Little Green Lies

Governments around the world are dropping, useless, expensive, environmentally destructive green energy.

Around the World, Buyers’ Remorse Sets in for Costly Clean Power – Bloomberg

Meanwhile, the press continues to push the same old lies …..

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

11 Responses to Little Green Lies

  1. Norilsk says:

    In Ontario, it is a regular practice to spill water at the hydro dams to make way for wind power.

    • Johansen says:

      Unless they’re spilling it for some other reason, that’s crazy.
      Hydro should/could be used to *balance out* wind power. The two are perfectly matched for each other, and should be co-sited when possible. Wind can be used for pumped storage, actually. That’s what is being proposed at the Hoover Dam site.

  2. DM says:

    I write to reinforce Tony’s point about false claims wind electricity is cheap. Wind, in fact, is costly.

    1) Levelized cost estimates suffer numerous flaws. The net result of flaws underlying the greenfield, onshore wind plantation calculation is a gross underestimate of total production costs (capital related charges + operating costs). The assumed service life (at least 20 yrs) exceeds actual experience (3-20 years for many onshore units). The assumed capacity factor (40+% for onshore U.S. units) exceeds actual N. American experience (about 25% in New England, 30% in Alberta and 35% in TX). The return on investment is too low. The treatment of tax incentives and renewable energy credits low balls costs.

    2) Wind power is low value power, a fact wind advocates never volunteer. Conventional power, in contrast, is high value power. Wind has low value because it is UNreliable, NOT dispatchable and undesirable in other ways. Wind is the equivalent of a car that starts only some of the time and often breaks down between the starting and destination points. Conventional power is a car that starts first time / every time, gets you to your destination every time, and returns you home.

    3) Wind turbines can be the foundation for a reliable electricity system, but that system’s total production costs are at least 1.5x those of a natural gas based system. Two major reasons are: The wind system needs more equipment, and the equipment is utilized less fully.

    4) It is wrong to infer wind must be cheap because it “wins” capacity and energy auctions. Wind “wins” capacity auctions because of renewable energy mandates, tax incentives and renewable energy credits. It does not win on its own merits. It wins energy auctions because of loading instructions issued by regulators.

    5) Real world electricity cost data refute the claim renewable power is cheap power. In Europe, the costliest power tends to be found in the countries most dependent on renewables. They include Denmark and Germany. In Australia, the costliest power in 2017 existed in the state most dependent on wind–South Australia. South Australia’s green policies have also driven up electricity costs in the states to which its electricity system is connected. In the U.S., the consequences are similar.

    • Johansen says:

      DM, you make many good points above.
      1. There’s really only 2 good spots in California for wind, Tehachapi Pass in So. Calif, and Altamont Pass in No. Calif. If you *actually compare* the nameplate capacity with the operating capacity of these plants, IT IS PITIFUL. These installations ‘scar’ tens of thousands of acres of land, and actually produce very modest amounts of energy.
      2. You *need lots of wind*. These big turbines require high wind velocity to reach anywhere near capacity. You can run the numbers yourself on a free simulator known as “RETScreen” – which I assign to students. It’s difficult to reach any sort of realistic ROI or Payoff Period without huge tax credits AND tons of (steady) wind.
      3. Look at a wind map of Denmark. It’s probably the windiest place on Earth. If *their* electrical costs are high, you can forget about it in most other locales.
      4. *Every* turbine in every wind farm generates AC current out of phase with 1) each other, and 2) with the grid. You need a tremendous amount of switchgear to make it happen. This adds a lot of cost and complexity… you don’t just plop down a turbine.
      5. You can’t permit a turbine on your property in urban environment. You’re limited to PV solar, and the payoff isn’t that great, and the local power company doesn’t reimburse very much, so you really need battery storage, which is expensive, and you would need to rewire your house for DC – or install your own AC inverter, and on and on it $$goes.

      • Jason Calley says:

        Hey DM and Johansen! You both make excellent points! I am something of a fan of both solar and wind — but it only makes sense for very specific and limited locations, certainly not for any sort of urban site, or for large scale or industrial usage. In my case, I already have solar and am considering wind power, but it is a very small scale system for a cabin that would otherwise require stringing power lines for several miles. Even in my case, an efficient, well designed diesel generator would probably win out economically speaking — but I do enjoy the peace and absolute quiet of solar. Still, for large scale usage, neither solar nor wind make sense. My favorite choice? If I could choose, how about small, home sized, decentralized, nuclear fusion! Still waiting for that one though… Maybe someday! :)

  3. Pathway says:

    If you like wind energy you have to hate those pesky raptors and bats that get in the way.

    • Jason Calley says:

      During those periods of high wind (they happen!) the excess wind power has to be dumped somewhere. I suggest having huge vats of electrically heated oil at the base of each turbine. That way, when a bird or bat gets chopped it will fall down into the oil, and…. mmmmmmm, tastes like chicken!

      • David of Aussie says:

        When the winds get too high they have to shut the monstrosities down, lest they fall apart.

  4. Walter says:

    If you are a greeney and tell me Nuclear isn’t an option then I know you are a fraud. A more carbonless option there is not.

    • Johansen says:

      …and the fissionable material is spinning off neutrons 24/7 whether we utilize it or not, in the earth’s crust. We just concentrate it to a few % and spin a turbine with it.
      The main problem with Nuclear is the cost, as voters in Georgia are finding out. It’s just too expensive to build the plants in the U.S. anyway

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.