Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

DRIESSEN: Hot Air About Wind Power
The Washington Times ^ | August 4, 2008 | Paul Driessen

Posted on 08/04/2008 9:35:53 AM PDT by kellynla

COMMENTARY:

T. Boone Pickens is being lionized for his efforts to legislate a transformation to "eco-friendly" wind energy.

We need to "overcome our addiction to foreign oil," he insists, by harnessing wind to replace natural gas in electricity generation, and using that gas to power more cars and buses.

If Congress would simply "mandate the formation of wind and solar corridors," provide eminent domain authority for transmission lines, and renew the subsidies for this energy, America can make the switch in a decade.

Mr. Pickens' $58-million media pitch makes good ad copy, but his policy prescriptions would bring new energy, economic, legal and environmental problems - and a price tag of more than $1.2 trillion.

Wind contributes more every year to our energy mix, but still provides only 1 percent of our electricity - compared to 49 percent for coal, 22 percent for natural gas, 19 percent for nuclear and 7 percent for hydroelectric.

We can and should harness the wind, but 22 percent of our electricity by 2020 is far-fetched. Wind power is intermittent, unreliable and expensive (even with subsidies). Many modern turbines are 400 feet tall and carry 130-foot, 7-ton, bird-slicing blades. They operate at only 20 percent 30 percent of rated efficiency - compared to 85 percent for coal, gas and nuclear plants - and provide little power during summer daytime hours, when air-conditioning demand is highest, but winds are at low ebb.

(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Culture/Society; Editorial; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: 2008; boonepickens; coal; drillheredrillnow; energy; energyfacts; environment; enviroprofiteering; naturalgas; nuclear; oil; tboonepickens; windenergy; windfarms; windpower
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-37 next last
"We have enough oil, natural gas, oil shale, coal and uranium to provide power for centuries...A single 1,000-megawatt nuclear power plant would reliably generate more electricity than 2,800 1.5-megawatt intermittent wind turbines on 175,000 acres."
1 posted on 08/04/2008 9:35:53 AM PDT by kellynla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: kellynla

Department of Energy report on subsidies for oil, wind, solar, etc.

Coal: $0.44. Nuclear: $1.59. Big Oil: $0.25. Hydroelectric: $0.67. Wind: $23.37. Solar: $24.34.

T.Boone is picking tax payers` pockets, he ain`t stupid,it`s a can`t lose proposition.


2 posted on 08/04/2008 9:41:42 AM PDT by Para-Ord.45
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RedRover

Speaking of wind......


3 posted on 08/04/2008 9:44:37 AM PDT by lilycicero (www.gi-bracelet.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kellynla

Pickens is a con man.

Wind and solar plants take up an enormous amount of real estate for pitifully small amounts of electricity.

France generates 80% of her electrical needs by nuclear means. A country the size of Texas, they have fifty-some nuclear plants. There is no reason at all we shouldn’t have at least fifty of them operating ourselves, and we could do it over the next ten years if we made up our minds to do it.

And coal, we have coal to last us for generations to come. We just have to stop letting the know-nothings get in the way of everything we try to do.

Our biggest problem is the fact that we import so much energy for our transportation system, and wind energy isn’t going to help with that at all. Its a waste of time even to think about it. If you want to build a wind-farm, fine, be my guest, but you’ll only make money thanks to tax-payer subsidies so try not to brag too loudly on your way to the bank.

Our energy deficit is in transportation fuels. To solve that we should be drilling, we should be going after our oil shale deposits. And if we are going to transition to electric cars, we should be building about fifty nukes right now.

We send about 2/3 of a trillion dollars out of the country every year buying oil. Even if we didn’t lower the cost of oil one dime, it would turn our economy around just keeping and spending that money here, pouring it into American pockets, spending it in American tax districts, paying it out to American contractors and American workers.


4 posted on 08/04/2008 9:49:18 AM PDT by marron
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kellynla

The problem with wind power energy generation is that an enviro-weenie is going to come along and decry the ability of the wind to “blow free, without interuption, just as mother nature intended.”


5 posted on 08/04/2008 9:49:43 AM PDT by subterfuge (BUILD MORE NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS NOW!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Para-Ord.45
Exactly. Pickens has a business in wind power and is paying for a nation ad campaign which he says, "we can't drill our way out of this crisis".

Wind power is only capable of 17% of its capacity, yet people will still buy into this crap only to enrich T. Boone further.

6 posted on 08/04/2008 9:52:11 AM PDT by lormand
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: marron

Too bad we don’t have more people in Congress who are as smart as you.


7 posted on 08/04/2008 9:53:10 AM PDT by kellynla (Freedom of speech makes it easier to spot the idiots! Semper Fi!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: kellynla

Great........ruin our whole country side with those windmills for 2% of the power we need. Picture driving across the country and only seeing windmills. I don’t think so.


8 posted on 08/04/2008 9:54:04 AM PDT by RC2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

bookmarked --gotta spread the news on this one.

Wind power is vastly overrated and expensive. Why do you supppose we went to steam, then diesel and nuclear for ships?

9 posted on 08/04/2008 9:58:17 AM PDT by Max in Utah (A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Para-Ord.45

Sounds like a report I should read, where is it? Got a link?


10 posted on 08/04/2008 10:01:37 AM PDT by DBrow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Max in Utah

T. boone is looking for a lot more than subsudies for the fraud wind farms....he is looking to get control of the right of way, the water and mineral rights therein...the guy is looking to become a true neo-robber baron and he needs the Left + the Supreme Court to get his little scam put together. Just say FU T Boone!


11 posted on 08/04/2008 10:03:35 AM PDT by iopscusa (El Vaquero. (SC Lowcountry Cowboy))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: RC2
Picture driving across the country and only seeing windmills.
I don’t think so.


Just my silly opinion, but...
I do know at least one view that would be improved with windmills...
the flattest, most featurless parts of the panhandle of Oklahoma.

Having some "mobile sculptures" there would relieve the monotony of
the endless flat browness!
12 posted on 08/04/2008 10:04:08 AM PDT by VOA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: kellynla
That leaves Climate Armageddon as the primary rationale for wind power.

Even if the worst global-warming claims are accurate, it's all the more reason to build nuclear plants, which emit no greenhouse gases and disrupt no prevailing wind patterns.

13 posted on 08/04/2008 10:07:14 AM PDT by steve-b (Intelligent design is to evolutionary biology what socialism is to free-market economics.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: marron
Dear marron,

“France generates 80% of her electrical needs by nuclear means. A country the size of Texas, they have fifty-some nuclear plants. There is no reason at all we shouldn’t have at least fifty of them operating ourselves,...”

Actually, we have over 100 nuclear power plants generating approximately 20% of our electricity right now. It's disappointing that no new plants have been built in roughly 30 years, but we already have a significant nuclear power industry.

“...and we could do it over the next ten years if we made up our minds to do it.”

The good news is that over 30 new nuclear plants are currently in the works. One is planned for my state of Maryland, for commissioning by 2015. These new plants will increase the electricity generated in the United States by nuclear power by over 50%.

I hope that it's the start of a trend.


sitetest

14 posted on 08/04/2008 10:09:25 AM PDT by sitetest (If Roe is not overturned, no unborn child will ever be protected in law.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: marron

good post

especially on the importance of coal

...and oil shale


15 posted on 08/04/2008 10:10:34 AM PDT by ConservativeDude
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: sitetest
The good news is that over 30 new nuclear plants are currently in the works.

Thats good news.

16 posted on 08/04/2008 10:11:28 AM PDT by marron
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Para-Ord.45

Yep, the Democrats are firmly hitched up to the global warming hysteria. It allows them to keep their “environmental” friends happy, while passing out large amounts of taxpayer dollars towards “alternative energy”. Everybody gets rich and prosperous except the taxpayer - not an atypical Washington solution.


17 posted on 08/04/2008 10:27:50 AM PDT by popdonnelly (Boycott Washington D.C. until they allow gun ownership)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: DBrow

Copied from a previous post from a fellow Freeper:

http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/servicerpt/subsidy2/index.html

http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/servicerpt/subsidy2/pdf/chap5.pdf

Page 16, table 35 .

Per Megawatt hour of power generation.
Coal: $0.44. Nuclear: $1.59. Big Oil: $0.25. Hydroelectric: $0.67. Wind: $23.37. Solar: $24.34.


18 posted on 08/04/2008 10:28:59 AM PDT by Para-Ord.45
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: kellynla

When you think about it, we’ve always had more efficient sources of energy than wind. We started off with water power, because it was abundant and practically free. We replaced that with steam, when it became obvious that steam was more efficient.

Every town and village in America would need a huge wind farm to provide its energy needs. This alternative energy stuff is hoakum.


19 posted on 08/04/2008 10:30:37 AM PDT by popdonnelly (Boycott Washington D.C. until they allow gun ownership)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sitetest

“Actually, we have over 100 nuclear power plants generating approximately 20% of our electricity right now”

http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/epa/epat2p2.html

I honestly didn’t realize how many we had on line. You’re right, over a hundred. It looks like the total capacity is about 10% of total, though.

I’d love to see those 30 new ones on line and then another 30 more after that. I hope it happens. I think its going to take a push from us to make it politically palatable. Its tough even getting permits for any kind of power plant these days, let alone a nuke. The Gores of the world are doing whatever they can to demonize energy projects of every kind, including renewables.


20 posted on 08/04/2008 10:31:44 AM PDT by marron
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-37 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson