However, in 2019 the Crimean edition of Vesti reported the Sudak wind farm, located between Capes Meganom and Rybatsky, is quite different:
“The masts with snow-white blades were located here back in 2000. Crimea has become a pioneer in renewable energy. This Sudak wind farm is considered the most powerful. Now it is capable of producing 3.8 megawatts of environmentally friendly energy per day, which is quite enough to provide 4 small settlements. “
The Sudak power plant did not work for several years. The fact is that in 2008 a strong natural fire occurred in the steppe near Cape Meganom. That’s what wrote in 2009 a Ukrainian blogger:
“Last year there was a fire on Meganom. The fire was such that the metal structures and even the blades simply melted and the windmills went out of order. Now a tender for the reconstruction of a wind farm has been won by some Zaporozhye company, they will most likely be changed. “
Judging by the reporting by the Crimean Vesti, there is no complaint about the Ukrainian heritage there.
But “idle” Crimean windmills are not Kiselev’s only argument against “green energy”:
– If we turn not to the “green” totalitarian sect named after Greta, but to serious scientists, then on the measured values it will become clear that it is the Sun that plays a decisive factor in the formation of the climate on Earth – the activity of the Sun and insolation of our planet, depending on the distance and angle of inclination earth axis. <…> Serious foreign scientists adhere to the same opinion. Professor Ingemar Nordin from Sweden, Professor Richard Lindzen from the USA, Professor Gus Berhut from the Netherlands, Professor Alberto Prestinzi from Italy are among the 500 signatories-climatologists and scientists in related fields of knowledge, signatories to the letter to the UN, sent on September 23, 2019.
It sounds solid, but Kiselev’s climatologists are strange. Professor of Linkoping University Ingemar Nordin specializes in the philosophy of science and technology, the relationship between pure science and technology. Professor of the University of Rome La Sapienza Alberto Prestinzi is engaged in applied geology, advises major urban construction projects. Guus Berkhout (this is what his name sounds like), who taught at the Delft University of Technology, was an acoustician, who also worked as an engineer in the oil and gas industry; on the university website it is said that he developed also a certain model of socio-economic development and a “proposal for a new democracy.” And only Richard Lindzen of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology is really a climatologist, the author of the theory that global warming on the Earth does not threaten… He does not question the role of man-made greenhouse gases, but believes that as the temperature rises, the area of cirrus clouds over the tropical zone will decrease, which will lead to an increase in infrared radiation, due to which the Earth will cool. Most scientists disagree with this theory.
A group of climatologists including Timothy Osborne, University of East Anglia Climate Research Team Leader, Amber Kerr of the Agricultural Resilience Institute at the University of California at Davis, Giorgio Vacchiano of the University of Milan and others in 2019 published my assessment of “letters of 500”:
“The claims contradict or distort the evidence found by geologists and do not provide support for their conclusions that downplay the threat of climate change. For example, the letter argues that climate models ignore the positive effects of increased CO2 on plant growth. This is not true because many climate models simulate the response of vegetation to CO2 increases and the resulting climate change.
Although some publications have named the co-authors of the article as experts in the field of climatology, most of them are not. As noted in the analysis below, a significant proportion of the co-signers are engineers or non-technical specialists. Only 10 people identified themselves as climatologists.
Similar letters have tried to gain credibility in the past with the help of a large number of signatories, but in science, proof is important. “