Posted on 07/17/2009 4:58:23 PM PDT by Graybeard58
For 30 years, government has helped fuel wind-power research, development and deployment. The industry would not exist today without the continued generous support from (coerced) taxpayers and ratepayers because 30 years out, wind technology still isn't close to overcoming its main obstacles: it's intermittent and therefore unreliable; it's economically uncompetitive even with the largess; no sensible person wants it in his backyard.
A year ago, with oil supposedly headed beyond $200 a barrel, it appeared wind power's time was at hand. And everywhere, oilman and former free-marketer T. Boone Pickens was promising energy independence through spinning turbine blades under the "Pickens Plan."
So far, it's turned out to be so much windbaggery, so much so that he has scrapped his nearly $12 billion plan for the world's largest wind farm in the Texas Panhandle. One of the many problems he didn't anticipate was the constraints of transmission lines he'd have to build to get his 1 GW of electricity to the power grid. Ultimately, he planned to put up more than 3,000 windmills and generate 4 GWs, but that's not going to happen, either.
Still, in early 2011, he will take delivery on $2 billion worth of 30-story-plus turbines, 687 in all, but he currently has no place to put them. Rep. Christopher Murphy, D-5th District, says he wouldn't mind having a turbine in his backyard — "Come on, they aren't that noisy" — but luckily for Rep. Murphy's neighbors in Cheshire, Mr. Pickens is looking at non-NIMBY-infested Midwest sites, if they exist.
This is only the most recent instance in which a wind-power investor has fallen significantly short of his boasts and goals, but Mr. Pickens assures it "doesn't mean that wind is dead. It just means we got a little bit too quick off the blocks."
The same can be said for the cap-and-trade global-warming bill, another Pickens-Murphy nexus, working its way through Congress. Cap-and-trade would make wind, solar and other alternatives economically viable by making fossil fuel prohibitively expensive. In the process, it would kill two jobs for every one it creates and allow the government to further dictate Americans' lifestyle choices. Oh, yes. And it would provide gigantic subsidies for the Pickens Plan when further domestic energy exploration and development and the deployment of more nuclear power plants would achieve energy independence quicker, more economically and more reliably.
It must be obvious by now that only three groups are behind wind power: greens whose religion requires it, though some heretics oppose it because it threatens wildlife and scenic vistas; wind-power companies and the likes of Mr. Pickens and Al Gore, who are looking to get rich off their taxpayer-subsidized investments; and legislators and members of Congress who are unafraid to "invest" your money mindlessly and unwisely in the hopes of increasing their power and influence they peddle at re-election time.
jakes0361 wrote on Jul 17, 2009 8:19 AM:
" To be fair, government has certainly helped the fossil fuel industry along over the last 5 decades so the wind subsidies are not out of line, just leveling the field somewhat.
"wind technology still isn't close to overcoming its main obstacles: it's intermittent and therefore unreliable;" This statement may have been true 8-10 years ago however the finest companies around the globe have invested billions of dollars into product developments that have mitigated those considerations.
Just look at the applications across Europe. A quick visit to Windpower2009 in Chicago and Intersolar Munich the last three months showed me just how many huge international vendors are investing in even further research and development making grid scale renewable/sustainable energy production a reality.
The Pickens plan may have to wait for the North American transmission and distribution to grid to catch up, and T Boone may have to table his wind farm for some time. Don't count him out yet though. His vision of a country significantly less dependent on foreign oil through better use of renewables is not that far off. "
Ping to a Republican-American Editorial.
If you want on or off this list, let me know.
has helped the fossil fuel industry ?
what by- functionally banning fossil fuel extraction and burning of fossil fuels?
Someday, in the far distant future, the Obamaloon administration will ask those of use with an actual REAL education (e.g., in some sort of real SCIENCE... about these things.
In about one picosecond, any of us will reply something to the general idea of, “what sort of alternate universe did you buy your toy education in?”/
Won’t work. EVER.
But they won’t ask us. Why? Because - even if dead - we have far greater IQs than the Head Loon... or his minions... or the sum of the above.
I’ll bet my life on it.
...sensitivities from Connecticut. Then they move west and push more regulations into western states and counties against their western neighbors’ private backup wind generators (not to mention complaining about snow removal and demanding more property taxes, impact fees, HOA dues, etc).
We need to have a contest to come up with suggestions on how that useful idiot Pickens can use his windmills now.
Texas PUC awarded the contracts last April. There will be two transmission lines, one to San Antonio and one to DFW. Completion is 2013.
I think a good place for windmills would be at airports, because they can keep those birds chopped up that would normally get sucked into jet engines.
Princess Nanny?
Just for the hell of it, T-Bone should take him up on that offer. Murphy sounds like a real buffoon.
Thanks for the ping Graybeard. I’ve read considerably about investment by major corporations National and International in Wind Generated Power, but I can’t get too excited about investments I don’t read favorable results.
Seems to me those corporations are mainly appeasing the Leftist Political Power Mongers with their investments in Wind folly.
So blind to the fact that nobody wants those damned windmills in their sight, nobody wants to hear those damned windmills, and nobody wants to pay for their damned upkeep.
In short, you got to put those damned windmills out in no man's land. And there is one more damned detail: you got to build that damned transmission line back into the cities.
No one wants to see those damned ugly transmission lines. No one wants those damned transmission going underground because it will tear up the damned environment. And no one wants to pay someone to watch those damned transmission lines to keep them from being blown up by some damned terrorist.
In short, there is no fricken way anybody is going to build those damned transmission lines across my view scenery.
For all that damned trouble, you only get electricity when the wind is blowing.
Hey, Pee Pickens, did I speak your language?
Now go back to getting some oil out of the ground, fool!
Oh .....of course....ha.
Large turbine wind farms may be a thing of the past.
There is a small turbine wind mill that is about 6 ft wide and can run on winds as low as 3 mph.
The trick was that they magnitized the blades and put coils in a housing like a house fan has a blade shield.
This elimniates most of the transmission gears.
It costs about 4k and is coming to a hardware store this fall.
Good suggestion.
please read post 17
No it's not. Airplane wings depend on "laminar air flow" not "turbulant airflow". The windmills would create turbulent flow at an airplane's most vulnerable time and that is slow airspeed over the wings.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.