_________________________________________
_________________________________________
Jay Lehr, PhD: “After two decades of huge subsidies for wind energy, nowhere in the world has an array of wind turbines replaced a single conventional power plant.”
Two scorching days here along the Allegheny Front and the turbine blades are barely spinning. Ugly sculpture garden indeed!
Well, talk about coincidence! In a post a couple of days ago I mentioned Thorium reactors as a possible nuclear energy alternative.
I linked a video, embedded below for your convenience, which discusses the potential for Thorium Molten-Salt Reactors as well as the political discussion which discarded it some 40 years ago:
_______________________________________
As luck would have it, in today’s online Grand Rapids Herald-Review, Terry Mejdrich has a very interesting article titled Thorium Revisited. In his column, Mr. Mejdrich makes a serious case for considering Thorium as a replacement for Uranium.
Mr. Mejdrich seems to suggest however, that even with the many positives of Thorium v Uranium, “a serious effort to replace or even supplement existing energy sources with Thorium would cut into the profits of the fossil fuel and Uranium-based energy industry. No elected official is anxious to take on that powerful lobby. The fossil fuel and nuclear industry has grown into an institution which provides millions of jobs and wields tremendous political power.” Ahhhhh – Politics!
Mr. Mejdrich notes that Thorium technology research will likely require the efforts of “a forward thinking private individual or company with lots of investment capitol” or, perhaps, “development will have to come from another country, like China, that is currently studying the original U.S. Thorium research with the goal of developing it into a new cheap energy source.”
(I really like the thought of fueling up the car once every ten years or so but, to achieve that, I hope I don’t have to by my car from China!)
Please be sure to read Mr. Mejdrich’s full commentary here – Thorium Revisited
Kansas Watchdog’s Travis Perry opens his commentary, Not so fast: Siemens still wants wind subsidies, with this gem: “Siemens Wind Power looks forward to a future where wind can compete without subsidies from the federal government … But not just yet.”
Good stuff … and it got me thinking.
Click the link to take a look at the Siemens US Energy web page. Impressive, huh? Is there anything they can’t do? Siemens, a German based multi-billion dollar company actually describes itself as a “global powerhouse in electrical engineering and electronics” with some 370,000 employees (as of September 30, 2012). And yet, they need a bit of financial help from little old me.
Here’s what if find amusing about these companies … they portray themselves to investors and their clients as financially strong and yet, would have us – consumers and taxpayers – believe they’re working out of a garage on a shoe string budget. Borrowing a line from John Fogerty’s classic – Fortunate Son
“Some folks are born silver spoon in hand,
Lord, don’t they help themselves, oh.
But when the taxman comes to the door,
Lord, the house looks like a rummage sale, yes”
I find it stunning that, while holding out its tin cup for renewable subsidies, “Mother” Siemens also touts an offspring to cover all your fossil fuel needs. In fact, Siemens wants to be “your partner in fossil power generation,” and believes that “fossil power plants will continue to contribute significantly to a needs-oriented power supply” and that fossil plants actually “form the basis of a working energy mix, which is indispensable for meeting the major challenges of today and tomorrow.”
Curiously, Siemens states on their Renewable Energy page that “ever since the beginning of time, the wind, the sun and water have provided infinite potential for sustainable energy. Why wait before we put them to good use?”
Why wait, indeed! A lot of folks who believe fossil fuel usage must be severely reduced might think that a darn good question! Why would Siemens continue to promote the future of fossil fuel buy naming it “the basis of a working energy mix, which is indispensable for meeting the major challenges of today and tomorrow,” yet ask, regarding the move to a sustainable energy future, “why wait?” It certainly couldn’t have anything to do with the ability to double dip into taxpayer and consumer bank accounts, could it?
Folks on the other side of the debate think maybe industrial wind is simply not all it’s cracked up to be. They fear industrial wind simply cannot replace fossil fueled plants to any large extent and ultimately, is simply another layer of activities these large companies can utilize to bilk customers and taxpayers of their hard earned cash. This possibly seems confirmed by the demand that energy producers be paid even if the electricity they generate is not used by the consumers and taxpayers who foot the bill.
Bottom line is that, as far as I know and apparently not disputed by the industry – except in a lot of woulda, shoulda and coulda commentary – there is no evidence that a single fossil fueled power plant has been dismantled due to the thousands of wind turbines installed over the past decades. Natural gas, another fossil fueled on-demand generator, is kicking coal fired generators rear ends for sure, but the unreliable wind cannot and, some speculate, actually increases the demand for fossil fuel usage due to ramping issues. Again, I’m happy to be proven wrong.
Not to single out Siemens … oil giants BP and Shell and many fossil fuel invested companies are happy to promote their “green” credentials. And heck, with all that cash rolling around out there, what’s the incentive for these profit based companies to close down one market when they can take financial advantage of all product lines, aka the ever popular – “all of the above approach to energy.”
My frustration stems from the marketing gimmickry employed by corporations and politicians who, on the one hand, express deep concern for our environment while the other hand is in our pockets.
In my humble opinion, there is no serious push to the “energy of the future” because there is too much money to be made hawking the energy of today, and the money is directed at the whim of politicians all too willing to pay back supporters.
Industrial wind, as an energy producing concept, is as ancient as burning coal – except you have to wait for the wind and, while you’re waiting for the wind to show up, you burn coal or natural gas to keep the lights on.
Nuclear energy, as we currently know it, has it’s drawbacks, but the resource should not be forever dismissed, as some would suggest. Again, was it the desire to secure votes that prompted on of our political elders to push the “wrong” method?
I believe there are answers lurking in the halls of research. But, it seems to me, as long as we continue to use our ever-scarcer dollars to subsidize what we know at the expense of what could be, we will continue to fumble along in the hope of making what we know doesn’t work – work. As long as we taxpayers and consumers are willing to pay companies such as Siemens, BP, Shell and my personal favorite – Edison Mission Energy directly or through their LLC stepchildren for pretending to replace fossil fuels with renewables, we will never see progress.
As far as subsidies, I find it hard to justify permitting politicians to fund any profit-based businesses with our tax dollars. The whole political/industrial circular cash flow scenario is just too tempting. Of course, the politicians who represent me are stellar individuals, it’s all the other politicians I worry about.
Oh, and by the way … check out opposing views on wind subsidies at the Post Crescent:
End subsidies for wind power? No
End subsidies for wind power? Yes
As always, your comments and criticisms are welcomed.
We would like to thank Ms. Karen Bessey Pease for granting permission to post the following letter, which as been submitted to the Editors of several Ontario newspapers.
Letter begins:
Esther Wrightman of Ontario, an unassuming young wife and mother, is being sued by one of the biggest industrial wind development companies in the world. NextEra is a multi-billion dollar corporation. Esther Wrightman owns an aging car and little else. So why on earth would this Goliath bother to bring litigation against her?
In my opinion, the answer is simple. NextEra wants to intimidate Esther and – by example – to silence many other individuals. See, Esther dares stand up to this company and call it like she sees it. She has the audacity to publicly refer to this conglomerate as ‘NexTerror’ and ‘NextError’. (Here in the States, we call such audacity ‘Freedom of Speech’ and ‘Freedom of Expression’. I believe Canadians respect those same principles.)
Esther and others have witnessed NextEra’s heavy-handed intimidation tactics in surrounding communities, spurring their claims of ‘terror’. The people of rural Ontario have been subjected to threats of legal action on numerous, well-documented occasions by this company when its development plans have been challenged.
“Some landowners are refusing NextEra an easement for transmission lines and may ultimately be forced to co-operate through provincial orders. ‘We take legal action if we have to,’ [NextEra] said.”
http://ontario-wind-resistance.org/2012/03/19/summerhaven-wind-projectapproved-by-province/
Not only has NextEra threatened to bring ‘legal action’ against individual landowners, they’ve used similar tactics to pressure communities and town officials not to create zoning ordinances which would disallow their turbine projects.
“You may also know that under Ontario law there is potential liability, not only for
municipalities, but also for individual municipal officials…where there are actions taken that result in damages based on unlawful legal actions, such as the passage of a bylaw.” Tyson Dyck, legal counsel for NextEra.
The wildlife of rural Ontario has also suffered at the hands of NextEra when it has stood in the way of a wind project. One example? Early one morning in January 2013, eighteen men armed with chainsaws and bulldozers descended on an active Bald Eagle’s nest and cut it down. Esther videoed the wanton act of destruction. In her video, NextEra’s Tom Bird is recorded as saying “The authorization we got from the Ministry of Natural Resources was to destroy this nest.”
These are just a few instances in which this powerful and wealthy corporation has used ‘terror’, intimidation and brute force to get its way. Those tactics may have been successful in the past…but they haven’t worked on the courageous people of rural Ontario. Most likely NextEra was taken aback to find quiet and unassuming folks such as Esther standing up to oppose its wind turbine projects. Perhaps it was surprised at the backlash of negative publicity it received when its attempts to ‘control the scene’ were unsuccessful. Maybe the company was downright scared that a humble but brave woman might effectively educate her neighbors – not only with facts about NextEra – but about the known negative impacts of grid-scale wind energy facilities, as a whole.
When backed into a corner by facts and ethics, NextEra did what any good bully would do. It SLAPPed Esther Wrightman. In a move sure to gain the admiration of the most proficient playground tyrant, NextEra filed a ‘Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation’ (SLAPP) suit against her. They know Esther is a woman of modest means. They know that even if they win their lawsuit there will be no ‘windfall’ to line their gilded coffers. So what do they hope to gain?
They say they have a case of ‘libel’ because Esther has referred to them as ‘NextError’ and ‘NexTerror’. But Esther claims that is ‘fair comment’ based on documentation of ‘errors’ the corporation has made and the ‘terror’ it has created in Ontario. (For multiple examples and links to articles, visit the Ontario Wind Resistance website.) She also believes individuals have the right to use satire and parody as a means of making a point – of speaking and expressing themselves freely.
Esther is effective in publishing facts about this company. She’s relentless in her efforts to educate the public. And she doesn’t kowtow to bullies. This is evidenced by the fact that – back in March – NextEra gave her ample warning. It threatened her with a lawsuit if she didn’t cease and desist in altering its logo and name in her personal writings. She answered their threat with stoic resoluteness and with polite thanks for the letter the company messenger – unobserved – dropped between her doors.
No, Esther didn’t cave. She didn’t fold. She didn’t tuck tail and run. Esther has facts, integrity and thousands of citizen-supporters on her side.
NextEra has size, might and money.
NextEra also has a Public Relations nightmare.
If this conglomerate is truly interested in protecting its ‘brand’, it will focus on honest and respectful dealings with the public and better stewardship of the land, wildlife and people its projects will impact. But if its aim is to intimidate citizens by threat of legal action and financial ruin, SLAPP suits such as this are certainly one avenue this Goliath can take.
With defendants such as Esther Wrightman, however, that avenue may very well prove to be a dead end.
Letter ends!
AT Note: Ms. Pease is a rural Maine native, newspaper columnist, and author. Ms. Pease is active in her community and has worked to bring common sense and integrity back into the picture as it pertains to Maine’s (and America’s) energy plan for the future.
Please be sure to visit Lexington & Concord Townships-Help Protect Rural Maine
We thank Mr. John Terry for allowing us to post his most recent video. When asked to introduce “A Cluttered Sky,” Mr. Terry provided the following comments:
“There are a lot of assumptions regarding wind energy. Some of these are based on the public relations efforts of wind developers and other parties with a financial stake in the in the success of this industry.”
“As with most things in life, there are benefits and risks. We need the Sun to make vitamin D yet too much sun can give us cancer. So is the Sun good for us or bad?”
“Wind energy in the form of utility scale wind farms might be a good answer for places with dependable winds, no human or wildlife population and no better or more efficient way to generate electricity. But that place is most certainly not the Allegheny Highlands of the Eastern United States.”
“As the film says, ‘If all you know about wind energy is what you’ve seen on TV…’ you might want to see what we have to say.”
NOTES: All the footage (after the intro) was filmed from the air and we hope makes three points.
First is that the construction of turbines in this region requires the destruction of the state’s highest ridges.
Second, the onshore wind resources in Pennsylvania, Maryland, West Virginia and Virginia are poor with the best locations barely reaching a level that could be called mediocre.
Third, there is little rational justification for building expensive wind energy facilities in places where turbines will turn slowly (if at all) the majority of the time as documented in this film.
October 17, 2012: Mercury News – “Central Nebraska wind farm to fire up soon“
October 25, 2012: Yankton Press and Dakotan – “Wind Tower Fire Reported Near Crofton”
And why does this matter to the folks on the Allegheny Front? – “The fire was located at the top of the wind tower, which is part of the newer section of towers in the area. High winds at the time sent some sparks flying, which briefly ignited some small grass fires.”
Unlike Nebraska, we don’t typically have “grass fires” in the mountain forests.
We thank Mr. John Terry for permission to post his October 5, 2012 letter to the Editor of The Inter-Mountain (Elkins, WV).
Ironically, and you’ll see why when you read the letter, the Editor has not yet published Mr. Terry’s important commentary, which we are pleased to post for your review and comment.
Mr. Terry’s letter begins:
Editor
The Inter-Mountain
Elkins, WV
Editor: In this age of tweets, texting and email, I believe the best way to communicate an idea is a good old fashioned letter. I also believe that, capable as they might be, Senators Manchin and Rockefeller and Congresswoman Capito won’t know what we expect them to do if they don’t hear our wishes. I rarely use email to contact politicians because the on-line forms they use require me to characterize my message by assigning it to one of the categories they’ve chosen, like defense or health care. I’ve always had the feeling that picking a category encourages the staff member going through the week’s emails to look only at your category and add you as a check mark on a “pro or con” list with no consideration of the fine points or justification of your concern.
I don’t write to the President because I doubt that my message would ever get through, but as a homeowner in Randolph County, I contact our West Virginia Senators and Representative several times a year with the expectation that my suggestions and observations will be heard. I know that those representing us at the federal level can’t possibly be aware of everything that’s going on at home so I tell them what I think they ought to hear.
I’ve received my share of responses from Manchin, Rockefeller and Capito that were off topic or where they thanked me for whatever and told me that they were glad I wrote. All this tells me is that they got my letter, but not that they read it. This week I received a response with Senator Manchin’s facsimile signature that angers me and brings up a serious question. My letter, which included data, studies and pictures, told Senator Manchin that I opposed the wind production tax credit, a government subsidy that has been on and off for the past twenty years and is set to expire on December 31st of this year. My letter was clear that this is a poor use of the Country’s limited tax resources and that I was firmly against the Wind PTC renewal. Senator Manchin’s reply was, “Thank you for contacting me to share your support for the Renewable Energy Tax Production Credit.” He then went on to detail his support for subsidies for every form of energy and the various bills he’s supported or cosponsored. How could he get this so wrong?
Every politician on the national scene has to maintain several offices in their state as well as one in Washington. Each of these offices has to have staff members to answer the phones, return messages, schedule meetings and advise the Senators and Representatives on what’s going on. I believe that this support staff is not without social, environmental and political bias. It makes me question who is in charge and who the information gatekeepers are.
My experience is not unique. It should make us aware that a vote for a certain politician is not a vote for that man or woman, but a vote for the honesty and integrity of the staff and advisers he or she surrounds themselves with and how willing they are to consider the wishes of their constituents.
John Terry
Montrose, WV
Mr. Terry’s letter ends.
AT note: Mr. Terry is a retired educator, creator of Windtoons.com, and a member of the Allegheny Highlands Alliance and the Laurel Mountain Preservation Association.
The Polish government also appears to be waking up. Will we?
Will the members of the US Congress who wish to continue handing your hard earned money to huge profit-based corporations finally wake up and allow the Production Tax Credit to expire at the end of the year, as planned? Contact your representative and tell them to end the Production Tax Credit.
Allegheny Treasures 