The Necropolitan Sentinel

chi per lungo silenzio parea fioco

Home » Posts tagged "wind power"

The Wind-Powered Mail Man


A perfect storm of waste, corruption, and inefficiency.

Senator Tom Carper (D-DE) looks to harvest the electricity that windmill farms produce in order to power a new fleet of battery-operated postal delivery vehicles, replacing the previous ’25 to 30 years old’ ‘dilapidated’ vehicles.

There are some very good, practical reasons– involving science, technology and other things which happen in the real world–why this is an incredibly stupid idea.

If you are a constituent you need to sound off. The stupidity of this idea is not only robust, it is unprecedented. Electric vehicles do better on long hauls and commutes, stop/start a thousand times a day at each mailbox, not so much.

What’s next? Solar-powered DMV? Uh…Oh, yeah…

Hurricanes And Windfarms Don’t Mix

Of course you’d think the bright set would know that:

Gone with the wind? Hurricanes could destroy the offshore wind farms the US is planning to build in the Atlantic and the Gulf of Mexico.

The US Department of Energy set a goal for the country to generate 20 per cent of its electricity from wind by 2030. One-sixth is to come from shallow offshore turbines that sit in the path of hurricanes.

Talk about a “d’oh” moment.

Stephen Rose and colleagues from Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, modelled the risk hurricanes might pose to turbines at four proposed wind farm sites. They found that nearly half of the planned turbines are likely to be destroyed over the 20-year life of the farms. Turbines shut down in high winds, but hurricane-force winds can topple them.

You don’t say. Each wind farm costs about $175 million.

Safe, reliable and eco-friendly – well except for the birds they regularly grind up. But hey, in the ocean those birds drop into the sea and no one ever sees them. They provide chum for the fish (if a bird gets chopped up in the ocean and no one sees it does it make a sound?).

That’s good … right? No? I’m confused. PETA, where are you?

Reading the obvious and understanding that they’re going to do this anyway (somewhere in this you, Mr and Mrs. Taxpayer, are paying a hefty chunk of the bill and taking most of the risk) makes you realize how, well, “not so bright” many of those who “lead” us are or how much they really don’t care about the outcome of what they do if it satisfies some voting constituency. As long as they have access to your tax dollars or borrowed dollars with little or no accountability, this sort of nonsense will continue unabated.

~McQ

Twitter: @McQandO

 

Obama Can’t Summon the Energy


It’s odd how the same people who self-righteously drag our children’s future into every argument want to burden same whippersnappers with unimaginable debt. Regardless, it’s of utmost importance to leave our nation’s brats an environment that hasn’t been disturbed by a single drill. We owe them an Earth where no dwelling is heated by burning or vehicle is mobile without pedaling.

Our head of state has taken issue with both jobs and energy. Barack Obama’s valiant efforts to not let TransCanada build a pipeline that would direct what he’s concluded is noxiously useless oil into our nation will help us fight the scourge of people being able to affordably drive to jobs they actually have.

Take that, hosers! By slapping the toques off the heads of our Canadian friends, Obama is again really sticking it to an enemy.

Cutting off the pipe at Saskatchewan is reminiscent of how he’s screwed other countries he’s deemed foes like Britain, Australia, Israel, India, Colombia, Honduras, South Korea, Panama, Poland, the Czech Republic, and nearly everywhere else in Eastern Europe. But Venezuela will be in luck if they ever wish to build a pipe directed into our nation, as we’re looking to make new pals with fellas who may be a little rough around the edges.

A president whose nomination was supposed to save the Earth has has come up small on an XL pipeline. He’s unaware that XL may as well be short for how it would excel our comatose economy. Rejecting the permit for the route brings us closer to the dream of an America that’s too unproductive to generate greenhouse gases.

Or maybe, as with ignoring debt’s horrifying consequences, the president assumes gas stations will never go dry. As with borrowing money, it will be there automatically, so quit bumming us out with your non-dreamer ways.

Still, realists have concluded that we need oil and not hippie power. Aside from what the producers of Jersey Shore would tell you, there’s no money in worthless junk.

Mean energy corporate juggernauts would invest in sunbeams or the breeze if they thought there was any potential in using weather conditions to make America go. Looking for petroleum substitutes is useless if said substitutes run as well as the economy under the incumbent.

But the failure to recognize that alternate energies are alternates for a reason won’t stop the same liberals who think that the government can manufacture demand. How much harder can it be to build functional sun panels than it is to spur a recovery? In practice, governmental influence in the oddball fuels realm is the equivalent spending a trillion bucks to increase unemployment.

Instead, shrewd conglomerates pursue fuels that work, largely through the stimulating and reliable process of combustion. Take shale gas, which we’re finding all over the place; you may even want to dig up your lawn to see if there’s any there, although I will not re-sod your lawn if there’s none. You don’t need to know anything about how to find energy in shale, other than that we need to burn stuff if we like a standard of living that doesn’t involve wallowing in mud.

The most remarkable fuel-finding technique should be admired for the woeful quality of its opponents’ case. Fracking’s opponents curiously never seem to turn off their power. They’re too busy bitching about an utterly amazing technique for retrieving energy from this otherwise useless lump of a planet.

Enemies of natural gas naturally indulge in hysterical fear about a relatively clean-burning fuel that they should adore if they really hate emissions. Instead, they prefer pretending that the chemicals used to score a huge supply of a most useful gaseous tinder are unhealthier than intermittent power. Envious greens disregard that the fluid used the most to frack is that most toxic of substances, namely water.

And bless their smug hearts if they really hold that retrieving natural gas caused the ground to rumble. They probably still risibly think that the process makes your tap water ignite when they’re not claiming that conservatives hate science.

The foes of functional light switches have a totally dispassionate and never incompetently biased federal agency on their side. Citing an EPA-released study that wasn’t peer reviewed is to be expected from those who ardently hold that there’s no way the government could make a mistake or have an agenda under this administration.

Yet they are unable to disprove that energy production creates work for those who make society work. North Dakota defies Obamanomics, and it’s heartwarming to realize that the president’s corrosive financial influence can’t stop every attempt to profit by producing something useful.

The higher Dakota is teeming with useful jobs that literally fuel our lives, and he blessedly hasn’t figured out how to muck it up yet. For now, the good and noble state is seemingly hidden from Obama’s view like a haven in some Objectivist novel.

As always, the energy utopians keep mindlessly striving for a life without tradeoffs, although they could come up with some better direful consequences than imaginary earthquakes and phantom toxic chemicals. As always, this is a good time for the insufferably green to shriek and panic, all while enjoying civilization’s innumerable comforts.

Other people will do the dirty work, and they’ll plug in their iDevices to complain about oil spills that haven’t happened once they’ve set the thermostat so it’s a little more comfy. The Earth can apparently take a little abuse from the people who truly care about it.

Anthony Bialy is a writer and “Red Eye” conservative in New York City. He tweets at http://twitter.com/AnthonyBialy.

The Truth About Government Energy Subsidies

The truth, unlike the common wisdom or at least the Democrat narrative, is that far and away the bulk of the $37 billion in government energy subsidies goes to “renewable” energy sources, not evil oil and gas corporations. The $37 billion is $19 billion more than was spent in 2007 in government subsidies, a 50% increase in spending.

It was a feature of the Obama administration’s recent narrative that government was subsidizing rich oil and gas companies, and that should stop. Never mentioned, of course, were where other subsidies were going. For example:

Of that $19 billion increase, additional subsidies for renewables amounted to more than $9 billion, a 186 percent increase. Subsidies for renewables now total $14.7 billion.

Wind power was the biggest recipient of federal energy dollars. Last year, this sector took in almost $5 billion in subsidies – a more-than-tenfold increase from 2007. Meanwhile, solar energy subsidies increased six times over the same period, from $179 million to $1.13 billion. And biofuels (think ethanol) saw a jump from $4 billion to $6.6 billion.

Any idea what we’ve bought for that money?

Take wind power. Today, it represents a paltry 1.2 percent of total domestic energy production. Yes, that’s up from 0.5 percent in 2007, but only after spending billions in taxpayer resources.

What’s more, wind power is expected to fall well short of some key growth goals set by the Obama Administration. The Department of Energy has officially declared it wants 20 percent of the energy market comprised of wind by 2030.

Currently, there are about 40,000 wind megawatts online in America. Meeting the Department’s target on time would require creating 13,000 new megawatts of wind energy every year — twice the growth notched by the industry last year, which was an all-time high. And warnings of a major contraction ahead have already been sounded by the American Wind Energy Association.

A classic example of government trying to pick winners and losers, or—in more succinct terms—distorting the market. Instead of letting the market decide what is viable, government hopes to force it. And, predictably, the results are not good.

As for the evil oil and gas companies. Well, the Democrats try to sell them as the ones sucking down all the subsidy dollars, and not paying their “fair share”. The truth, of course, is almost the opposite: Plenty of politicians, mostly Democrats, have advertised the notion of eradicating Federal dollars for oil and natural gas as a budget panacea.

The EIA [Energy Information Administration - part of DOE] study shows that these critics have fingered the wrong energies. Researchers report that last year, oil, natural gas, and coal received a total of 11 percent of all federal energy subsidies. And most of those oil and natural gas “subsidies” are typical deductions, deferrals, and credits that all businesses take.

In fact, as a share of net income, the oil and gas industry paid 41.1 percent in federal income taxes last year, compared to 26.5 percent for all non-oil and gas S&P 500 manufacturing companies. Meanwhile, oil and gas account for 78 percent of domestic energy production, and are responsible for more than 9.2 million American jobs.

The myths, however, continue to persist.

One sector promises jobs and a new source of energy, yet is essentially a subsidy sinkhole. The other accounts for over nine million jobs, and actually provides the vast bulk of energy the country uses. Guess which one is constantly under fire from the left?