22, 2021 3:17 pm

Great…and just what are they going to salvage from those blades?

Archer
Reply to  Alastair Brickell
May 22, 2021 3:22 pm

Hardcore for road foundations?

Gregory Lane
Reply to  Archer
May 22, 2021 6:39 pm

Been tried?

Matthew Sykes
Reply to  Alastair Brickell
May 23, 2021 12:56 am

Only the metals, the blades will be chopped up and buried. You can recycle GRP, but it is expensive, and not worth it.

Reply to  Matthew Sykes
May 23, 2021 2:20 am

Yes, you’re right…not much value in them, impossible to recycle and I don’t think there’s much metal in the blades. Just more landfill…

6′ under is probably the best place for windmills.

Matthew Sykes
Reply to  Alastair Brickell
May 23, 2021 11:37 pm

Zero metal in the blades, they are all GRP

Gunga Din
Reply to  Matthew Sykes
May 25, 2021 3:49 pm

I had to look up GRP.
In the US it’s called FRP, “fiber reinforced plastic”.
Fiberglass is commonly used, hence, GRP, “glass reinforced plastic”.
https://defifiberglass.com/frp-vs-grp-whats-the-difference/

I’m sure all those “green” windmill blades use carbon-free plastics. (Probably made from recycled carbon free tires.)

Reply to  Gunga Din
June 5, 2021 5:21 am

If they didn’t have so much glass in them, you could presumably grind them up and add them to the fuel mix for coal-fired power plants. However, I suspect that the fiberglass content makes them unsuitable for waste-to-energy tech. (I’d like to be wrong!)

Brooks H Hurd
Reply to  Alastair Brickell
May 26, 2021 8:22 am

The video shows that blades and the mechanical components were severely damaged by the demolition.

James Snook
May 22, 2021 3:18 pm

Wonderful sight!!

Me @ Home
Reply to  James Snook
May 22, 2021 6:52 pm

More please!!!

Mr.
May 22, 2021 3:20 pm

. . . permitting the Wind Farm Owner to complete salvage of blades and drive-train elements from some of the wind turbines to provide replacement parts for similar Units they operate at other wind farm locations.

They have to be kidding.
Those blades were totally trashed.

Greg S.
Reply to  Mr.
May 22, 2021 4:18 pm

Part salvaging was done before felling. At 1:48 you can see several units in the background with missing blades.

Mr.
Reply to  Greg S.
May 22, 2021 4:43 pm

C’mon man.
Those missing blades blew off ages ago when their governors failed 🙂

BCBill
Reply to  Greg S.
May 22, 2021 8:11 pm

Well they sure didn’t salvage many of the blades in the video I watched.

Greg S.
Reply to  BCBill
May 23, 2021 6:42 am

The description wasn’t really specific on the amount that they salvaged before the felling, only that “some” were. At the timestamp I mentioned you can see some that had their blades removed. A total of 90 turbines were destroyed and we only saw a fraction of that total in the video.

Matthew Sykes
Reply to  Mr.
May 23, 2021 12:57 am

Exactly, they arent salvaged at all they are junk.

rah
May 22, 2021 3:21 pm

And what of those massive concrete foundations? In my part of the country those things are in fields actively being farmed. What are they going to do with them when the time comes? And then there are the gravel roads they put in leading to the base of each unit.

jorgekafkazar
Reply to  rah
May 22, 2021 9:17 pm

Leases call for restoring the land to the pre-existing grade.

George Daddis
Reply to  jorgekafkazar
May 23, 2021 9:24 am

If you can find the original leasee. Many in the US are corporations with tangled foreign ownership that quickly go bankrupt after subsidies run out.

The only resort is an upfront bond.
We wrote that provision into our NYS town’s ordinances as wind sites crept up from PA to the Finger Lakes.

The encroachment of our beautiful ridges stopped on on small town immediately south of us. There is no way of knowing if the bond requirement stopped them or even if the NYS government, who favored those developments, would have allowed our provision to stand, push come to shove.

ozspeaksup
Reply to  rah
May 23, 2021 2:35 am

dry pads to put a silo/feeder on?
shed base for shelters?

Coach Springer
Reply to  rah
May 23, 2021 6:37 am

One farmer was interviewed about his lease. He was not expecting the concrete to go away. Much like the demolition in the video.

As for the utility in using it for a foundation for something else? Maybe they can put up 300 -foot white crosses. There is a religiosity continuity to that. – Or statues of Biden.

Last edited 23 days ago by Coach Springer
David Streeter
Reply to  rah
May 23, 2021 12:32 pm

They get covered with local dirt, fertilized and planted.

May 22, 2021 3:22 pm

The coolest way to explode a wind generator is to turn the governor off. The blades will overspeed in high winds, the tips will break the sound barrier and the resulting asymmetrical loads on the airfoils results in an immediate and dramatic “explosion”. Search “exploding wind turbine” watch the videos for yourself.

Walter Sobchak
Reply to  William Abbott
May 22, 2021 5:14 pm

Yes, but does that drop the tower?

Matthew Bergin
Reply to  Walter Sobchak
May 22, 2021 8:14 pm

Usually yes …. catastrophically. 😊👍

Rainer Bensch
Reply to  Matthew Bergin
May 23, 2021 5:29 am

And they would save on the explosives.
But it’s more fun that way.

Last edited 23 days ago by Rainer Bensch
jorgekafkazar
Reply to  William Abbott
May 22, 2021 9:17 pm

Unsafe.

TheTooner
Reply to  jorgekafkazar
May 22, 2021 10:12 pm

A lot of fun stuff is that.

YallaYPoora Kid
May 22, 2021 3:30 pm

’When wind turbines are no longer useful’
One could argue they were only ever useful to generate subsidies since any power generation was purely coincidental.

Coeur de Lion
May 22, 2021 3:31 pm

Do we know why?

May 22, 2021 3:32 pm

More of that 😀

cirby
May 22, 2021 3:36 pm

The earliest mention I can find of the Mitsubishi 1000A wind turbines is from 2003.

All of these are no more than about 18 years old.

So much for 25+ year lifespans.

George
Reply to  Jay Hendon
May 22, 2021 6:10 pm

I wonder what the over all cost has been versus the amount of energy produce? Hence, what was the return on investment? Was it worth it from a cost benefit point of view. Without knowing the details probably not much. Symbolism.

Robert of Ottawa
Reply to  George
May 23, 2021 6:50 am

It doesn’t matter, the subsidies were the goal.

BCBill
Reply to  Jay Hendon
May 22, 2021 8:06 pm

Sounds like a labour of love where economics was not a consideration. It would be nice to know the cost of maintenance and refurbishment.

Doonman
Reply to  Jay Hendon
May 22, 2021 8:41 pm

Good maintenance is expensive 500 ft in the air.

Melvyn Dackombe
Reply to  Doonman
May 23, 2021 5:33 am

Especially at sea.

David Streeter
Reply to  Doonman
May 23, 2021 12:34 pm

Replace good with any.

Analitik
Reply to  Jay Hendon
May 24, 2021 5:13 pm

From the article,

Tvindkraft is maintained by volunteers and caretakers, and also led to the creation of the Tvind Climate Centre

So this oldest operating wind turbine is a running as an historical exhibit – not as a normal operating generation system.

Eric Stevens
Reply to  cirby
May 22, 2021 4:39 pm

2002 in the USA. You will find quite a lot of information at https://www.mhi.co.jp/technology/review/pdf/e404/e404238.pdf

May 22, 2021 3:36 pm

Outage hampers Poland’s main power plant, felt across Europe
With sun power and windmills no chance to recover…

jdgalt1
Reply to  Krishna Gans
May 22, 2021 5:33 pm

Will Nord Stream 2 do anything to solve this single-source problem?

Barnes Moore
Reply to  Krishna Gans
May 23, 2021 5:48 am

Interesting article. The article claims that Poland will be moving forward with new wind projects, but this article says otherwise. Has anything changed? Polish government: wind turbines will be scrapped within 17 years – Watts Up With That?

Analitik
Reply to  Barnes Moore
May 24, 2021 5:17 pm

No, the article just puts forth claims by environmental groups (notably the WWF) that Poland needs more wind farms to provide “diversity” in its power generation.

n.n
May 22, 2021 3:37 pm

Somewhere, a bird, a bat, sighs in relief. Clear the Green blight. Go green. Emit.

Robert A. Taylor
Reply to  n.n
May 22, 2021 4:03 pm

Not to mention millions of insects. Migratory insects use wind corridors to travel. Guess where wind turbines are put.

Scute
May 22, 2021 3:44 pm

Lol arrived here after doing the obligatory click-thru that all self respecting men must make when they see “demolition” in their feed

Watched 3X with multiple scroll backs. 👍

CD in Wisconsin
May 22, 2021 3:52 pm

A very satisfying video to watch. As far as I am concerned, they can blow up all the wind turbines in the U.S.

KILL WIND TURBINES, NOT AVIAN WILDLIFE.

henry Chance
Reply to  CD in Wisconsin
May 24, 2021 7:17 am

They peddled all the hoopla on wind energy. Then the environmental litigation got the fans shut down for spring and fall bird migration.

UNGN
May 22, 2021 3:53 pm

too much fun. Those guys love coming to work each day.

Observer
May 22, 2021 3:57 pm

The end of an error

Rory Forbes
Reply to  Observer
May 22, 2021 4:47 pm

Great double entendre.

jorgekafkazar
Reply to  Rory Forbes
May 22, 2021 9:19 pm

It’s a pun.

Rory Forbes
Reply to  jorgekafkazar
May 22, 2021 10:33 pm

Nope … double entendre in which a pun is often a poor facsimile. It could also be taken as a pun (giving it the distinction of a possible triple entendre).

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/puns-vs-double-entendres-good-bad-never-ending-confusion-greg-reese?trk=public_profile_article_view

jtom
Reply to  Rory Forbes
May 23, 2021 4:22 pm

Pun. Two different words; era and error. You are changing a phrase by substituting a similar sounding word. A double entendre is a single phrase with more than one potential meaning.

Children make nutritious snacks, is a double entendre. Single phrase, two meanings.

He gave his sons a farm he named “Focus,” because that’s where the sons raise meat, is a triple pun. Sun, rays, and meet were changed to sons, raise, and meat.

Rory Forbes
Reply to  jtom
May 23, 2021 8:54 pm

Children make nutritious snacks, is a double entendre. Single phrase, two meanings.

That is a classic example of ambiguity. The above sentence is just bad English, vagueness and likely unintentional using a poor choice of verb. It is most definitely not a double entendre which, by definition is intentional … and usually clever.

“You can tune a guitar, but you can’t tuna fish.” is a classic pun.

High Treason
May 22, 2021 3:59 pm

I would guess that few wind turbines would reach their 25 year life expectancy. Typically they only break even in terms of emissions and energy at the 15 year mark, based on rosy predictions, so they only have a 10 year period of making an energy profit, something most do not achieve.
The costs of removal of the defunct edifices to monumental stupidity are never factored in to the monetary, carbon, and energy budget of wind power, let alone the environmental damage. They subsidy farmers just whistle and turn a blind eye to the long term environmental damage. Even the concrete foundations diminish the amount of farm production long term. I will bet that the hundreds of years of lost growing capacity were not factored in to the business model. Perhaps the wind power producers need to continue to pay off the farm owners for the lease of their land until they make good- remove the foundations and roads.
Never mind, all these inconvenient costs are bankrolled by subsidies paid by the taxpayers.
I propose a change in name from wind farms to subsidy farms.

jorgekafkazar
Reply to  High Treason
May 22, 2021 9:21 pm

Got any numbers to back those assertions up?

Melvyn Dackombe
Reply to  jorgekafkazar
May 23, 2021 5:37 am

Why don’t you provide numbers to disprove the assertions ?

Trying to Play Nice
Reply to  High Treason
May 23, 2021 5:22 am

The land under those windmills was not farmland. You probably couldn’t use it for any other purpose because it is an “irreplaceable desert habitat that would take thousands of years to recover from a person walking across the land”.

MAL
Reply to  Trying to Play Nice
May 23, 2021 10:21 am

“irreplaceable desert habitat that would take thousands of years to recover from a person walking across the land”every time I see that i just can’t get over the massive stupidity it takes to write such garbage. I presently live in the Phoenix area ten thousand years ago it was a pine forest. When the glacier disappeared up north it reverted back to desert. Where I lived before 10,000 years ago it was covered either with ice or water, when the glacier disappeared water drained away and a rich soil was left behind other place the glacial drift was covered in a short time by a soil it richness was dependents on the amount rainfall that occurred after that. Desert can disappear and reappear in a wink of and eye in geological time scales us puny humans have little to do with it, foot prints or not.

tomo
May 22, 2021 4:00 pm

OT

– probably deserves a separate article

https://www.rechargenews.com/wind/icelandic-offshore-wind-to-pump-green-power-to-uk-under-21bn-anglo-us-mega-plan/2-1-1014282

If some of my taxes are spent with these goons I won’t be happy – no siree .

Jay Hendon
May 22, 2021 4:02 pm

They do the same thing to coal power plants: https://www.sltrib.com/news/2020/12/19/demolition-largest-coal/

Mr.
Reply to  Jay Hendon
May 22, 2021 5:01 pm

From the linked report –

“All these people who watched this smokestack come down, they’re part of its history,” said Calvin Bigman, another local who came out to see the demolition. “They’re not only here to watch the action; they grew up being supported by their fathers and mothers who worked here. They know there’s a lot of history. I’m pretty sure they’re sad and they didn’t want to see this plant go down.”
Calvin’s late father, David Bigman, helped build the plant in the 70s and benefited from a good-paying union job in an otherwise economically depressed area. The younger Bigman worked off and on at the plant for 30 years as an electrician and welder.
“I was hired to tear it down,” Bigman said, “but I didn’t want to be a part of it because I didn’t want to see it go.”
He added that many of his friends had to sell their houses and move to Wyoming or Idaho to work in other coal-fired plants. “It’s going to change Page, which is also a tourist town,” Bigman said. “It’s going to have to rely on tourists now to keep the place alive.”

LdB
Reply to  Jay Hendon
May 23, 2021 8:38 am

It also had a working life of 47 years and it’s lowest year of production was 2016 which 61% of it’s rating. That is under the performance part of the link … try also reading the economic impact. Then there was the social impact to the Navajo as they made up 83% of plant employees and 93% of mine employees, resulting in about 850 direct tribal positions.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Navajo_Generating_Station

Please come back to us when you can show us any Wind Farm that can do any of that.

Last edited 23 days ago by LdB
Charlie
May 22, 2021 4:11 pm

Probably the Aragonne Mesa windfarm. Went online in 2006, died 2021.

YallaYPoora Kid
Reply to  Charlie
May 22, 2021 4:55 pm

Yes, agree – see project link. The plant was ONLY 15 years old!

https://www.leewardenergy.com/projects/allegheny-ridge-wind-farm-17/

Last edited 24 days ago by YallaYPoora Kid
Joseph Zorzin
Reply to  Charlie
May 23, 2021 4:33 am

Why exactly was it taken down?

LdB
Reply to  Joseph Zorzin
May 23, 2021 8:43 am

To con a new set of investors in a new upgraded farm … to make it profitable you just need to build it bigger 🙂

https://www.renewableenergymagazine.com/wind/ge-renewable-energy-announces-235-mw-repower-20210114

Last edited 23 days ago by LdB
Joseph Zorzin
Reply to  LdB
May 23, 2021 10:44 am

we can only wonder how big they’ll get!

VID_20180124_233914_00_004_2019-09-14_07-29-55_screenshot turbine 4 x.jpg
Kevin kilty
May 22, 2021 4:15 pm

Fun, I am sure, but who cleaned up the broken fiberglass. Don’t even ask about foundations.

Burgher King
May 22, 2021 4:16 pm

Where are these turbines located in New Mexico? Who owns the turbines? Who owns the land on which the demolished turbines sit? Were the turbines part of a still currently operating wind farm? Were environmental or governmental permits of some kind needed to approve the demolition? If so, from which agencies?

Robert Arvanitis
May 22, 2021 4:25 pm

If we did the thermodynamics + economics right from the start, they’d never be built.
Same for solar-panels + rare earths.

jorgekafkazar
Reply to  Robert Arvanitis
May 22, 2021 9:23 pm

Solar is worse.

Robert of Texas
May 22, 2021 4:25 pm

Finally, someone knows what to do with these monstrosities. Now what to do with all the waste they have created.

gringojay
Reply to  Robert of Texas
May 22, 2021 6:19 pm

Simple solutions just appear.

C7545CFF-CAB0-4548-8BC8-950BD255ABFC.png
Walter Sobchak
May 22, 2021 5:12 pm

The video rang a bell. About 25 years ago when my now 34 year old sun was about 9, a cable channel had a show called “Dynamite Dynasty” We taped it, and he watched it over and over. it was about the Loizeaux family who are the founders and owners of Controlled Demolition Inc. I couldn’t finmd any links to that show, but there have been lots of articles about them:

“A Family Legacy, Built to Withstand Dynamite” By Steve Friess | Nov. 12, 2007 | https://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/12/us/12implode.html

“The Loizeauxes are the first family of a decidedly distinct business that started with Mr. Loizeaux’s late father, Jack Loizeaux, who as a Baltimore forestry worker realized in the late 1940s that dynamite was the easiest and fastest way to remove the roots of trees that had died from Dutch elm disease. That discovery led to a full-time job blowing up tree roots until others started asking him to knock down man-made structures, too. He went on to blast coal tipples, low bridges and eventually buildings.

“As business picked up, Jack Loizeaux founded Controlled Demolition Inc.; his wife was the first to use the term “implosion” as a softer way to describe using explosives to make a building crumble of its own weight. Jack Loizeaux’s two sons later took over his business, and now several of his grandchildren are on the job, too. The staff of Controlled Demolition, a multimillion-dollar business, includes about a dozen people, half of whom are family members who also share a 45-acre estate in Baltimore County.

“One of the reasons why this is a family business is anybody in this building is capable of taking all our lives with one mistake at any point in time,” said Mark Loizeaux, who lost much of his hearing and was badly banged up in 1973 when an unspent piece of dynamite exploded as he worked in a debris pile after an implosion. “There needs to be a high level of trust.”

* * *

The remarkable precision of the Loizeauxes’ work — the 32-story Stardust Hotel-Casino collapsed in less than 10 seconds in March — keeps them atop the field, said Alan Feldman, spokesman for MGM Mirage, which hired the Loizeauxes most recently to demolish the Boardwalk Hotel-Casino on the Strip.“They do what they do with the craftsmanship of a great shoemaker or carpenter, someone who does this fine, detailed work,” Mr. Feldman said. “It just so happens their fine detailed work is taking down big complex buildings.”

jorgekafkazar
Reply to  Walter Sobchak
May 22, 2021 9:24 pm

Is it apropos to say, “You didn’t build that”?

Andre Thomas Lewis
May 22, 2021 5:20 pm

Surely the worn blades and mechanical parts can be replaced on the tower without destroying the whole thing? Or were they erected in the wrong place so not economic?

Pat from kerbob
Reply to  Andre Thomas Lewis
May 22, 2021 5:34 pm

Trick question?
They aren’t economic anywhere

Rusty
Reply to  Andre Thomas Lewis
May 23, 2021 4:50 am

I doubt there’s enough subsidy for that.

MAL
Reply to  Andre Thomas Lewis
May 23, 2021 10:31 am

No my best guess is the new turbines are much bigger weigh much more, my younger brother would have all the details he spent most of his adult live overseeing these things going up. He has spent most of his adult life working for the construction companies that put them up his main job for many years was bidding the work and seeing the project of beginning to end. He has made good money doing it. May have put up the one that just cut down. He been all over the USA putting these monuments of stupidity up.

Craig from Oz
Reply to  Andre Thomas Lewis
May 23, 2021 8:25 pm

Nope.

Let’s break it down in general terms.

You have a huge concrete base, a big steel column, a rotating box with the generator and the blades.

So the assumption is we want to replace the generator and the blades with new models.

Where are these blades and generators? Up the top of the tower.

So two remove the old units you are going to need cranes. Big ones that – one assumes – cost big money to run.

Then you have to refurbish the existing mounts for the new generator, which is probably the easy bit, and then you need to life the new equipment back up to the top.

Then test and commission.

So, you get to keep the concrete and the post, but the blades and turbines are new, both to manufacture and install. Then there is the down time, the temp decommission and removing the old blades/turbine.

At a very rough guess I would say replacing these parts would be almost as expensive as a new install.

Tony Taylor
May 22, 2021 5:20 pm

They might only last 25 years, 10 for the blades, generate way less than nameplate capacity, and cost a pile, but at least they are fun to watch being destroyed.

SAMURAI
May 22, 2021 6:45 pm

What a glorious sight!

Unfortunately, Biden’s “30 x 30” Executive Order (Federal government to control 30% of all US land and ocean rights by 2030) is a land/ocean grab to greatly restrict future oil/gas/coal exploration and farms/ranches/fishing, and to build insanely unreliable massive wind/solar farms on these federal lands and oceans….

BTW, the true goal is 50 x 50 (Federal government to control 50% of all US land and ocean rights by 2050)—oh goody…

Ironically, the name of this Biden EO is “America The Beautiful”….

dk_
May 22, 2021 7:01 pm

Blades aren’t salvageable. They are a balanced set, and can’t be interchanged. Damage to one blade causes the whole set to be scrapped.
Anyone with a boat or light aicraft knows that prop blades wear out. As do airframe wings, without inspection and repair. WInd turbine blades combine the frailties of air props and of aircraft lift surfaces. Since they are installed for the service life of the turbine, they are not salvageble by the time they are removed — even the removal process can completely destroy them.
Some older, shorter, less efficient designs use aluminum (brit: insert superfluous i to taste) but for these, the aluminum skin and frame is recycled as scrap. They are still worn out and too small to be reused on a modern 160 or 210 foot (eu: divide by whatever for meters) blade turbines.
But fear not: Carbon fiber and resin blades will burn just as well as coal in a modern furnace, so they won’t go completely to waste.
These were old 1KW units. Newer ones are rated at 6 and 10 kw. 210 ft. blades used on 10kw turbines are at the limit of what can be transported by road. Both sorts use specialized tractor trailer equipment and up to 15 vehicle teams to transport a set to a site. I’ve been on a couple trips for 160 ft. blade sets — returned to manufacturer for failed acceptance inspection.

Last edited 24 days ago by dk_
Mr.
Reply to  dk_
May 22, 2021 7:26 pm

Thanks d_k.
A report from the front.

Rich Lambert
Reply to  dk_
May 23, 2021 6:21 am

I wonder if the blades couldn’t be chopped up and used to help fire cement kilns.

dk_
Reply to  Rich Lambert
May 23, 2021 8:11 am

Rich,
Actually, carbon fiber can be burned. Other composites not so much, resins will burn off but what is left is mostly silica. As for aluminum components, a completely renewable source of intense heat is the thermite reaction — in this case a simple mixture of iron oxide (rust) and aluminum, once ignited (perhaps by a punctured lithium battery?) renders levels of heat that might be quite useful in ceramics, so long as one doesn’t mind building a new plant afterwards.

Mickey Reno
May 22, 2021 7:19 pm

It’s a good start.

Dennis
May 22, 2021 7:36 pm

Come on people, what’s wrong with wind turbine energy, it can be expected for 2.1 days in every 7 on average depending on the wind blowing.

Of course what days are difficult to predict.

sarc.

Doonman
May 22, 2021 8:37 pm

A significant impact of blasting techniques is the release of toxic carbon monoxide CO, and the non-toxic gas carbon dioxide CO2, which are the products of the final explosive transformation of explosives (Mainiero, Harris, & Rowland, 2007).

May 22, 2021 9:42 pm

Anthony forgot to mention that the modern explosives to blow these eyesores up are all made from fossil fuels.

Mark in FL
May 22, 2021 10:22 pm

That video was just soooooo satisfying. Loved every second of it.

Chris*
May 23, 2021 12:05 am

Six down and another million to go .

Vincent Causey
May 23, 2021 12:36 am

We should realize that this is just the beginning. Those turbines being blown up represent the small number that existed 20 years ago. The numbers have been growing at an exponential rate since then. The demolitions will therefore start growing at an exponential rate. At some point this will be noticed by even the dullest climate alarmist. Renewables eh?

Reply to  Vincent Causey
May 23, 2021 2:24 am

Yes, good point Vincent.

Ed Zuiderwijk
Reply to  Vincent Causey
May 23, 2021 3:07 am

The pillars are steel. A bonanza for scrap dealers.

Harry Passfield
Reply to  Vincent Causey
May 23, 2021 8:18 am

The demolitions will therefore start growing”

But then, Biden will stop the demolition and pay to keep ’em. Never thought I’d live to see fully-fledged Dementia Government.

Matthew Sykes
May 23, 2021 12:55 am

Salvage blades? They will be junk! Look at them crumple as they hit the ground and shatter.

Anyway, how old were these turbines, and why were they no longer viable? (if they ever were of course)

dk_
Reply to  Matthew Sykes
May 23, 2021 8:18 am

see cirby’s comment in this thread. I started to write, but cirby’s already started the gist of it, and other’s have filled in.

Last edited 23 days ago by dk_
Matthew Sykes
May 23, 2021 1:06 am

Is this the one in Guadalupe county? IF so its only been running since 2006.

https://www.leewardenergy.com/projects/allegheny-ridge-wind-farm-17/

Thats only 15 years old.

I cant find any more references to these turbines in new mexico so if they are only 15 years old, thats shocking.

dk_
Reply to  Matthew Sykes
May 23, 2021 8:24 am

Matthew, But not unexpected. These were early models, small compared to modern capacity, and little had been done to establish service life when they were designed.

Unlike fossil fuel plants, which are able to be upgraded and use well-understood technology, these things are one-use, not modular, and can’t be restored or upgraded. Maintenace capability is limited.

Don’t expect more than 25 years of service from any of these things, or from PV solar. If they aren’t replacing them faster than they are building new ones, they are already losing ground. Part of the con is to deny (or ignore) that they’ve got as big a “carbon footprint” as anything they’ve been proposed to replace.

Last edited 23 days ago by dk_
MAL
Reply to  dk_
May 23, 2021 10:36 am

 “Part of the con is to deny (or ignore) that they’ve got as big a “carbon footprint” as anything they’ve been proposed to replace.” let me fix that for you:  Part of the con is they deny (or ignore) know that they’ve got as bigger a “carbon footprint” as anything they’ve been proposed to replace.

dk_
Reply to  MAL
May 23, 2021 9:19 pm

Mal, Yup. There may be a scientific definition of carbon footprint. I’ve not heard of a reliable one. Mostly in the eye of the beholder, so I’m pretty confident of the claim.
As to my wording, I have a guilty pleasure in turning around accusations of denial and ignorance on this general topic. You are correct, and I shouldn’t indulge when it interferes with my meaning.
Thanks!

Last edited 23 days ago by dk_
ozspeaksup
May 23, 2021 2:30 am

hot damn! best thing Ive seen in ages!!
woulda been nice to see entire rows of em fall one by one
hmm hydryaulic fluids etc neatly drained n recycled prior?
or not;-)
way they landed not many blades etc would be useable
hooray!!

Ed Zuiderwijk
May 23, 2021 2:46 am

What a beautiful sight. But where are the activists? If you try to fell a tree they are on it like flies, climbing onto them to prevent you doing your thing. Where are they here? Not one in view. Do they not care enough? Shame on them!

jtom
Reply to  Ed Zuiderwijk
May 23, 2021 4:51 pm

Somebody is missing a good money-making opportunity; a Save the Wind Turbine advocacy group. Send the usual suspects a blurb saying, with enough funding, the turbines could be reconditioned and reused, once again helping us win our battle against fossil fuels. Send your donations to….

Pay a few idiots to block the demolition – maybe someone could perch on a blade – and get a lot of free press.

Last edited 23 days ago by jtom
Ed Zuiderwijk
May 23, 2021 4:09 am

It is not said why they were demolished but I hazard a guess that the subsidies dried up and that therefore running the farm with the maintenance involved was not economical anymore, with destruction the cheaper option.

John Bell
May 23, 2021 5:09 am

If they were worth putting up then why not keep using them? they seem okay.

griff
May 23, 2021 5:41 am

Well most wind farm sites in Europe are reused for larger turbines and the removed equipment is mostly sent to be used again in other parts of the world.

This is just another case of the USA having lower standards than other parts of the world.

Harry Passfield
Reply to  griff
May 23, 2021 8:06 am

‘Most’? – So what about all that concrete?

Dave Andrews
Reply to  griff
May 23, 2021 8:57 am

According to Wind Europe (“The Voice of the Wind Industry in Europe”)
although theoretically between 85% and 90% of a wind turbines total mass can be recycled to date the number of turbines being recycled has been quite low.

Moreover the recycling of turbine blades is difficult because of the complex composite materials they are made from. They estimate that 14,000 turbine blades could be decommissioned in Europe by 2023.

So yet again Griff you are wrong.

Last edited 23 days ago by Dave Andrews
MAL
Reply to  Dave Andrews
May 23, 2021 10:39 am

“So yet again Griff you are wrong.” Question has he ever been right?

Graemethecat
Reply to  MAL
May 23, 2021 3:07 pm

No.

MAL
Reply to  griff
May 23, 2021 10:38 am

Ah no a lot of these are imported from Europe. Is Europe selling us junk?

pigs_in_space
Reply to  griff
May 23, 2021 12:14 pm

Have you ever BEEN in Europe Griff?

How about paying a visit or three to the Europe I actuallydrive around on a daily basis!

Richard Page
Reply to  pigs_in_space
May 23, 2021 1:40 pm

Ugh. Do we have to? I’m in UK as is Griff (I believe). According to the latest EU mandates (sung by some drug taking, crossdressing Italian morons), the UK no longer appears to be in Europe.

Curious George
Reply to  griff
May 23, 2021 3:32 pm

“The removed equipment is mostly sent to be used again in other parts of the world.”

What a naked racism.

Graemethecat
Reply to  griff
May 23, 2021 11:46 pm

You should get used to this, Griff. More and more turbines will be coming down as the subsidies run out.

Barnes Moore
May 23, 2021 6:29 am

Does anyone know if this is the site where the demolition occurred? Aragonne Wind – Leeward Energy If so, it looks like GE was selected to “repower” this wind farm with new turbines –GE to Repower Leeward’s Aragonne Wind Project in New Mexico (steelguru.com) . If this is the correct location, what this also shows is that this windfarm became operational in 2006 meaning these wind turbines lasted at best 15 years. Yet, the lunacy continues with new turbines being installed that will also likely last 15 maybe 20 years.

Burgher King
Reply to  Barnes Moore
May 23, 2021 9:51 am

This has to be the site where the turbines were demolished. If so, it’s probable that the concrete foundations will be removed and replaced with ones capable of handling larger turbines. Doing this is probably a good investment under the not unreasonable assumption that the harvesting of green energy subsidies will grow considerably under the current regime.

Barnes Moore
Reply to  Burgher King
May 23, 2021 10:23 am

Will take a lot of explosives and heavy machinery to remove all that material – each base weighs over 2,000,000 pounds consisting of steel rebar and concrete.

The Dark Lord
May 23, 2021 6:42 am

They keep saying we need renewable energy because coal is finite … But its estimated we have 200 years of coal available … So is there enough cobalt available to build 10 generations of wind turbines (20 year life) … Not very “renewable” if you run out of materials to build them …

Harry Passfield
Reply to  The Dark Lord
May 23, 2021 8:04 am

But-but-but, we only have 20 years of windmills left – apparently. AGW is causing the wind to drop. (prove me wrong, GP).

Robert of Ottawa
May 23, 2021 6:44 am

Greatvideo – sort of an environmental Zabriski Point

Steakman
May 23, 2021 8:08 am

Warms my heart to see this..!! Should become a World Wide thing IMO.
Wind turbines RUN ON SUBSIDIES period – & require massive and VERY Expensive Back up when they do not generate useful amounts of electrical power…which is often.

All they do is kill wildlife, destroy natural habitat and scenery.
Industrial wind is the Biggest CON Job ever.
BLOW EM ALL UP..!!

Gordon A. Dressler
May 23, 2021 8:32 am

From the above article: “. . . permitting the Wind Farm Owner to complete salvage of blades and drive-train elements from some of the wind turbines to provide replacement parts for similar Units they operate at other wind farm locations.

WTF? Anyone believe that turbine blades and “drive train elements” would be reliable replacement part after surviving impact forces associate with an approximately ~ 35 m (115 foot) average fall height?

Last edited 23 days ago by Gordon A. Dressler
MAL
Reply to  Gordon A. Dressler
May 23, 2021 10:41 am

As someone put it a long time ago, “a fool is born every minute” this site has a few of them that comment far to often.

Gordon A. Dressler
Reply to  MAL
May 23, 2021 5:02 pm

Exactly . . . and many of these are fond of posting off-topic.

Gordon A. Dressler
Reply to  Gordon A. Dressler
May 24, 2021 11:49 am

. . . And most of those resort to ad hominem comments.

Rod evans
May 23, 2021 10:27 am

Has anyone got a video of a bulldozer recycling a solar farm?
After pushing the useless grant generators into a heap of broken glass and metal frames. I am sure they will be ideal spare parts for other solar farms.

Michael S. Kelly
May 23, 2021 2:51 pm

Doesn’t look like there is much to be salvaged after these drops. But what a great job to have!

My wife and I are both rocket propulsion specialists, and both freely admit that it’s just a socially acceptable outlet for pyromania.

Curious George
May 23, 2021 3:36 pm

Any data available on how much power these windmills produced in their 15 years of lifetime? Was it more that the energy needed to manufacture them, plus the energy needed for a cleanup?

David A
Reply to  Curious George
May 24, 2021 3:44 am

Not certain, yet when the term power is qualified with the word “useful” then the answer is a rather large net negative. ( And that is not counting the cost of the spinning reserve loss that backed up these monstrosities for their short life cycle.)

John
May 23, 2021 4:59 pm

typical
large waste of resources
probably never recovered the embedded energy

Streetcred
May 23, 2021 9:35 pm

… and the birds cheered !

Quilter52
May 23, 2021 11:08 pm

i’d like to think that here in Australia they would blow them up at the end of their useful life but somehow, I expect we will be left with this blight on our landscape until they fall over. There are quite a few windfarms here that must be getting close to their end, so I am interested to know.

henry Chance
May 24, 2021 5:53 am

The 35 ton composite blades can’t be repurposed or recycled. My company was a tech pioneer in getting Enron blade manufacturing launched. Now GE Wind. Enron Lay, Gore and Hansen cooked up the COX, SOX, NOX Ch4 trading/tax schemes. Gore promised carbon free energy by 5 years ago. 1,450 tons of coal to make the tower for a fan and the rebar in the pad. Natural gas ovens are used to dehydrate gypsum to make cement.
You can’t put a price on the value of greenie weenie virtue signaling.

Snarling Dolphin
May 24, 2021 7:11 am

Blade salvage? Spare parts? That’s almost as unbelievable as catastrophic anthropogenic global warming itself

WBrowning
May 24, 2021 7:33 am

Why is it that 90% of the wind turbines I see, even on windy days are not turning? Specifically, I have only once seen the turbines on the hills over San Luis Reservoir off CA Hwy 152 actually spinning, they are always feathered, just sitting there, looking ugly.

TonyG
May 24, 2021 8:55 am

I seem to remember someone right here telling us how this stuff would all be reused and repurposed only a few days ago…

Steve Z
May 24, 2021 12:52 pm

[QUOTE FROM ARTICLE]”CDI’s crew felled the 90 Units in two (2) mobilizations to the site, permitting the Wind Farm Owner to complete salvage of blades and drive-train elements from some of the wind turbines to provide replacement parts for similar Units they operate at other wind farm locations.”[END QUOTE]

Does anyone seriously think that a turbine blade or drive train can be salvaged after an uncontrolled crash from over 100 feet in the air?

If they really wanted to “salvage” the turbine blades, they would have to use a crane to disconnect the turbine from the drive shaft and gently lower it to the ground. But then someone would have to pay to rent the crane and its operator, which is probably more expensive than Wile E. Coyote and “Controlled” Demolition.

henry Chance
May 24, 2021 3:04 pm

Our farm had natural gas pipeline crossing from 80 years ago. It showed corrosion from sour SO2 and was ordered removed. They rented 10 acres of land and stacked 2,000 80′ pieces of pipe. Every pipe was tested and 100 with asbestos were bagged in plastic and hauled away seperately. They had to restore all the access roads, cut fences pastures, crop surfaces for 100’s of miles and pay damage settlements. They can’t leave a mess with dead fans.

Of course this video doesn’t show the gathering grid of poles and power lines also removed plus the buried lines.

Gunga Din
May 25, 2021 3:54 pm

It’d be nice to see a time lapse aerial video of all 90 going down in 90 seconds.

Martin
May 26, 2021 7:47 am

This film should be titled ” The Raptors Revenge ” 🙂

June 5, 2021 5:25 am

What a beautiful sight!

%d bloggers like this: