Get Adobe Flash player

Wind Power

Wind Farm Follies and Renewable Energy Disasters

From Big Government:

So much for the argument that renewables don’t compromise our national security the way fossil fuels do – but try telling an environmentalist as much. While it was first reported more than a year ago that wind farms were interfering with military radar, making airplanes disappear from sight on screens and cluttering those same screens with the blade-rotation changes of turbine blades, not much was said on the matter until this month, when the Department of Defense and the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) proudly unveiled the Renewable Energy and Defense Database. The REDD is an interactive tool that allows renewable-energy developers to locate military installations with a view toward avoiding them in deciding where to construct future projects.

According to a Nov. 9 DoD press release, the “labor-intensive, very time-consuming project” was primarily an effort of the NRDC and didn’t cost the federal government a dime. Unfortunately, this assessment fails to take into account the hefty national security toll wind farms have already taken – and will likely continue to take unless the current premium placed on “green” energy isn’t removed.

As of 2008, wind turbines had compromised almost 40 percent of U.S. long-range radar systems (h/t masterresource.org). Here’s just one example of how: In 2007, two wind-farm projects slated for the area near Travis Air Force Base in northern California came before the county planning commission. The base and a county airport land-use body sought to have the projects delayed until turbines’ effects on radars could be further studied. But when, the following year, a project supporter donated $1 million to the base, Col. Steven Arquiette, commander of the 60th Air Mobility Wing at Travis Air Force Base, “was told by his superiors to accept the money and withdraw his complaints,”according to Masterresource.org blogger Lisa Linowes, despite the fact that nothing about the plans had changed substantially.

Now pilots coming in to Travis are urged to turn on their aircraft’s transponders as a way of announcing their presence, since they still cannot be seen on radar. This poses a sizeable security threat given that it could easily be emulated by terrorists – and has been. As Linowes notes, among the first actions the Sept. 11 perpetrators did was turn off the transponders of the planes they hijacked.

Wind farms have also dramatically slowed the Federal Aviation Administration’s review time for project proposals. While it once took a month for construction of a project to be approved or be declared hazardous, now similar projects stand to wait up to three times that long.

Read the rest at Big Government.

The Wind-Energy Myth

From National Review:

Hot? Don’t count on wind energy to cool you down. That’s the lesson emerging from the stifling heat wave that’s hammering Texas.

Over the past week or so, Texans have been consuming record-breaking quantities of electricity, and ERCOT, the state’s grid operator, has warned of rolling blackouts if customers don’t reduce their consumption.

Texas has 10,135 megawatts of installed wind-generation capacity. That’s nearly three times as much as any other state. But during three sweltering days last week, when the state set new records for electricity demand, the state’s vast herd of turbines proved incapable of producing any serious amount of power.

Consider the afternoon of August 2, when electricity demand hit 67,929 megawatts. Although electricity demand and prices were peaking, output from the state’s wind turbines was just 1,500 megawatts, or about 15 percent of their total nameplate capacity. Put another way, wind energy was able to provide only about 2.2 percent of the total power demand even though the installed capacity of Texas’s wind turbines theoretically equals nearly 15 percent of peak demand. This was no anomaly. On four days in August 2010, when electricity demand set records, wind energy was able to contribute just 1, 2, 1, and 1 percent, respectively, of total demand.

Over the past few years, about $17 billion has been spent installing wind turbines in Texas. Another $8 billion has been allocated for transmission lines to carry the electricity generated by the turbines to distant cities. And now, Texas ratepayers are on the hook for much of that $25 billion, even though they can’t count on the wind to keep their air conditioners running when temperatures soar.

That $25 billion could have been used to build about 5,000 megawatts of highly reliable nuclear generation capacity, or as much as 25,000 megawatts of natural-gas-fired capacity, all of which could have been reliably put to work during the hottest days of summer.

The wind-energy lobby has been masterly at garnering huge subsidies and mandates by claiming that its product is a “green” alternative to conventional electricity. But the hype has obscured a dirty little secret: When power demand is highest, wind energy’s output is generally low. The reverse is also true: Wind-energy production is usually highest during the middle of the night, when electricity use is lowest.

The incurable intermittency and extreme variability of wind energy requires utilities and grid operators to continue relying on conventional sources of generation like coal, natural gas, and nuclear fuel. Nevertheless, 29 states, plus the District of Columbia, now have renewable-energy mandates. Those expensive mandates cannot be met with solar energy, which, despite enormous growth in recent years, still remains a tiny player in the renewable sector. If policymakers want to meet those mandates, landowners and citizens will have to learn to live with sprawling forests of noisy, 45-story-tall wind turbines.

The main motive for installing all those turbines is that they are supposed to help reduce carbon-dioxide emissions, which, in turn, is supposed to help prevent global temperature increases. But it’s already hot — really hot — in Texas and other parts of the southern United States. And that leads to an obvious question: If the global-warming catastrophists are right, and it’s going to get even hotter, then why the heck are we putting up wind turbines that barely work when it’s hot?

WCCC to join Pat Miller on WOWO July 27 at 4:00 PM

Whitley County Concerned Citizens is joining with Tom Stacy from Save Western Ohio to do a 1/2 hour educational program about wind energy.     Find out why wind energy is not a “good value” for our tax dollar,  and why wind energy is ineffective as an energy source.     Find out why our dependance on fossil fuel actually goes up when we add wind energy to the mix.     

Listen to WOWO at 1190AM  –  or you can listen live online  here   or  here

SET YOUR ALARM ON YOUR WATCH OR YOUR PHONE TO REMIND YOU  – 

WEDNESDAY,    JULY 27TH   @ 4PM

Cost of Going Green? Wind Farm Turbines Slaughter Bats — and That’s Bad for Crop Prices!

From The Blaze:

New green technologies look to be backfiring for Pennsylvania farmers, and the nocturnal creatures who take care of their pest problem. Pittsburgh Post-Gazette:

“The 420 wind turbines now in use across Pennsylvania killed more than 10,000 bats last year — mostly in the late summer months, according to the state Game Commission. That’s an average of 25 bats per turbine per year, and the Nature Conservancy predicts as many as 2,900 turbines will be set up across the state by 2030.

This is a bad time to be a bat.

It may seem like a good thing to those who fear the flying mammals, but the wind farm mortality rate is an acute example of how harnessing natural energy can lead to disruptions in the circle of life — and the cycle of business. This chain of events mixes biology and economics: Bat populations go down, bug populations go up and farmers are left with the bill for more pesticide and crops (which accounts for those pricey tomatoes in Kansas).”

The Post-Gazette goes on to point out a Science Magazine report that calculated that bats saved farmers about $74 per acre, and a total cost across the state estimated to be $277.9 million. Technology producers are looking to develop solutions to deter bats from the turbines like high-pitch sound generators that keep creatures from coming too close.

“All these options cost money,” said Ms. Librandi Mumma, and it can be a tough sell to the private industry handing over the information that helps in the research. “You don‘t want to penalize the hand that’s giving you the data.”

The energy producers could be labeled killing machines, as the state Game Commission report estimates that in addition to bats, 1,680 birds were killed in the turbines last year.

Here’s a report by KCTS-TV from last year:

Windmills Are Chopping Up California’s Golden Eagles

From Moonbattery:

Wind turbines aren’t much use for generating electricity, but they are good at chopping up eagles:

California’s attempts to switch to green energy have inadvertently put the survival of the state’s golden eagles at risk.

Scores of the protected birds have been dying each year after colliding with the blades of about 5,000 wind turbines.

Now the drive for renewable power sources, such as wind and the sun, being promoted by President Obama and state Governor Jerry Brown has raised fears that the number of newborn golden eagles may not be able to keep pace with the number of turbine fatalities.

Any constructive activity would be closed down immediately for threatening the eagle population. But since windmills exist solely to allow liberals to wallow in their sanctimonious idiocy, the blades will keep chopping away.

The death count along the ridgelines of the Bay Area’s Altamount Pass Wind Resource Area has averaged 67 a year for three decades. …

Nationwide, about 440,000 birds are said to be accidentally killed at wind farms each year, as well as thousands more bats. With the government pushing for more wind energy farms, that statistic is likely to rise.

Another recovering species, the California Condor, is also said to be at risk from the giant blades.

Meanwhile, oil drilling in Texas is suppressed lest the sight of derricks somehow affect the lizards that overpopulate the area.

REALITIES & LEGALITIES – Other Perspectives on Industrial Wind Energy

From Whitley County Concerned Citizens:

Mark your calendars for Tuesday, June 21st @ 6pm.

WCCC will be presenting REALITIES & LEGALITIES – Other Perspectives on Industrial Wind Energy, at Indian Springs Middle School, just south of Columbia City on State Road 9.   

“REALITIES” will be addressed by Dave & Stephanie Hulthen from rural Dekalb, IL.   Their dream farmhouse is now surrounded by 146 industrial turbines –  the same size as those proposed for Whitley County.  They have thirteen 40-story turbines within a mile of their home.    Join us and hear firsthand how they cope with the REALITIES of living in an industrial wind installation.

“LEGALITIES”  – economic ramifications, subsidies, taxing issues and landowner agreements will be tackled by Professor Roger McEowen, Director of the Center for Agricultural Law & Taxation, Iowa State University.  Professor McEowen conducts an educational program in Agricultural Law & Policy at Iowa State, and regularly conducts national conferences for accountants, lawyers and agribusiness professionals to update their knowledge of tax, business and legal matters related to agriculture and farm business activities.  One of the current ‘hot topics’ arising at his conferences is ‘wind energy’.   Many attorneys are dealing with client issues arising from wind turbines.

Attached a flyer giving the specifics of the meeting as well as a little about our speakers.

Please help us out with advertising.    Email this message to anyone you know in Whitley County or surrounding counties with the link below the article.  Wind installations are cropping up all around us.

Click here to download the REALITIES & LEGALITIES flyer.

The flyer is perfectly sized for 8 1/2 by 11 paper.     Print out extra copies for your friends and neighbors; share them with co-workers; give to customers if you have your own business.

The flyer prints beautifully on photo paper.  Put it on your bulletin board at work,  and any community bulletin boards you are aware of.

And of course, any amount you could contribute toward speakers honorariums, their travel expenses, facility rental, and advertising would be most greatly appreciated.

Donations can be made by PayPal through our website, or checks can be made out to Whitley County Concerned Citizens and mailed to Post Office Box 235, South Whitley, IN  46787.

Thank you for your help ~~~ now take a good look at the picture above.   The distances marked are from the foundation of Dave & Stephanie Hulthen’s home.   The last draft of the ordinance that nearly came to a vote before the Plan Commission last fall called for a 1500′ setback, but there was a recommendation to reduce it to 1200′.

Wind Turbines May Not Be the Prettiest Structures, But They’re a Real Cash-Cow For Residents

EDITORS NOTE:  I only post this pro-wind fluff piece to illustrate the kind of crap that is being fed to the public.

From Gizmodo:

It’s usually disheartening to wake up and discover the wind is blowing. But if that wind is proving to be quite the money-spinner, you may feel differently about the huge white objects dotted around the horizon. And the wind.

The NY Times has reported on one area by the Columbia River Gorge in Oregon, which has hundreds of 300-foot wind turbines that not only pay out nicely to those who lease their farms, but to each and every resident as compensation for spoiling an otherwise beautiful landscape.

There’s real money to be made by wind farms, with Sherman County’s 1,735 residents earning $3 million altogether in 2010. Most of the money goes to the farmers whose land the wind turbines are erected on, but $590 is awarded to every land-owner as compensation for their “spoilt” views.

There’s no arguing that it’s not good for the area as well, with taxes and other fees bringing in $17.5 million in just nine years. Schools and other public resources are also prospering, with the extra money paying for teachers and school equipment they wouldn’t otherwise have been able to afford. Two city halls, a library, sewers and a bridge have all been built in the county from the money generated (pardon the pun) from the turbines.

 

Shadow Flicker Videos from This Morning

From Our Life with DeKalb Wind Turbines:

Published 5/27/2011:

Perspective

From Our Life With DeKalb Wind Turbines:

Here is a photo from the back of our home taken in March of this year. It gives some perspective on the actual size of these industrial machines. The distances given are approximate from the foundation of our home.

What If Oil Producers Actually Received Subsidies Like Wind Energy Producers?

From The Heritage Foundation:

With the current debate over ending oil producers’ subsidies the question arises as to what subsidies do the producers actually get.  It is a surprisingly complicated question.  Wind producers also get subsidies that take complex forms—investment tax credits, production tax credits, mandates, property tax exemptions, etc.  But the major federal subsidy for wind producers is the option to take a 30 percent investment tax credit or to receive a 2.2 cents per kilowatt-hour production tax credit.

“2.2 cents” doesn’t seem like much, but, depending on the time of year, it falls somewhere between 25 percent and 100 percent of the wholesale price of electricity.  Forty percent if frequently used as the average.

So, what would an oil-production subsidy look like if it were the same magnitude?

Deepwater drilling rigs can cost over $400,000 per day.  With other costs, a rough per-well figure would be $100,000,000 per well.  If an oil company could get the same 30 percent investment tax credit as wind producers, the government would write the company a $30,000,000 check for each well completed.  For the lower cost, shallow-water wells, the government would write a check closer to $3,000,000 for every well drilled.

If on the other hand, the oil company opted for a production tax credit (and it was set at 40 percent of the 2010 average price of about $75 per barrel) then the government would write the oil company a check for $30 for each barrel produced (onshore as well as offshore).

If a subsidy like that was the deal oil companies had, then cut away.  But the $4 billion per year that oil’s detractors keep repeating works out to $0.60 per barrel, and upon closer examination they do not even qualify as oil-industry subsidies.

Heritage’s Nick Loris and Curtis Dubay have sorted it all out. Of course, there are subsidies for the oil and gas industry, but they come from the Department of Energy, not from unfair tax benefits, and they work out to about a nickel per barrel.  So, leave it to Washington to misidentify and exaggerate the problem.  It’s as though they are firing a shotgun at the chandelier when the problem is a gnat in the salad dressing.

God Bless America

Find Us On Facebook!

Hot Topics

Random Quote

I think we have more machinery of government than is necessary, too many parasites living on the labor of the industrious. — Thomas Jefferson, letter to William Ludlow, September 6, 1824

Today’s Events

None

Upcoming Elections

  • No dates present