This is from Andy at Bridgemaxx. In all cases, they would be riding along customer traffic, so probably only a few hundred mbps available .. 104.37.102.206 speedtest / bridgemaxx
Justin Wilson j...@mtin.net --- http://www.mtin.net Owner/CEO xISP Solutions- Consulting – Data Centers - Bandwidth http://www.midwest-ix.com COO/Chairman Internet Exchange - Peering - Distributed Fabric > On Feb 17, 2017, at 5:58 PM, Jaime Solorza <losguyswirel...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Yep between 1 10 and 1 20 past Ft > Stockton there are thousands of them > .. > > On Feb 17, 2017 3:55 PM, "Cameron Crum" <cc...@wispmon.com > <mailto:cc...@wispmon.com>> wrote: > The worst part for me is the freaking eye-sore these things create. I drive a > couple times a year from Fort Worth to Taos, NM and west Texas is littered > with these things as far as the eye can see. Looks like shit and half of them > are never even spinning. I'd much rather see the boring prairie than these > things. But, it's not my land so I can't complain too much. I sure wouldn't > want to live nearby though. The are somewhat noisy. > > On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 12:43 PM, Ken Hohhof <af...@kwisp.com > <mailto:af...@kwisp.com>> wrote: > As part of the zoning approval, they pretty much get forced to put in that > language. Otherwise, they could avoid setting aside money to restore the > land, and just skip town leaving the landowners with rusting hulks and > concrete blocks to clean up. > > > > <> > From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com <mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com>] On > Behalf Of That One Guy /sarcasm > Sent: Friday, February 17, 2017 12:32 PM > To: af@afmug.com <mailto:af@afmug.com> > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] OT Jaime's thread > > > > The lease on the turbine on the old ladies family estate has the 10 year > renewing lease (it auto renews with a bunch of numbers about changes to the > calculation) but it does state it is intended to cease operation in 30 years. > There is a residual trust on each one to cover the cost of removal, going > into detail about what that consists of, essentially says it will return the > property to its original purpose state, in this case, farmland. > > The lease was like 35 pages, im not a lawyer, so I may have misread it when I > looked at it while drunk. I did find it odd to only use something with that > much expense for 30 years (taxpayer funded, so who cares) maybe it just means > it will be refurbished and the lease revisited, I dont know > > > > On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 12:09 PM, Josh Reynolds <j...@kyneticwifi.com > <mailto:j...@kyneticwifi.com>> wrote: > > Just a note: check the calculations on that page, and the charts. > > > On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 12:08 PM, Josh Reynolds <j...@kyneticwifi.com > <mailto:j...@kyneticwifi.com>> wrote: > > " > > > > Summary of the calculations > > > > First of all I want to state that my calculations might include > > mistakes that I have not realized. Also, I know for a certain I have > > not included any accounting gimmicks that big companies might use to > > make their returns look better. Also, the fixed tariff price that I > > used in every calculation might give wind power some advantage over > > solar. > > > > Without subsidies the profitability of solar energy is surprisingly > > low. Especially when considering that it is the one from these three > > that seems to be the most talked about in India. Although all that > > changes when subsidies are added in to the calculation. > > > > Also the hydropower gives a mediocre return on invested capital but it > > makes it up with its flexibility. By this I mean that hydropower can > > be used whenever the electricity prices are high. It should also be > > noted that in these calculations I used lifetime of 50. If the > > lifetime was 100 the ROCE would be higher. The subsidies did not > > affect the hydropower’s profitability that much. Unfortunately I > > didn’t find any subsidy schemes for large hydropower plants. > > > > In these calculations the wind power is easily the most profitable > > form of energy. The incentives didn’t change the ROCE that much > > because most of the incentives were tax based and only show on the > > profit line. Although, I believe that the used electricity price is a > > bit too high for wind power. > > > > As for Atlantic Tele-Network’s statement, solar power can be > > profitable without subsidies but only barely." > > > > From: http://www.huntingvalue.com/renewable-energy-profitability/ > > <http://www.huntingvalue.com/renewable-energy-profitability/> > > > > On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 11:56 AM, Ken Hohhof <af...@kwisp.com > > <mailto:af...@kwisp.com>> wrote: > >> I think you're reading too much into the provision in the land lease to > >> remove the concrete foundation and restore the land at the end of the > >> lease. > >> > >> If you watch the whole process of developing a wind farm, the actual wind > >> turbines are a small part of it. The question would be, if it's still > >> profitable at the end of 20 or 30 years, what would it take to extend the > >> land leases and refurbish the infrastructure to keep it running? I'm > >> guessing a small fraction of the original cost. Maybe just inspect the > >> towers and foundations, replace the blades. They still have the power > >> wires, access roads, permits, etc. It seems that a certain number of > >> turbines get worked on each year as part of regular maintenance. I've > >> seen blades break, they just go out with a crane and replace them, it > >> doesn't seem to be that big a deal. These things are in rural areas and > >> have access roads, they plan on regular inspections and maintenance. > >> > >> A lot depends on the regulatory environment, are there subsidies, is the > >> power company required to buy the power, what does it cost to generate > >> power from coal/nuclear/gas, has some other renewable energy like solar > >> taken off. > >> > >> > >> -----Original Message----- > > >> From: Af [mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com <mailto:af-boun...@afmug.com>] On > >> Behalf Of Josh Reynolds > >> Sent: Friday, February 17, 2017 11:36 AM > >> To: af@afmug.com <mailto:af@afmug.com> > >> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] OT Jaime's thread > >> > >> So 30 years of generating power - (certain maintenance types + production > >> resource usage) > >> > >> I can't see that not being not only carbon neutral, but carbon negative. > >> > >> On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 11:30 AM, That One Guy /sarcasm > >> <thatoneguyst...@gmail.com <mailto:thatoneguyst...@gmail.com>> wrote: > >>> the turbines here are on 20 year renewing land leases with an expected > >>> removal at the 30 year mark if theyre still in production > >>> > >>> On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 11:27 AM, Josh Reynolds <j...@kyneticwifi.com > >>> <mailto:j...@kyneticwifi.com>> > > >>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> "The manufacturing, transportation, and erection of these things is > >>>> not offset by the gains, its a net carbon loss at the end of the day." > >>>> > >>>> I haven't seen any data that corroborates that statement. You > >>>> basically have to look at how long they plan for them to run, the > >>>> power generated during that time, include maintenance, and compare > >>>> that to the cost to manufacture and erect. > >>>> > >>>> On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 11:21 AM, That One Guy /sarcasm > >>>> <thatoneguyst...@gmail.com <mailto:thatoneguyst...@gmail.com>> wrote: > >>>> > realistic dependency reduction is something we havent seen, > >>>> > regulating industries out of buisines or to the point consumers > >>>> > cannot afford things is not the way to go. > >>>> > Imagine how many of these millions of windmills we have in the US > >>>> > without huge consumptions of oil. exactly zero. The manufacturing, > >>>> > transportation, and erection of these things is not offset by the > >>>> > gains, its a net carbon loss at the end of the day. They dont even > >>>> > account for the technician carbon footprint driving from turbine to > >>>> > turbine. I would like to see an actual report on the oil cost per > >>>> > turbine, taking into account all factors, including the oil for > >>>> > fedex to deliver replacement parts, and oil consumption in rope and > >>>> > rigging. > >>>> > > >>>> > Solar is a joke en mass, from a carbon perspective, especially here > >>>> > where all our power comes from nuclear. > >>>> > > >>>> > hydroelectric, maybe not a whole lod of oil consumption, but > >>>> > ecological impact is catastrophic, what do we have now 2 salmon > >>>> > variants > >>>> > > >>>> > shut it all down > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 10:11 AM, Josh Reynolds > >>>> > <j...@kyneticwifi.com <mailto:j...@kyneticwifi.com>> > >>>> > wrote: > >>>> >> > >>>> >> That's a pretty irrational stance to take, being 100% against a > >>>> >> resource I mean. > >>>> >> > >>>> >> It is not irrational to reduce dependency on anything though, for > >>>> >> a variety of reasons. > >>>> >> > >>>> >> On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 10:08 AM, <ch...@wbmfg.com > >>>> >> <mailto:ch...@wbmfg.com>> wrote: > >>>> >> > Try to make industrial amounts of electricity without oil. Even > >>>> >> > hydroelectric turbines need lube. Transformers are filled with oil. > >>>> >> > If > >>>> >> > you > >>>> >> > are against oil, be against oil. > >>>> >> > > >>>> >> > -----Original Message----- From: Josh Reynolds > >>>> >> > Sent: Friday, February 17, 2017 8:58 AM > >>>> >> > To: af@afmug.com <mailto:af@afmug.com> > >>>> >> > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] OT Jaime's thread > >>>> >> > > >>>> >> > I'm trying to figure out what electricity has to do with oil > >>>> >> > from your statement. > >>>> >> > > >>>> >> > You can also make a decision to reduce oil consumption where > >>>> >> > logical. > >>>> >> > This would be a good thing from a monetary and national defense > >>>> >> > standpoint among other things. > >>>> >> > > >>>> >> > On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 9:55 AM, <ch...@wbmfg.com > >>>> >> > <mailto:ch...@wbmfg.com>> wrote: > >>>> >> >> > >>>> >> >> Being against oil but using oil... > >>>> >> >> Think FedEx can do its thing without oil? > >>>> >> >> > >>>> >> >> If you are truly against oil, stop using it. > >>>> >> >> Go to the forest. No kerosene lamps, deer fat tallow candles > >>>> >> >> perhaps. > >>>> >> >> No guns, takes oil to make guns... > >>>> >> >> > >>>> >> >> etc > >>>> >> >> > >>>> >> >> -----Original Message----- From: Josh Reynolds > >>>> >> >> Sent: Friday, February 17, 2017 8:53 AM > >>>> >> >> To: af@afmug.com <mailto:af@afmug.com> > >>>> >> >> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] OT Jaime's thread > >>>> >> >> > >>>> >> >> Would you mind clarifying the follow a bit? Thanks > >>>> >> >> > >>>> >> >> "Being against oil but using electricity and vehicles and FedEx." > >>>> >> >> > >>>> >> >> On Fri, Feb 17, 2017 at 9:32 AM, <ch...@wbmfg.com > >>>> >> >> <mailto:ch...@wbmfg.com>> wrote: > >>>> >> >>> > >>>> >> >>> > >>>> >> >>> I like driving my gas and diesel vehicles. > >>>> >> >>> I like the products derived from oil like the jacket on CAT 5 > >>>> >> >>> cable and printed circuit boards. > >>>> >> >>> I like the price of oil to be as low as possible. > >>>> >> >>> I prefer having sources in this hemisphere and not funding the > >>>> >> >>> Arab world. > >>>> >> >>> > >>>> >> >>> I too have built many miles of copper and fiber over public > >>>> >> >>> and tribal lands. I have gone through the exact same NEPA and > >>>> >> >>> FLPMA process as the pipeline many many times. I consider > >>>> >> >>> myself a NEPA expert and am currently advising the US Senate > >>>> >> >>> on ways to make that process work faster. > >>>> >> >>> > >>>> >> >>> Pissing and moaning that folks with more money than you are > >>>> >> >>> building a pipe to make even more money than you sounds like > >>>> >> >>> sour grapes and jealousy. > >>>> >> >>> If > >>>> >> >>> you are against the “commons” don’t use common frequencies. > >>>> >> >>> Don’t use ROWs. > >>>> >> >>> Don’t use electricity. > >>>> >> >>> > >>>> >> >>> I don’t get several things: > >>>> >> >>> > >>>> >> >>> Being against oil but using electricity and vehicles and FedEx. > >>>> >> >>> Being against certain forms of arguably safer and more > >>>> >> >>> efficient oil transportation. > >>>> >> >>> Being against certain rich people doing business but > >>>> >> >>> attempting to become a richer person yourself. > >>>> >> >>> Being against the use of public and private ROWs for oil > >>>> >> >>> pipelines but not for water pipelines, natural gas pipelines, > >>>> >> >>> sewers, fiber cables or electric. > >>>> >> >>> > >>>> >> >>> And being a second or third generation wanna-be 1960s social > >>>> >> >>> justice warrior going thousands of miles to hang with other > >>>> >> >>> like minded people and think you are really doing anything be > >>>> >> >>> being cold, being an ass, being stupid and wasting your time > >>>> >> >>> and the resources of local, state and federal authorities. > >>>> >> >>> Those folks are punks. (Their parents probably have BA in > >>>> >> >>> liberal arts). > >>>> >> >>> > >>>> >> >>> And yes, BTW, I too have made deals with tribes. It is as > >>>> >> >>> Lewis describes. > >>>> >> >>> You make the deal, you pay the money and more often than not > >>>> >> >>> when tribal leadership changes, the deal no longer exists and > >>>> >> >>> you have another round of payola. I have native American > >>>> >> >>> heritage in my blood. Don’t get all butt hurt when I say it is > >>>> >> >>> called “indian giving” for a reason. Tribes have communal > >>>> >> >>> property. You never own anything, you just possess it for a > >>>> >> >>> time until some other tribal member decides they need it. > >>>> >> >>> That spills over to dealing with non tribal members. > >>>> >> >>> > >>>> >> >>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_giver > >>>> >> >>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indian_giver> > >>>> >> >>> > >>>> >> >>> > >>>> >> >> > >>>> >> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> > -- > >>>> > If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your > >>>> > team as part of yourself you have already failed as part of the > >>>> > team. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> -- > >>> If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your > >>> team as part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team. > >> > >> > > > > > > > -- > > If you only see yourself as part of the team but you don't see your team as > part of yourself you have already failed as part of the team. > >
