JAN 27

I think wind is an important part of any alternative energy supplies. We can never expect alternative energy to ever replace fossil fuels, but if we live more simply and reduce our consumption and energy use, it should be able to provide enough to meet our needs.

http://www.selfdestructivebast...nergy.html

The forced gifting of $80 billion American dollars to support so-called "clean energy" is neither cause for celebration, nor a good investment.

On the AWEA's lobbying efforts, and on foreign countries that benefit by them...

"The American Wind Energy Association , whose membership includes most of the dominant foreign-owned companies, spent $728,883 in the first half of 2008. In the first half of 2009, it spent $3 million. Its second-quarter 2009 total of $1.83 million was just a few thousand dollars short of energy lobbying king, the American Petroleum Institute ($1.86 million)."
http://investigativereportingw...ng-frenzy/

"But of the $1.05 billion in clean-energy grants handed out by the government since Sept. 1, 84 percent – a total of $849 million – has gone to foreign wind companies."
http://investigativereportingw...-overseas/

Michael Combs:

"Putting resources into wind (and solar) makes them unavailable for investment in alternatives, and creates a self-fulfilling prophecy – 1000 MW of installed wind turbine capacity won’t deliver peak power when needed, and installing another 1000 MW of wind won’t either – you just end up with double the capacity not doing the work. Meanwhile, the resources used for wind negate investment in reliable current technologies – nuclear – or in technological advances in power production – the next generation of nuclear. Amazingly, nuclear solves all the shortfalls of current power production – it is scalable, reliable, no CO2 “pollution”, can be located near where needed, and for all practical purposes, is renewable. It doesn’t mess up rivers, pristine landscapes, or scenic vistas like hydro, wind, and solar. It is abundant, inexhaustible, and relatively inexpensive – with the advances in technology that can be expected for this young industry, we can expect dramatic increases in power production and waste and cost reduction."

http://www.masterresource.org/2010/01/how-many-households-can-a-large-wind-project-serve-lessons-from-texas-and-the-uk-part-1-of-2/#comments

Robert Bryce Managing Editor of Energy Tribune debated wind energy with Boone Pickens on the John Stossel show. A must view video approximately 9 minutes long:

http://video.foxbusiness.com/v/3981431/is-energy-independence-a-hoax/?
playlist_id=87185

The 10GW added last year is equivalent in GW to 10 nuclear plants or over 3 in kWh/year generated, and the rate wind energy is being added is accelerating. By the time the dust settles on the nuclear power issue, it appears like wind power will have installed more capacity than planned nuclear. The 35GW of wind (running 30% average) now installed is more than 10 nuclear plants running constantly. Soon we will double this.

Note the wind turbines are installed with private investment. While the banking crisis slowed down loans for renewable energy, the government ARIA program mentioned allowed a partial tax credit (with accelerated depreciation). Many people claim nuclear plants haven't been added because investors haven't been interested, even with large public subsidies.

The more wind power added, the cheaper it will be. Expect prices to go down as quantity scales up. Not mentioned above, but in the report, are 38 new manufacturing facilities added in 2009.

This sounds promising. Any increase in using sustainable sources of energy is great! Hopefully we can all do something to help.

Elodie
Slim Girl Diary

Is ARIA part of the government or funded by the government? Although the use of government money to fund any industry is dubious, better to send money to sustainable power than banks. The issue raised by the anonymous poster about where the turbines are manufactured seems like a separate problem, even though it's a good point.

Wind energy has it's own side effects. Taking 50GW of energy out of the wind means the wake behind it will create climate change, especially over water where slack water lets sunlight penetrate deeper. The result could be good or bad ( different dew points, etc ) depending on the region behind it, but it needs to be considered.

While they installed 50GW of capacity and got the federal tax credits ( and worse, right of ways )for it, no one is discussing actual yields.

It's a nice idea, but consumption is still the real issue.

re nukes- just claiming that they are cheaper does not make it so. the industry has stalled in the past few years because investors do not see a return on their investment. Plants cost billions and are prone to cost overruns (that usually have nothing to do with eco laws). The nuke industry is asking for another 100 billion dollars in loans from taxpayers. That's money that may not even be paid back, as they have a high default rate. They want the taxpayers to bear the burden of insurance and disposal and storage costs.

To claim nukes have no impact on the environment is also bogus, as the lifecycle includes mining, transport of fuel, processing (energy intensive),disposal of processing waste, using billions of gallons of water for cooling and dumping that water back into the environment through direct effluent or evaporation in ponds. That water is not exactly pure either, and in some cases can add to killing fish or wildlife through thermal pollution. Anti wind groups keep whining about decommissioning wind farms. That's another dumb argument since you don't have to entomb or guard wind farms for decades as you do with nukes. I have yet to see anyone analyse what effect the '100 new nukes' plan of some politicos will have on thermal pollution. Some use France as an example of high nuke use, saying they recycle. That's not totally true, they are storing their waste so that eventually they can find a solution.
Nimby groups pick apart every aspect of wind power, but blithely accept 'nuclear power is clean' or 'we have clean coal now.' Every power source needs to have a more complete analysis of costs, benefits and liabilities- cradle to grave. When this is done, wind comes out looking pretty good as an integral part of a healthy energy system.