The 2015 Projection:
 |
Absurd 2015 headline from "Scientific American"
|
The Reality:
 |
| Yesterday's headline |
Friday, I wrote about wind energy operating at less than 9% of capacity during a hot day in Texas. Things have gotten worse since. The Scientific American article quotes costs of 2¢/mWh. Of course, those are on windy spring days when it is 65° and the power isn't needed. Today, wholesale costs soared to $750 (increase of 3500%).
 |
| The reality: Yesterday's headline |
At one point yesterday, after the Bloomberg story was posted, wind power dropped to less than 4% of capacity. Put another way, out of 1000 hypothetical wind turbines, 985 were just standing there. More or less, the same was true at times in parts of Oklahoma and Kansas yesterday. Is this was we ratepayers have paid billions for?
So, I started wondering if we are forced to pay for so much expensive and unreliable wind energy, do they use it in NYC and Washington? If it is the great idea they say it is, I'm sure they would be banging down the doors at ConEd and Potomac Energy to install wind turbines. I did some investigating.
Conclusion? As the rest of the nation struggles to produce enough electricity to handle the July heat, one thing that Washington and New York do not have to worry about is wind turbines that do not turn.
Below is a map of wind farms in the central Great Plains. We can hardly turn around without seeing them and -- even if they weren't so prominent visually -- we are reminded of them every time we get our electric bill.
How many expensive, unreliable wind farms are located around Washington? Answer none. You can tell by the lack of colored splotches. That wind energy is not used in DC is confirmed by President Biden’s own Department of Energy (DOE). So, the DOE, White House, Congress, Sierra Club’s Legislative Office and all the rest get almost no energy from wind.
 |
| New York Times' climate porn graphic |
Given the New York Times' over the top coverage of global warming, surely NYC would use wind energy, right? No!!While ConEd owns wind farms in Nebraska and South Dakota, it owns none in its home territory, even though the Department of Energy says there is sufficient wind for that purpose.
In fact, New York has closed its last carbon-free nuclear plant and has increased its use of fossil fuels.
I ask the following question: If wind energy is such a great idea and so ‘cheap,’ wouldn't you think Washingtonians and New Yorkers would want to benefit from it? The fact they have virtually no wind energy in the region speaks volumes.
The Scientific American article completely omitted that wind energy is often not available when needed most: high pressure and light or even calm winds occur in extreme heat and cold.
Thanks to 'green' energy, once advanced nations become more medieval every day. We need to stop this in the United States.
 |
| ThinkMaverick.com |
Buffet admits the only reason to build these monstrosities is for the tax subsidy.
We starting a congressional election campaign. Ask the candidates where they stand on eliminating the tax credit for wind energy!!
Comments
Post a Comment