wind

Jon Boone, environmentalist, naturalist, bird and nature artist, wind energy expert: So how to make electricity in the Sierra Club's world of the future? The answer: RENEWABLES! Lots of wind and solar. And a move away from central grid dependency by making wind especially part of a distributed generation micro-grid system located near demand centers. All this would be supported by the so-called smart grid, requiring substantial new transmission lines in an effort to improve efficiency and reliability, thereby saving fossil fuel and avoiding carbon emissions while conserving demand by moving it to off-peak hours. The image, but hardly the reality, is one of downsizing and intimacy, and a transition away from centralized control.

Mark P. Mills, economics21.org: Not satisfied with the mere claim that solar and wind are reaching parity with the costs of conventional energy technologies, green enthusiasts are upping the ante claiming that by “2030, the cost [of solar] could be so near to zero it will effectively be free.” But no amount of research or torturing of reality, however, will lead to that result. Both physics and history offer instructive lessons. That scenario has played out in Germany and Britain, both far further down the green path, leading to radically higher electricity prices there — 200% to 300% higher than in America.

James Conca, scientist in the field of earth and environmental sciences. Contributor to Forbes: Stanford University Professor Mark Jacobson is the prophet of a religion that claims the world can be fueled by 100% renewable energy. But other scientists better not question him or he’ll excommunicate you. And by excommunicate, I mean sue in court. Jacobson filed a $10 million libel suit in Washington, D.C. Superior Court against another scientist, Dr. Christopher Clack, who dared to criticize him.

John Droz is the publisher of "Energy and Environmental Newsletter." Although there has been a lot of press coverage about foreign interference in our political process, they are actually attacking us in a much more effective way, with very little attention being paid to it. An indisputable fact is that our society (our health, our economy, our national security, etc.) is 100% dependent on plentiful, reliable, affordable energy. There is significant evidence that our country’s enemies are purposefully subverting our energy sector in a variety of ways.

John Droz, physicist. Publisher of "Energy and Environmental Newsletter." Editor of http://wiseenergy.org/. The proponents of Climate Change insist that we are facing an imminent threat to our very existence. To prevent this catastrophe they assert that we must make immediate, consequential changes — particularly regarding our energy policies. The primary solution advocated by the major Climate Change advocates is wind energy. The climactic question is: If we accept the Climate Change contention and spend Trillions of dollars to assiduously implement their wind energy solution, will the existential threat be extinguished in the short time-table they say we have? "Greenpeace and others protesting CO2 and global warming, based on a mere BELIEF, like any other religion, is as laughable (if it weren't for their willful and unlawful disruption of honest TAX-PAYING citizens' lives) as demanding the government 'do something' about the length of daylight, or the force of gravity, or the composition of Jupiter.

Paul Driessen, Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow, CFACT: In a world where we are supposed to ban nuclear (and most hydroelectric) power, the very notion of eliminating the 80% of all global energy that comes from oil, natural gas and coal – replacing it with wind, solar and biofuel power – is fundamentally absurd. Now the focus is on climate change. Every EV sale will help prevent assumed and asserted man-made temperature, climate and weather disasters, we’re told – even if their total sales represented less than 1% of all U.S. car and light truck sales in 2016 (Tesla sold 47,184 of the 17,557,955 vehicles sold nationwide last year), and plug-in EVs account for barely 0.15% of 1.4 billion vehicles on the road worldwide.

Paul Driessen, senior policy analyst for the Committee For A Constructive Tomorrow: “Offshore wind currently provides just 0.3% of global power generation,” IEA executive director Fatih Birol noted. But “wind farms” constructed closer than 37 miles from coastlines around the world, where waters are less than 60 meters (197 feet) deep, could generate 36,000 terawatt-hours (36 million gigawatt-hours or 36 billion megawatt-hours) of electricity a year. More turbines will mean countless seagoing birds will get slaughtered and left to sink uncounted and unaccountable beneath the waves. The eventual jungle of fixed and floating turbines will severely interfere with surface and submarine ship traffic."Greenpeace and others protesting CO2 and global warming, based on a mere BELIEF, like any other religion, is as laughable (if it weren't for their wilful and unlawful disruption of honest TAX-PAYING citizens' lives) as demanding the government 'do something' about the length of daylight, or the force of gravity, or the composition of Jupiter.

Michael Shellenberger, Founder - President of Environmental Progress: Rep. Ocasio-Cortez said, "The world is gonna end in 12 years if we don’t address climate change." Then, yesterday, she proposed a “transition from” nuclear power, America’s largest source of emissions-free energy. How does she avoid the cognitive dissonance created by holding two radically opposed views? The Socialist revolutions of the last century all over again.

Anthony Watts provides personal observations and summarizes others regarding operations and maintenance of wind turbines. John Shanahan made similar observations at some of the same locations in the 1980s, 1990s and 2000s. All forms of generating electricity require maintenance. Because wind is one of the most dilute forms of energy, there is a lot more equipment to maintain. Because the maintenance work is at the top of wind turbine towers, in windy areas, it has its own set of risks. One characteristic of maintenance of wind turbines is that many times they go for months or years nonoperational, with uncertainty even to who is responsible for the maintenance.

No other type of industrial power generator has such a low capacity factor because of its inherent technical limitations and the nature of its power source. Nuclear plants, even with outages for maintenance, have capacity factors in excess of 90 percent; their national average approaches that level. (

The low capacity factor for wind energy has enormous implications. Without considering any other variables, simple arithmetic shows that over 2000- 2.0 MW wind turbines, each with a generous capacity factor of 30 percent and spread over hundreds of miles, would be necessary to equal the output of one 1600 MW coal plant situated on a few acres.

Environmentalists who demand dependable power generation at minimum environmental risk should take care about what they wish for, more aware that, with Rube Goldberg machines, the desired outcome is unlikely to 24 be achieved. Subsidies given to industrial wind technology divert resources that could otherwise support effective measures, while uninformed rhetoric on its behalf distracts from the discourseóand political action-- necessary for achieving more enlightened policy.

Jon Boone, environmentalist, naturalist, bird and nature artist, wind energy expert: The electrical grid needs precise, controllable energy input for modern society. Wind energy is unpredictable, highly variable, near useless for regional and national electrical grids. Near double the effort and available power is required to just accommodate the political mandates for wind power.

John Droz is the publisher of "Energy and Environmental Newsletter." A hundred-plus years ago, wind energy was recognized as an antiquated, unreliable and expensive source of energy – and now, after hundreds of billions of wasted tax and consumer dollars, we find that (surprise!) it still is an antiquated, unreliable and expensive source of energy. This is what happens when science is relegated to a back-of-the-bus status. When a major turbine manufacturer calls a catastrophic failure like a blade falling off "component liberation", we know we are in for an adventurous ride in a theme park divorced from reality.

John Droz, physicist. Publisher of "Energy and Environmental Newsletter." Editor of http://wiseenergy.org/:.Wind energy was abandoned for most commercial and industrial applications, well over a hundred years ago. Even in the late 1800s it was totally inconsistent with our burgeoning, more modern needs for power. When we throw the switch, we expect that the lights will go on – 100% of the time. It’s not possible for wind energy, by itself, to EVER do this, which is one of the main reasons it was relegated to the archival collection of antiquated technologies (along with such other inadequate energy sources as horse and oxen power).

John Shanahan, Civil Engineer, Editor of allaboutenergy.net and efn-usa.org: Wind turbines are destroying land- and sea-scapes in the UK and Germany. They are killing seabirds, birds of prey and bats, Citizens are up in arms about loss of wildlife, disturbance of the landscape and higher energy costs. Promises of closing coal and nuclear power plants by fast approaching dates are in sharp contrast with slow addition of wind and solar power to replace them. "Greenpeace and others protesting CO2 and global warming, based on a mere BELIEF, like any other religion, is as laughable (if it weren't for their willful and unlawful disruption of honest TAX-PAYING citizens' lives) as demanding the government 'do something' about the length of daylight, or the force of gravity, or the composition of Jupiter.

Many states and the utilities they regulate are talking about replacing their coal and gas fired generators with solar and wind power.

Given the high intermittency of wind and solar the idea of running on solar and wind turns out to be an extremely costly prospect. It is all about reliability. Electricity must be there when we need it.

The president finally admits we need more oil refineries but lies about supply

Biden killed a major oil refinery expansion on May 14, just five weeks ago, and killed a one million acre oil and gas lease proposed for Alaska on May 12. Some might dismiss Biden’s refusal to open up one million acres in Alaska, but Biden has yet to hold a single onshore lease sale and delayed multiple oil and gas lease sales a second time last week.

Raphael Telis, research physicist at BNL and CERN: One of the most widespread myths is that wind and solar power sources are inexhaustible because the wind will always blow and the sun will always shine. This statement assumes that all that is needed for energy is wind and sunshine, which isn’t the case. Wind and sunshine don't equal wind power and solar power. The transformation into renewable energy requires minerals, metals and fossil fuels, which are non-renewable resources. Thus, wind turbines and solar panels are largely made from non-renewable resources. Take a note: "renewable energy" isn't a technical or scientific term but a marketing term.

Jay Lehr, Ph.D. Science Contributor, CFACT: Why is wind power and solar power, not making significant gains in providing a substantial amount of renewable electricity? The US has utilized, in its energy mix, about eight percent of wind and two percent solar for more than a decade. The reason it is not growing requires an understanding of the fundamental elements, of an electrical grid.

Michael Shellenberger, Founder - President of Environmental Progress: This is an excellent review of wind and solar energy. It doesn't work. Michael and his science advisor, James Hansen are determined to stop use of fossil fuels because of their convictions that they are causing catastrophic anthropogenic global warming. John Shanahan points out that this website has hundreds of articles on wind, solar and man-made global warming. Based on these articles, he concludes that the world needs fossil fuels far more than any possible problems with global warming they cause. The problems with stopping use of fossil fuels are tremendous, existential. Extreme environmental and man-made climate change alarmists are determined to save the world with their solutions. They are not the best persons to help the world. China is doing a far better job of helping millions out of poverty by using fossil fuels than extreme environmentalists like the Sierra Club, the Natural Resources Defense Council or James Hansen are doing by forcing stopping use of fossil fuels.