Are Wind Energy Advocates Terrorists?

Wind Farms Don’t Make Economic Sense

the observation of serial wind energy “investor” Warren Buffett: “We get a tax credit if we build a lot of wind farms. That’s the only reason to build them. They don’t make sense without the tax credit.” ___ http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/07/07/study-wind-farms-even-more-expensive-and-pointless-than-you-thought/

Wind and solar produce only about 5% of electric power in the US, but receive almost 70% of federal subsidies.

Quality and reliability of power is a life or death issue for modern societies. And yet Obama and his cronies are treating crucial power grids as playthings in a game of political . . . corruption.

Rich and politically connected investors in wind farms receive very generous government subsidies. Not for producing power, but just for building the monstrous wastes of space and resources. But what are the taxpayers getting for their money? Worse than nothing!

Here are a few of the reasons why the true costs of wind farms are underestimated by academics, government agencies, and wind energy advocates:

The peer-reviewed report accounted for the following factors:

  • The federal Production Tax Credit (PTC), a crucial subsidy for wind producers, has distorted the energy market by artificially lowering the cost of expensive technologies and directing taxpayer money to the wind industry.
  • States have enacted Renewable Portfolio Standards (RPS) that require utilities to purchase electricity produced from renewable sources, which drives up the cost of electricity for consumers.
  • Because wind resources are often located far from existing transmission lines, expanding the grid is expensive, and the costs are passed on to taxpayers and consumers.
  • Conventional generators must be kept on call as backup to meet demand when wind is unable to do so, driving up the cost of electricity for consumers.

“Innovation is a wonderful thing and renewable energy is no exception. Wind power has experienced tremendous growth since the 1990’s, but it has largely been a response to generous federal subsidies,” Yonk stated.

Full Report PDF The full report provides clear reasons for why wind farms will never be acceptable alternatives to nuclear or hydrocarbon power plants.

As shown in the figure below, without the federal subsidies, wind investment drops close to zero — and for good reason. If wind energy investors cannot bleed the taxpayers, it is just another stupid idea for losing money.


The July 2015 report linked above is just the latest study to show what wiser people have known for decades: intermittent energy sources such as big wind and big solar, simply are not compatible with a delicately balanced power grid.

Four years ago, MIT held a symposium on the challenges of integrating intermittent energy sources into a delicate power grid scheme. A link to the 240 pp PDF document which resulted from that symposium is provided below:

http://mitei.mit.edu/system/files/intermittent-renewables-full.pdf (240 pp PDF)

The above-linked MIT study focused on problems related to intermittency, rather than costs. But the scale of the problems revealed by that report are large enough to cause prudent people to re-think the mindless rush into “renewable energy.”

96 pp PDF report from the Centre for Policy Studies on the disastrous UK renewables policy

Renewable Energy is Destroying the UK, comments on the CPS study above.

Europe’s Renewables Disaster A very careful analysis which should have most Europeans very worried

True Costs of Wind Energy A thoughtful yet damning indictment of a costly and destructive form of energy.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/07/07/study-wind-farms-even-more-expensive-and-pointless-than-you-thought/

Government programs that promote “renewable energy” are wasteful, corrupt, and destructive. Rent-seeking cronies of Obama are milking $billions from taxpayers, and providing negative value in return.

Reliable, affordable, high quality power is a life or death issue for individuals, communities, and entire societies. Anyone who threatens a nation’s energy supply should be considered a terrorist and an enemy of the people.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Energy, Government, Green Quagmire and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to Are Wind Energy Advocates Terrorists?

  1. AbelardLindsey says:

    I would not go so far to say that the greenie luddite parasites are terrorists. They are just deluded parasites, plain and simple. The designation of “terrorist” should be reserved for the people who do things like chopping people’s heads off in the name of their religion (I despise organized religion as much as I despise the liberal left fucks – I despise anyone who is not a hard core “Ayn Rand” libertarian such as myself). It is necessary to maintain a sense of balance on this stuff.

    • alfin2101 says:

      In the abundant and expansive human future, a thriving terrestrial biosphere could support a hundred billion responsible humans using clean, efficient, advanced technologies. Most of the Earth would be pristine wildlife refuge. Humans living in space and in all niches of the biosphere would discover ways to protect the Earth and its lifeforms from the infinite hazards that exist — of both a terrestrial and extraterrestrial nature.

      In the future which the greens envision, no more than a hundred million humans would barely eke out a brutish subsistence living, leaving the Earth to its own inevitable destruction — with the ultimate loss of the only life and intelligence that we know of in the universe.

      Who is the terrorist? The fool who chops the heads of a few random infidels, or the organised lefty-Luddite religionists who doom the entire planet with its rare life and intelligence?

  2. jccarlton says:

    Reblogged this on The Arts Mechanical and commented:
    No wind energy advocates are not terrorists. In my long experience with MANY long electronic discussions with them, they tend to be unrealistic romantics. The problem is that romanticism and energy policy do not mix.

    • alfin2101 says:

      Yes, and I was once one of them. But the “accidental terrorist” with a good heart is still a terrorist, in his impact on the real world. The categories of “unrealistic romantic” and “accidental terrorist” are not mutually exclusive.

      It is the end result that defines the action and the actor.

Comments are closed.