14 ms·
US blocks all offshore wind construction, says reason is classified
- ChrisArchitect 11mo agoEarlier: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46355227 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46355227
- dlt713705 11mo agoNext step is invade Venezuela and pump as much oil as possible
- marcosdumay 11mo agoThe theory that the US government does those wars to keep oil prices high fits the timing way better than the opposite. I still thinks it's missing important details, but the US making wars to get more oil doesn't fit reality at all.
- braincat31415 11mo agoAgreed, and it's easy to understand why the US is doing what it is doing in Latin America by reading the new national security strategy.
- janc_ 11mo agoVenezuelan oil is more about US refineries that can only use very heavy oil, and US wells for such oil running out. Those refineries decided it is cheaper to bribe Trump than to invest into converting their factories. They are using US tax payer dolars (in a war with Venezuela) to avoid having to invest into their own conpanies.
- marcosdumay 11mo agoYet this is yet another attack that happens while the oil price falls, successfully making it stop falling. Again, I don't think the explanation is linked to oil prices.
- jandrewrogers 11mo agoThat makes no sense. Any US refinery that can process heavy sour can also process any other kind of crude. It isn’t the 1950s. The US has very advanced refinery tech that can adaptively refine everything from heavy sour to light sweet. The reconfiguration for the customer is highly customizable and largely automated. It is why so many countries send their crude to the US for refining. The US refiners make money no what kind of crude you send them.
- shimman 11mo agoYou're assuming they want to sell the oil in the US markets, they don't. Corporations want to sell it to other countries but they want the US to do the heavy lifting with minimal risks.
- dirkt 11mo agoI still find it very curious that after Russia invaded Ukraine, now Trump is using rhetoric that makes it look like the US is ready to invade some other country, too, they just have not decided on the victim yet. And of course "start a war with another country" is an excellent example of how to control your country in case you have to, because, say, elections are coming up and you may loose.
- tim333 11mo agoTrump seems to have been following Russian advice throughout his political career. It started in 1987: > Moscow at the invitation of Soviet ambassador Yuri Dubinin, in a private jet accompanied by “two Russian colonels” and then after he ran full page ads attacking NATO. Not much has changed there really. I'm surprised that all he has to do is say "russia russia hoax" and then the voters forget about it. I think maybe people have some similar failure modes to LLMs.
- blazespin 11mo agotrump literally said he wants venez to return the oil it 'stole' when it nationalized.
- msie 11mo ago[flagged]
- josefritzishere 11mo agoPure idiocracy.
- cdrnsf 11mo ago[flagged]
- lateforwork 11mo agoThe Saudis have enormous influence over Trump through business deals. So does Qatar through the jet they gifted Trump, and the UAE through crypto deals. These oil rich countries are no fans of clean energy. Is it merely coincidence, then, that Trump is canceling wind and solar projects in the United States? Previously Trump also canceled the largest solar project in the United States. Known as Esmeralda 7, the project planned in the Nevada desert would have produced enough energy to power nearly two million homes.
- deleted 11mo ago[deleted]
- verdverm 11mo agoIt's more the Scottish that caused this than the oil princes, the windmill stuff is all about petty hatred from losing a court case and now one of his precious golf courses has windmills visible out on the ocean for a few of the holes https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c15l3knp4xyo https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c15l3knp4xyo
- lateforwork 11mo agoBut he didn't just cancel wind projects. He cancelled solar. He cancelled EV tax credits. Then Trump went a step further: He is using tariffs to pressure other countries to relax their pledges to fight climate change and instead burn more oil, gas and coal [1]. The oil princes are getting their moneys worth. [1] https://www.nytimes.com/2025/08/27/climate/trump-international-pressure-climate-oil.html https://www.nytimes.com/2025/08/27/climate/trump-internation...
- verdverm 11mo agothe rest are more "a bonus" than the RCA, which is pettiness at his core and a constant seeing anything and everything as a slight against him how and why the republican/maga party wholeheartedly adopted Trump's grievances as their own is beyond me
- 11mo ago
- therobots927 11mo agoAll the more reason for me to invest in a personal windmill.
- Rebelgecko 11mo agoYMMV depending on where you live but for MOST people you get more bang for your buck with solar+batteries
- beembeem 11mo agoUnlike solar, wind at the utility scale virtually always improves load factors, lcoe, and a host of other economics vs a personal installation. Generally utility scale solar buys cheap panels that aren't as energy dense as those purchased by rooftop consumers, so you could make the argument. However, the efficiency and energy density of the ever-growing turbines installed by utilities, particularly off-shore, are far more efficient than anything you would install yourself. E.g. average annual wind speed typically improves with altitude, and having a taller turbine can reach those larger sustained wind speeds. Whereas, utilities and consumers almost always install solar near-ish ground level and see the same sky, perhaps the utility installs in a sunnier corner of geography. Consumers potentially benefit from the shading of panels, and lower distribution costs.
- derriz 11mo agoSadly wind turbines don’t really scale down like PV panels. The energy produced by PV panels is a linear function of their surface area. For wind turbines, it scales with the square of the blade length.
- KaiserPro 11mo agoThis is true, but if you already have a battery, getting an extra 200-400w when the sun isn't shining is really useful. (for a UK based house. Not so sure about the USA.) The cost isn't as good as solar though. a 1kw turbine is expensive.
- 11mo ago
- iamnotsure 11mo ago[flagged]
- kylehotchkiss 11mo agoMeanwhile, we're in a multi-year shortage of turbines for thermal electrical plants. Electric bill beatings will continue until morale improves.
- Kye 11mo agoAre wind turbines remotely similar? I would have thought something mounted high up on an always-moving top would have to be smaller, lighter, and sturdier than something that sits on the ground in a controlled environment. I'm not sure the two are in competition for production.
- tim333 11mo agoI think it's more a shortage of electricity generation in general.
- herewulf 11mo agoI asked Gemini if this was true and my city blacked out.
- kylehotchkiss 11mo agoNo. Thermal turbines turn steam into spin, they're not quite jet engines, but they need 24/7 reliability under stressful physics for extended periods of time. Wind generators are just like big electric car motors, I would think? https://www.spglobal.com/energy/en/news-research/latest-news/electric-power/052025-us-gas-fired-turbine-wait-times-as-much-as-seven-years-costs-up-sharply https://www.spglobal.com/energy/en/news-research/latest-news...
- shmerl 11mo agoOf course they'll classify the actual reason - government corruption.
- willis936 11mo agoIt's a matter of national security that the public not know the government is illegitimate.
- dvh 11mo agoPutin's orders?
- dadjoker 11mo ago[dead]
- zppln 11mo agoThis happens all the time in my country. The navy has all kinds of gear deployed in the sea that could be interfered with. Edit: Looks like they were a bit late to veto it here though.
- breakyerself 11mo agoThis is obviously because Donald Trump notoriously hates offshore wind turbines.
- dboreham 11mo agoPerhaps worth recapping that he hates them due to a specific personal event (the same is true for everything he does, if you dig deep enough to find the reason). In this case he developed a golf resort on the East Coast of Scotland. Meanwhile wind generators were also being deployed immediately offshore. He became enraged that the view from his new development was blighted by the turbines. So it isn't even due to oil industry bribery. It's personal.
- Swenrekcah 11mo agoIn that case he would just approve wind farms that fuck with people he dislikes. It seems to me this is very much intentional to keep oil demand up and prices high.
- smolder 11mo agoI don't know why people think wind turbines are ugly... Someone who admires gold toilets, no less. I think the opposite.
- linuxftw 11mo agoTo be fair, there could absolutely be national security issues. One example might be undersea (or even surface) navigation. If the coastline is littered with windmills off shore, this might create a negative of submarine navigation routes. That's clearly information we don't want shared with adversaries. There might be undersea classified cables. There might be classified sonar stations. It might be hard to detect adversary subs within a windmill field due to extra noise, etc.
- ribosometronome 11mo agoIf that were the case, why would they have been granted the leases in the first place?
- breakyerself 11mo agoSure. We can always imagine an excuse to avoid dealing with the obvious reality. I don't think it's productive though.
- vntok 11mo agoYet Sweden did it too (https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2024/11/11/why-sweden-nixed-new-wind-farms-for-fear-of-missing-russian-missiles/ https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2024/11/11/why-swe...) and they quote these defense-related reasons. Are they lying, do you believe that Sweden of all countries is under Trump's direct influence re: wind aversion?
- breakyerself 11mo agoSweden is worried about a hostile neighbor. They're freaked out enough that they joined NATO after generations of non-alignment. Who are we afraid of? If ICBMs are incoming to the Continental United States the world is ending. Regardless of whether we prevent wind farms in any of the 12,000+ miles of coastline. Are we expecting missiles to come from the Gulf of Mexico? People always bend over backwards to justify this administration. It's tiresome.
- tony_cannistra 11mo agoI looked into this a little because I was curious. I guess the ostensible "national security" rationale (which clearly is not the only reason!) for this is that turbines severely degrade the utility of radar surveillance along the coastlines. This is particularly relevant for low-altitude incursions and drones. Now, other large governments (UK) have resolved this in several ways, including the deployment of additional radars on and within the turbine farms themselves. So clearly this is politically motivated, and they're using what seems to be a real but solveable concern as a scapegoat.
- sigwinch 11mo agoI feel like the defense against drones is denser, sharper turbines.
- reactordev 11mo agoThis. Also, drones can be jammed pretty easily so making jamming stations on those platforms would be something too. The Brit’s have the right approach, just put radar on them so now you can see past them.
- tim333 11mo agoThe drones could fly over them. You could mount interceptor drones on them though. Like https://youtu.be/bsy5xzdKahU?t=80 https://youtu.be/bsy5xzdKahU?t=80
- beembeem 11mo ago
- catigula 11mo agoIt's interesting that people are very incredulous of there being a legitimate defense reason for this when we have had unilateral unanswered drone incursions all over Europe and the US. There's obviously some sort of arms race occurring and some of it is public. The world in on the precipice of many technologies advancing at an all too rapid pace. The idea that technology will become tightly regulated isn't inconceivable. FYI Sweden did the same thing last year. There is likely a (drone) reason, it's all but completely clear.
- dcminter 11mo agoIt could in principle be legit. But there's a trail of previous bad faith behaviour around the same windfarms.
- LastTrain 11mo agoNo, Sweden did not ban all offshore wind projects last year.
- catigula 11mo agoIs that the strawman framing of my argument that you want to stick with? https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2024/11/11/why-sweden-nixed-new-wind-farms-for-fear-of-missing-russian-missiles/ https://www.defensenews.com/global/europe/2024/11/11/why-swe...
- LastTrain 11mo agoYou framed it that way. This is an article about how the US shut down every offshore wind farm project. People are here discussing the fact that the us shut down every offshore wind project. You came in and said Sweden did it too. Setting aside the fact that they did not do that, they blocked some projects, not all - you don’t even know what “it” is because the US did not give a rationale.
- cr1895 11mo agoAnd, Sweden blocked those projects in early stage permitting, not well underway or even nearing completion. It's not comparable at all. US defence agencies have had thorough involvement in the permitting process of these US developments.
- blahedo 11mo agoI've been wondering all year about what happens when an executive-branch office issues orders that it is not legally qualified to issue; by and large everybody has just... followed them. This may be another example (I don't know quite enough of the legal specifics in this case, though there are certainly others that are more slam-dunk-y in this respect). What are the enforcement mechanisms here if the states in question---MA, RI, CT, NY, NJ, and VA---just said "no go ahead, keep building"? What happens to the companies if they just keep building? I'm not saying they should but at this point rule-of-law has fallen apart so badly that I literally don't know what happens when the government invents a new rule and people just... disregard it. (Particularly if state-level enforcement decides not to play along.) Do they bring in the FBI? Military?
- dmbche 11mo agoThese things take large amount of money from upstream, if the money is cut they can "say" what they want, nothing is getting done, from my understanding
- reactordev 11mo agoPower of the purse, given to the executive
- jrmg 11mo agoShort term punishment for states: ICE and the National Guard get sent into cities to make people feel unsafe, under the guise of an ‘immigration emergency’. Perhaps also Marines! To punish more fully, just illegally withhold federal funds for whatever is most hurtful. Highways? Education? Healthcare? And to your direct point, I’m sure someone could whip up a reason for the military to take over and shut down the sites if they don’t comply - this _is_ a national security matter after all. Court system stops any of that? Just comply (or pretend to) with the letter of the ruling and try another barely-distinguishable but arguably different illegal method for the next few months while the gears of the court system grind. What is _meant_ to stop the executive branch (meant to ‘execute’ the will of Congress, not just follow its own desires) going rogue is impeachment by Congress, but that seems like a far off prospect.
- linuxhansl 11mo agoWhat the... It seems we crossed into the realm of intentionally doing damage. I'm reminded of threatening tariffs to successfully derail global carbon levy on ship emissions. Meanwhile China runs away with all the clean energy tech (solar, wind, batteries, etc, etc.) while we hold to fossil fuels to save less than 200,000 jobs.
- andrewflnr 11mo agoIntentionally doing damage started with DOGE. So, roughly day 1.
- bakies 11mo agoyou forgot this is part 2
- andrewflnr 11mo agoOk, right. Intentionally doing damage started at least as early as Jan 6 2021.
- deleted 11mo ago[deleted]
- nailer 11mo ago[flagged]
- watwut 11mo agoThe group that was found to be massively lying every time they released stats in easy to catch ways and wasted more money then they saved?
- amanaplanacanal 11mo agoJust because they call it waste, doesn't make it so. You could cut anything and then justify it by calling it waste. It's all bullshit.
- ch2026 11mo agocan we setup a polymarket for the number of days until trump blames offshore windmills for hurricanes
- mv4 11mo agoTrump Media merging with a fusion energy firm.
- brewdad 11mo agoNot sure why this was downvoted. This was announced last week. https://apnews.com/article/trump-media-fusion-power-company-devin-nunes-0ad9fe84447acf340a3fbf57e8dbd4fd https://apnews.com/article/trump-media-fusion-power-company-...
- janc_ 11mo agoThe weirdest part was that it increased share value, when realistically it should have decreased it…
- meroes 11mo agoIf fent is a WMD then so are turbines!
- ineedaj0b 11mo agoWe don’t need offshore wind or onshore. Wish the US focused more on Solar. Seems to be the smartest path forward. China understands and is gunning for Nuclear and Solar. Geothermal and wind are nice but too location dependent.
- bryanlarsen 11mo agoWind and solar are highly complementary. Wind tends to be peak during evening and morning, and is often stronger at night than during the day. Wind is cheaper than overbuilding solar and adding batteries.
- ineedaj0b 11mo agoEveryone hates living near the turbines. They are loud, an eyesore, kill birds in droves, and cause annoying flickering. People don’t mind solar as much. Wind cannot compete on solar for price especially with China reducing solars base cost each year.
- michelsedgh 11mo agoThe big solar plant they made in between Cali and Las Vegas one, it wasn't online more than a few years? It shut down...
- jeffbee 11mo agoYou're thinking of an actually quite small solar-thermal plant, which is bankrupt because solar-thermal is a dumb idea.
- michelsedgh 11mo agoIf its a dumb idea, why waste billions of dollars on it? Do you know how much pollution that shutted down plant is? It was HugE I've gone past it. So much waste for a "dumb idea"
- 11mo ago
- teaearlgraycold 11mo ago[flagged]
- BenFranklin100 11mo agoThis is dumb. We are in the midst of an energy shortage that will only get worse. Between MAGA blocking wind and Progressives blocking nuclear, the US is left with solar and carbon. Solar is fine, but it needs a 24/7 base. Unfortunately it increasingly appears that base will remain carbon.
- speed_spread 11mo ago> energy shortage that will only get worse Worse? An energy shortage is an opportunity to increase prices and make more money! Think about the hyuge profits!
- ekjhgkejhgk 11mo ago[flagged]
- mullingitover 11mo agoThis is a road to serfdom (and/or a road to 1789 France) situation with what's happening to energy prices in the past couple years[1]. The price of new solar+battery and wind should be pushing fossil fuel energy prices off a cliff right now, unless you live in a petrostate. [1] https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/APU000072610 https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/APU000072610
- monero-xmr 11mo agoThe UK has tons of wind power but prices there are exceptionally high. Offshore wind isn't as cost effective as solar, it's the poster boy for high-cost, low-value renewable energy
- doctorpangloss 11mo agoenergy development is complex, but it cannot be your idea, which boils down to, "whatever is cheapest," especially for government policy. it would be cheapest to not use energy at all, which is the exact opposite of the mercenary POV you are talking about, without having to use the word environment at all.
- monero-xmr 11mo agoIt would be cheapest, and 100% in our control, to construct coal plants. Coal is abundant. China builds insane amounts of coal plants to this day. That would provide bountiful cheap energy. But we don't do this. So all else being equal, I would suggest we reorient towards other types of renewable energy, especially nuclear, if we are longer worried about price
- doctorpangloss 11mo agoWhy do you think your particular mercenary point of view does not prevail? Because people are stupid? I like nuclear. The funny thing about nuclear power and the mercenaries promoting their startups about it is, you will still have to convince democrats about it. Because occasionally they are in power, and nuclear, as is often criticized, takes a long time to build and a short time to turn off haha.
- d--b 11mo agoTrump doesn't like windfarms since they built some off the coast of his Scottish golf club. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trump_International_Golf_Club_Scotland_Ltd_v_The_Scottish_Ministers https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trump_International_Golf_Club_...
- josefritzishere 11mo agoI suspect this is the true reason. He is not known for being a strategic thinker.
- Surac 11mo agoi have the feeling the real reason is "drill baby drill". The actual administration does not hide it's love for carbon based energy
- alecco 11mo agoOccam's Razor: offshore wind requires a lot of rare earths for their magnets and whatnot. US military-industrial complex needs the little remaining global supply not under China's export controls.
- techgnosis 11mo agoThis feels extremely plausible. I don't see anyone else saying this yet, well done.
- KaiserPro 11mo ago> offshore wind requires a lot of rare earths for their magnets compared to the general motor market in the USA? I think thats out by a few orders of magnitude. Radar shadow is vaguely plausible, if your radar is shit and needs replacing. it also requires your hydrophone network to not be working that well either.
- bongodongobob 11mo agoOccams Razor: Trump openly hates windmills and green energy
- platevoltage 11mo agoThis could very well be the excuse they're using. The reality is almost certainly more petty than that given the great one's irrational hate of wind power.
- hristov 11mo agoAny electricity produced by turning generators will require rare earths. This includes, every current non-trivial electricity source with the exception of solar. Gas, oil, coal and nuclear all work by heating steam and running it through a turbine that turns a generator that makes electricity. For hydro, the falling water turns the turbine/generator. So any source of electricity that may replace these wind turbines (other than solar) will require about the same amount of rare-earths. And lets face it, Trump is doing his best to hamstring solar as well. He has cancelled all solar subsidies and has hit solar with major tariffs. I think Occams Razor would lead to a very different conclusion.
- LgWoodenBadger 11mo agoIt's to reapply pressure on Denmark with respect to Greenland.
- _alaya 11mo agoI'm surprised this isn't mentioned more. Denmark is big in the wind industry and blocking this construction keeps money out of the Danish economy. Another pressure move to get Denmark to give up Greenland.
- MisterBastahrd 11mo ago[flagged]
- jeffbee 11mo agohaha, amateurs. California is way ahead of the game here. We've been blocking our own offshore wind fields for years, using our own environmental regulations, and we're going to keep doing it for the foreseeable future.
- metalman 11mo agodrones are invisible to radar.......or clearly russia(or ukrain) would not be dealing with strikes far from the front lines also, hypersonic missles are now a thing, and the hit faster than any radar or interceptor can register but yes if you were worried about Portugal trying a sneak attack, then clearly they would use the wind turbine shielding attack vector from weaponised shipping cans placed on container ships
- janc_ 11mo agoThey are not (necessarily) invisible, that depends on size & many other variables. Also, hypersonic missiles are perfectly vusible on radar.
- cosmicgadget 11mo agoDrones are regularly intercepted in the Ukraine war. Patriot batteries have intercepted kinzhals.
- riku_iki 11mo agoKinzhal is ballistic missile flying on high altitude trajectory, so it is easily visible and somehow interceptable. Drones and cruise missiles often fly very low, which makes them much harder to detect and intercept.
- deleted 11mo ago[deleted]
- arghandugh 11mo agoThis is because King Pedophile wants to destabilize the American power grid in order to enrich his donors. It was an explicit campaign promise that the tech industry completely endorsed and he is fulfilling it.
- exabrial 11mo agoI actually believe the radar surveillance excuse (on a technicalities only), if that's what this is going to come down to. The ocean is a big empty place and prime for picking up radar reflections as the background is pretty quiet. However... how on earth was this not identified like 10 years ago way before these projects were even started? Seems pretty obvious in hindsight.
- Retz4o4 11mo agoYoure taking the bait.
- platevoltage 11mo agoIt's almost certainly the best excuse they could think up to placate the masses.
- bakies 11mo agoSounds plausible but it would have been identified 10 years ago which is why everyone in the thread thinks it's a dubious claim. One I would have believed more is that they're worried about being too reliable on the offshore wind which can be easily attacked by a foreign navy or maybe a smaller group.
- janc_ 11mo agoThere is a Belgian company that can use temperarure & other fluctuations in underseas power & cimmunication cables to detect nearby objects etc. I'm sure they are willing to help the US navy if they can convince them the US is a solid NATO partner… ( oh, wait, that might have become difficult…)
- SamDc73 11mo agoYes, turbine blades can introduce radar clutter and affect certain military systems; but this has been know since the 1990s and has been engineered around for decades. China, the UK, Germany, and Denmark operate gigawatts of offshore wind in close proximity to military-grade and NATO air-defense radar without much issue...
- 3form 11mo agoThere could be new developments in the problem. For example, small scale drones using these areas as entry points. Not to say that's that, but I think it's not impossible that something new is being taken under consideration.
- insane_dreamer 11mo agoUnder other circumstances I might be inclined to give the benefit of the doubt. But when's the last time we saw any action from this admin that wasn't clearly self-dealing or ideologically motivated instead of science-based?
- myvoiceismypass 11mo agoYup. And Trump very specifically has had a very irrational obsession and hatred for windmills for years now.
- saturnite 11mo agoHe has said that wind turbines cause cancer. He also said they make noise that bothers people and drives whales insane. He has also said that they kill birds, as if their spinning draws birds into the blades. But most of all, he thinks they're ugly.
- hadlock 11mo agoThere's actually some truth to the bird thing. Some of the first wind turbines in the 1980s had very short blades, 5-10 feet, and would spin at ~50rpm, sort of like a spinning baseball bat, ready to strike birds out of the air. Combined with not being very high off the ground, maybe 40 feet, birds would take off from the ground directly into the very fast spinning blades. Modern wind turbines neither look nor act like these early turbines, but that's where the data comes from. They only just retired those fast spinning, low to the ground turbines in like ~2017. Something like 80-95% of all bird strikes came from ~35 essentially prototype wind turbines, and virtually none come from modern, huge slow spinning turbines.
- lm28469 11mo agoOh no! look Trump is doing exactly what he promised and everyone is shocked, again https://www.project2025.observer/en?agencies=Dept.+of+Energy https://www.project2025.observer/en?agencies=Dept.+of+Energy
- platevoltage 11mo agoI don't think anyone here is shocked.
- LastTrain 11mo agoHe said he'd never heard of project 2025.
- mring33621 11mo agoThe Water Folk put the kibosh on that shit.
- DoctorOetker 11mo agoIs there a similar ostensible classified reason why OCO-2 and OCO-3 are requested to shut down operations? 700+ M invested in space based observatories with ~ 15M yearly operating cost. Just doesn't make sense to disable perfectly working observatories to save less than ~75M in a timespan of 5 years while losing a 700+M investment.
- dalyons 11mo agoThe reason is observatories are woke, apparently
- DoctorOetker 11mo agoMachines and instruments can be woke? How does one establish if a machine is woke? What would be the most woke thing for machines to do? To protest and demand machine rights?
- frogperson 11mo ago[flagged]
- alhirzel 11mo agoYears ago, this very subject was an interview question at a national lab (at an undergrad level). The question was roughly: > the ends of windmill blades look a lot like a jet on radar. If you were assigned to this project, what would your approach be to avoiding false positives? This was in 2011/2012. I find it difficult to believe the problem is not solved.
- dmbche 11mo agoRealistically, isn't it a known presence on radar? It's static - you can't just ignore signals from that area in space?
- the_gipsy 11mo agoThe enemy could be hiding precisely at the windmills /s
- robocat 11mo agoPerhaps if tip speed is X and radar installation is perpendicular to wind turbine, then an enemy can approach at speed X in the turbine's radar shadow. There would still be multiple pulses with timing differences but if there's a field of turbines then I'd guess there's enough interference/scatter to be a problem. Like using approaching from the sun causes problems for pilots. The reflections from the turbines would pulse due to the blades so in theory their scatter could be cancelled out in processing?
- tjohns 11mo agoYes, and more... You can use different antenna designs for a more directional radar beam. Or tilt the beam upwards to steer it around obstacles. You can also build a moving-target detector by looking at doppler shift to filter out objects that are moving too slowly: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moving_target_indication https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moving_target_indication
- egberts1 11mo ago
- softwaredoug 11mo agoThe real takeaway is when a big project can be paused entirely due to one presidents very specific / frivolous whims - we won’t be able to do big projects in the current order. We need a shift in the constitutional order where the whims of one person isnt fused with the bureaucracy
- trymas 11mo ago> We need a shift in the constitutional order where the whims of one person isnt fused with the bureaucracy Correct me if I'm wrong, though there are already protections there. It's just president, senate, congress, SCOTUS all agree on this. IMHO - most effective constitutional change would be to get rid of first past the post election system, electoral colleges, gerrymandering, etc. I think USA's two party system made it to the place where it is right now, seemingly on the verge of turning into one-party system.
- softwaredoug 11mo agoThe US has had worse structural power imbalances in the past. It’s gotten over them (after a generation or more) by - coalition shifts - every election, new groups going and out of each party - demographic shifts - shrinking / growing / moving around of different groups - external shock - war / depression / ?? changes incentives of governance (see Civil War, Great Depression) - hegemons dilemma - the in power party over time goes through in fighting, over confidence, etc (see Republicans becoming corrupt in The Gilded Age) Alternate constitutional order can mean a lot besides amendments - or even using Federal power. It can be about organizing economic power to reject illegitimacy. It can mean organizing the Democratic Party differently as more of a shadow set of social institutions that support people. It can mean leveraging state power, and building coalitions of blue states. Or other creative approaches to power.
- hammock 11mo agoDon't overlook the influence of global soft power and the non-profit sector. Demographic shifts and a robust social safety net are also naturally reshaping the landscape
- nextworddev 11mo agoPrefer solar over wind
- nixosbestos 11mo agoCan we summon the Trumphole licking HN users that spent their reputation insisting that us "libtards" were freaking out, and get them in here to explain how this fits in the MAGA 4D Chess? Or is it against HN decorum to point out just how much of that shit-headery fart-huffing was allowed and transpired here, on HN?
- deleted 11mo ago[deleted]
- CommenterPerson 11mo agoThe $445 million campaign contribution / bribe from Big Oil is clearly paying off.
- tonetheman 11mo ago[dead]
- maxglute 11mo agoTBH the fact renewables haven't or can't cut big cheques to change Trumps mind is a little baffling. Surely he can double dip from big oil and small renewable.
- Havoc 11mo agoUS bribery system eh I mean fossil fuel lobby strikes again
- zombiwoof 11mo ago[dead]
- politician 11mo agoGlobal human populations are in decline; fossil fuel use will decline along with us. If humans no longer use as much carbon (because they no longer exist in large numbers), doesn’t that alone adequately address the climate change concerns? Does it really make sense to overhaul the global energy generation infrastructure given these conditions?
- defrost 11mo ago> Global human populations are in decline; fossil fuel use will decline along with us. That doesn't follow as the per capita consumption trends are still steadily increasing ... large numbers of people across the planet barely using any resources is far less of a problem than substantially fewer people all consuming like central north americans (which is increasingly the aspiration goal). > doesn’t that alone adequately address the climate change concerns? No. The amount of CO2 in the atmosphere is already problematic and will remain there for hundreds of years (unless removed). The amount added each year by human activity is still increasing .. it needs to stop increasing, and to fall substantiatly, and probably something done about extraction or other mitigation. > Does it really make sense to overhaul the global energy generation infrastructure Yes .. and on the plus side that's already happening thanks to China, the EU, past US administrations, etc. THe current US administration isn't helping .. they appear to be doing very much the opposite of helping given the cosy relationship with existing fossil fuel companies.
- deleted 11mo ago[deleted]
- t1234s 11mo agoThe US doesn't want to piss off all the USO's zipping around underwater.
- pkaeding 11mo agoYep, this is what I was thinking. It was part of the detente negotiated to end the "drone" hysteria about this time last year.
- hulahoof 11mo agoLocal news (Australia) is reporting this as extra pressure on Denmark relating to the rhetoric around Greenland https://aapnews.aap.com.au/a/XVWrainrX https://aapnews.aap.com.au/a/XVWrainrX
- Ayanonymous 11mo agoI found this article interesting as someone still learning about how energy policy and renewable projects interact with government decisions. It’s surprising to see how national security concerns are being used to pause offshore wind construction, and I’m curious how this will affect both the industry and broader energy goals. Thanks for the clear overview!
- egberts1 11mo agoAs one who worked on over the horizon radar (OTH-B), ground clutter is a major impediment to accurate detection, identification, and correlation of an object. Same principle applies for water as it is in air.
- ChoGGi 11mo agoHow many golf courses is he planning to build?
- deafpolygon 11mo agoControl over oil and gas keeps monetary values high. Green energy is much harder to control because you can’t force the market into artificial scarcity and re-inflate the value of gas to drive the economy back up (and keep rich people rich).