This appeared here and I wish to thank Alan for allowing me to publish his work. RK
In July the Fairhaven, Massachusetts Board of Health
voted to shut down the town’s two wind turbines at night between 7 p.m. and 7
a.m. after dozens of residents had filed more than 400 complaints. Testing had
demonstrated that the turbines exceeded state noise regulations and those
specified in their operating permits.
In July the Heartland Institute’s Environmental
& Climate News reported on the announcement by Nordex USA, a
manufacturer of wind turbines that had accepted millions of dollars in
subsidies while promising to create 750 jobs that it had shut down its
Jonesboro facility. In 2008, Gov. Mike Beebe (D) had given Nordex $8 million
from the Governor’s Quick-Action Closing Fund and the Arkansas Development
Finance Authority had given Nordex another $11 million. The decision, said the
company, was its uncertainty about receiving federal subsidies. At the time,
only fifty people were employed there.
In early October, the House Oversight and Government
Reform Subcommittee on Energy Policy, Healthcare, and Entitlements held a
hearing on the Wind Production Tax Credit (PTC). The American Wind Energy
Association (AWEA) was there to argue for an extension of the subsidy.
According to lobbying disclosures, in 2012 the AWEA had spent more than $2.4
million to protect the subsidy which was set to expire, but which received a
one-year extension as part of the deal struck to avoid the “fiscal cliff.”
Arguing that wind energy is an important element of the
mix of energy provided by coal, natural gas, nuclear and hydroelectric
facilities, the facts are that in 2012 coal accounted for 37 percent of total
generation, natural gas represented 30 percent, and nuclear contributed 19
percent. Wind power accounted for just 1.4 percent of U.S. energy consumption
in 2012 and only 3.5 percent of the nation’s electricity generation.
Since the PTC was first enacted two decades ago, it has
cost taxpayers $20 billion dollars.
One of the primary arguments for wind energy is that it
is “renewable” and does not contribute to the so-called "greenhouse gas
emissions" that are the cause of a “global warming.” However, the latest
warming cycle ended some fifteen years ago. Not one student in our
nation’s schools has ever experienced “global warming.”
Wind energy is “green” say its supporters, but it is
hardly “green” to kill
an estimated 573,000 birds every year, including 83,000 birds of prey
according to a study published in the March edition of the Wildlife Society
Bulletin. It also kills countless bats, a species that reduces the vast number
of insect pests that prey on crops and transmit diseases.
A permit is being sought by the Shiloh IV Wind Project in
Solano County, California, that would grant it the right to kill up to five
golden eagles over a five-year period despite their protected status under the
Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act.
So wind energy is justified as reducing greenhouse gases
that are not causing global warming which does not exist, is
receiving millions in subsidies, and wants to kill protected species, an
environmental objective. This is hypocrisy on a galactic scale.
Testifying before the congressional committee, Dr. Robert
Michaels, a senior fellow of the Institute for Energy Research,
noted that the subsidy which was supposed to end by now has been renewed
five times. The wind industry is essentially non-competitive when it comes to
energy generation from traditional sources and has also been around long enough
to amply demonstrate that. In a market economy, such industries are allowed to
fail.
The wind industry, however, doesn’t even need to be competitive
because utilities in some thirty states are required by law to include it in
their “renewable portfolio standards” that set quotes for its use. This mandate
is expected to see the installation of more than 100,000 renewable megawatts
over the next twenty years and wind, said Dr. Michaels, and “seems certain to
get the lion’s share.”
Adding to the idiocy of wind energy is the need for such
production facilities to have a back-up from traditional coal, natural gas, and
nuclear facilities because wind is not available with any predictability. The
consumer not only pays for the electricity these facilities provide to ensure
that they will always have electricity, but pays in the form of the subsidies
the wind industry continues to receive.
There is no need for renewable energy mandates. Both wind
and solar are unreliable sources of energy and produce so little as to lack any
justification for their existence.
The wind industry exists because it spends millions
annually to convince legislators that it should not only be subsidized and
because many states require its use. Take away the interference of government
entities and the industry would have no real basis to exist. It is a fraud.
© Alan Caruba, 2013
No comments:
Post a Comment