Wind turbines are a workable alternative. Downside: They require a lot of land, kill a lot of birds, operate only in a wind corridor, and to date do not have a positive return on investment.
Windmills seem to waste energy. Seems they could produce some type of energy out of all the dead birds.
I’m sure this gets lost on her within the first two lines of reading.
Don’t forget land acquisition, and grid infrastructure, you have to wire the turbines to something. Oh yeah, 3% that’s on paper, real world not so much
That dingbat No Cortex thinks NYC IS NY.
Someone should tell her one is a city and one is a state.
NYC does not decide the fate of the entire state.
Hell they can’t even destroy my beloved Staten Island though they have TRIED, MAN have they TRIED.
Projects in good neighborhoods, drug treatment centers in good neighborhoods and a million other attempts to ruin this mostly Italian/Irish enclave have failed.
Their self absorption and superiority complex will doom them in the end.
I also expect the state senate to be taken back by Rs after the HORRIFIC abortion bill.
A cautionary tale on going 100 percent renewable:
The municipal electric utility locked in 20 and 25 year renewable rates with surplus for peak usage and expected growth, and sells unused power back to the Texas grid. Well, the price of natural-gas generated electricity has plummeted, which means the utility loses money every day selling that juice at a loss.
Idiots. The mayor had Al Gore come to town and went on late-night TV talk shows. Now the peasants are revolting.
No, it is not viable.
The wind does not blow all the time or on demand. Wind power does not contribute overall to power production, because it is expensive to build.
You still have to have other capacity to replace it when the wind does not blow.
Under the Green screw you Deal, cannot have backup natural gas turbines for electricity. That would be baaaad. So, good luck NY when the wind is not blowing. I’ll feel really bad for you in the cold or the hot when you are under a high pressure center - not.
And a blight on the land!!! Miles and miles after endless miles across the Midwest of these things! /spit.
Okay, waiting for the flaming wind mill video. :-)
The greenies here in Washington state blocked the efforts to include hydropower as renewable when the state passed the law that 10% of energy be “green”, which forced the utilities to buy power from wind and solar projects.
The national debt is $21,000 billion ($21 trillion) and we paid $370 billion in interest on the debt last year.
The Green New Deal isn’t much different than what DC has been doing for the last 60 years. All the presidents through Clinton maxed out our credit card, Bush Jr. maxed out our kids credit card, Obama maxed out our grandkids credit card, and Trump has opened a credit card in our great grandkids name.
Spit.
Extrapolating from that would be $103Bn and would need 36,000 turbines operating 100% of the time. Given the proclivities of wind and sun not being reliable, the backups would need to be available 100% of the time or following the average amount of sun and wind, we could guestimate roughly 60% solar and 30% wind availability. With an ROI of 21.5 and life span of 20 years, 1.5 years of negative return * $103Bn (current dollars) would cost the N'Yakers $115Bn in estimated actual cost for a span of 20 years. The future cost of money would be more unsustainable than the lack of wind/sun in generating the current need, let alone the future need for energy.
And this chick has a degree in economics?
As marktwain said, “they are not viable”. They are also not workable or an alternative. They are the biggest scam ever for power production and they kill millions and millions of birds and bats. There is nothing that makes me more irritated than seeing hundreds of wind turbines destroying the landscape. They have failed completely everywhere that they are used for large scale power production. Think of the good that could have been done with those billions that have been squandered.
Windmills have the YUGEST environmental footprint of all types of energy.
328 ft tall. OOPS! I just dropped my wrench!
My BiL is a hotshot nuclear and rocket fuels engineer and lecturer. Wind turbines went in near his home and he couldn’t sleep. He investigated and learned that the turbines put out a low-level hum that disturbs sleep patterns. He testified about this before the Idaho state legislature, asking that they increase the distance requirement between turbines and housing.
He also says if people are serious about lowering emissions they should be in favor of nuclear power.
Gov. Cujo is going for it anyway. Wants 100% renewable by 2040.
[[[[Dear Fellow New Yorker,
The fact of climate change is indisputable, and the need to take action now is more urgent than ever.
With the Trump Administration ignoring science and putting the profits of the fossil fuel industry over the future of our planet, it’s up to states like New York to lead.
I’m proud to announce New York’s Green New Deal as part of our 2019 Justice Agenda: a nation-leading clean energy and jobs agenda that will put the state on a path to carbon neutrality.
Add your name as a citizen cosponsor of the Green New Deal!
New York’s Green New Deal includes the following proposals:
• 100% clean power by 2040 — the most aggressive goal of any state in the country
• Quadrupling New York’s offshore wind commitment to 9,000 megawatts by 2035
• Doubling distributed solar deployment to 6,000 megawatts by 2025
• Delivering climate justice to underserved communities
• Expanding the Bottle Bill (5¢ deposit on bottles) to include most nonalcoholic drinks
• Banning plastic bags
Voice your support and become a cosponsor of the Green New Deal.
Climate change is a reality, and the consequences of delay are unacceptable.
We know what we must do. Now we need the vision, the courage, and the competence to get it done.
Ever Upward,
Governor Andrew M. Cuomo(Cujo)]]]]
Ever see the huge concrete and steel thing they anchor wind turbines with ,as big as a house ,well small house
I think there should be a 10 year study to evaluate how putting AOC’s idiotic policies would work out, starting with NYC. Let’s destroy every building, and unfortunately that includes historical buildings and culturally significant structures that are not 100% energy efficient. Tear down every high rise apartment building that Al Gore would not approve of as well as all businesses that weren’t built with saving the planet in mind. Get rid of all cars in the city unless they are totally green. No hybrids that can use gasoline if needed because all temptation should be removed. Shut down the airports. Eliminate all non-green energy sources. Get rid of all heat and air conditioning that is not fueled by wind, solar, or water power. What to do with all the masses of people during the great demolition of the city? That is a good question. But we have history to help us. AOC’s fellow traveler Mao had some experience in this arena as he attempted to completely transform China’s economy and society. Perhaps the brain trust in Congress can consult Mao’s Great Leap Forward strategy for tips. In fact, I think instead of the Green New Deal, the new plan should be named The Green Leap Forward in recognition of one the Left’s most innovative thinkers of the past. (Never mind that Mao’s plan resulted in the deaths of 45 million people. After all, when communists participate in mass murder or man created starvation of the populace, they should get a pass because of their good intentions.) After 10 years of these policies in place, we should have sufficient data to judge how effective these policies are and whether we should implement them throughout the rest of the country. And an added benefit is that since Democrats make up the vast majority of voters in NYC, we should have a willing population for our study. And if they object, Mao has tips for that.
Money is just data. That is made obvious by the fact that most money these days is stored as bits inside computers. What money data reflects is how much energy something uses, and indirectly how much pollution it generates. Spending money emits pollution proportional to the amount of money spent. If product option A has a higher total cost of ownership than B then it is generating more pollution somewhere along its supply chain. To find out where wind turbines pollute more than natural gas turbines just follow the money. Hint: start with that huge concrete base and calculate the amount of CO2 that was emitted to make it.
True green costs less green. If you are being charged more for green energy, you've been had.