What companies think climate change will have a material impact on their business?

Or Hitchens Razer - Assertions without evidence may be dismissed without evidence. From the great "There is a tiny teapot orbiting between Earth and Mars" argument.

Hitchens's razor - Wikipedia

What is Russell’s teapot? | GotQuestions.org

Fair enough all around...this started with me asking if anyone else had data easily at hand one way or the other. It seems not, so I'll go find it myself.

Food for thought:
A refutation of an assertion without data is, in itself, its own assertion without data.
A dismissal of an assertion without data (re Hitchens's Razor) is different than a refutation.

"Where's the data to support that?" is a dismissal...a bit different than "asinine", "nonsensical" or mocking which are in themselves counter-assertions without data.

But we're way off track of climate change now, so I'll go look for data on my own.

US researchers have carried out an environmental lifecycle assessment of 2-megawatt wind turbines mooted for a large wind farm in the US Pacific Northwest. Writing in the International Journal of Sustainable Manufacturing, they conclude that in terms of cumulative energy payback, or the time to produce the amount of energy required of production and installation, a wind turbine with a working life of 20 years will offer a net benefit within five to eight months of being brought online.

Interesting numbers here... which disagree with what Sidney posts above...looks more like 15-20 year payback...but that's in dollars, not energy so it's not directly pertinent.

Still plenty of digging to do...

Wind Turbine Cost: Worth The Million-Dollar Price In 2020?

FWIW: this link was provided by the original claimant...and it proves him wrong on the dollar front at least. Nice when the data provided to support an assertion contradicts the assertion...makes life easier.

Ninja said:

looks more like 15-20 year payback...but that's in dollars,

Click to expand...

Where does it say that? I could not find it in the link you provided. I have seen that claim elsewhere, but, once again, I seriously doubt it, as most investors would not put their money in a project that has a life cycle of 20-25 years and only see a break even point in the 15th year, ESPECIALLY considering the fact that the price of energy fluctuates and long term pricing is hugely uncertain.

Yes, I am aware of subsidies playing a part in the equation, but the largest (by far) producer of wind energy in the World is China and I seriously doubt the CCP would be providing subsidies to wind farmers over there.

Sidney Vianna said:

Where does it say that?

Click to expand...

I did the math ....
$1.3MM per MW x 2.5 MW = $ 3.25MM (first sub-bullet in bold)
Yearly revenue at 50% capacity ($219000 from table) less yearly maintenance cost ($42000 from text above table) = $ 177000

3.25MM / 177,000 = ~18.4 years

But again...I'm keyed on Energy in vs. energy out...far too easy to play games with dollars...and it seems like current turbines are net energy gain over lifetime, now it's just figuring out how far net positive...and I doubt we'll get concrete numbers there.

...and I read your comment on CCP to assume private wind farmers (ie. subsidies), I wouldn't assume privatization there...

Ninja said:

3.25MM / 177,000 = ~18.4 years

Click to expand...

Thanks. But, there are so many variables (capacity factor, wind speed, size of installation, pricing of kwh, location, etc...)involved with ROI of a wind turbine and a wind farm that such simplistic quantification does not seem appropriate. As wind power grows, CAPEX investments also should come down and, as the decarbonization push of the energy matrix trend grows, pricing of renewables-sourced electricity is likely to rise significantly.

There are many articles out there that make the return on the investment of wind energy much more attractive than a 18-year return break even point.

Return on investment from wind turbines - Renewables First

Ninja said:

.I'm keyed on Energy in vs. energy out.

Click to expand...

Carbon and Energy payback of a wind turbine — SaskWind

"Food for thought:
A refutation of an assertion without data is, in itself, its own assertion without data. "

You mean an opposite claim. Not being persuaded by evidence for a claim is not a claim.

There is the positive claim and the negative claim but there is also the agnostic default position of being "without knowledge"

For example, if I state you have Covid-19 as I saw you cough. That's a claim with weak evidence. To State "No, I Do not have Covid" is also a claim. But to reject the assertion you have Covid as 'I don't see evidence I have covid" is not a claim. You are not rejecting the possibility the claim is true but you are acting as if you don't until you are convinced. If you did not act in this manner we would go insane; you would be testing yourself daily for covid and running to the ER for any sneezes or coughs.

By the way, the original asinine claim apparently was made in that sewer pipe called FB.

Overblown: Wind turbines don’t take more energy to build than they will ever produce - Full Fact