Will Ohio legislators guzzle BigWind koolaid?

The Ohio Senate and House have currently removed the option for local landowners to vote a BigWind project up or down. We are afraid their butts are in the air, and their heads are guzzling the BigWind koolaid. What will it take to get their attention? Phone calls and votes, period. Have you done your part, yet???

Ohio’s best wind resources are Iowa’s worst. So why build thousands of massive 600- to 650-foot wind turbines in northwest Ohio? It’s all about the subsidies.

Wind turbines aren’t green by any stretch of the imagination, although corporations have spent millions in Ohio to convince the public otherwise. Wind turbines produce energy that is intermittent and unpredictable. They must be backed up by fossil fuels in new “peaker plants” which produce at least 25 percent more pollutants than the baseload facilities and cost at least 25 percent more to operate than baseload plants.

Why would Ohio build inefficiency and extra air pollution into our grid? Follow the money in renewable energy subsidies. Turbines require hundreds of gallons of oil laden with PCB’s. Do these turbines leak oil or crash to the ground? Absolutely! Do these turbines ever catch on fire? Yes, and the PCB laden oil burns with the neodymium magnets to release a highly cancerous toxic cloud.

Estimates put the tear-down cost of a single modern wind turbine at over $200,000. The blades are a fiberglass composite, those are not recyclable and they can’t be sold. Consequently, 47 million tons of unsustainable blade waste could be added to the world’s landfills within the next few decades. Some landfills refuse to take the biohazardous components of wind turbines….

The turbines proposed for the Firelands region of Ohio have blade tip speeds of 180 mph and a blade span which would can engulf a Boeing 747. There are a total of 8 known wind projects in various planning stages in the four-county area of the Firelands. An area known to be riddled with sinkholes, caves and Karst formations with a water table that is very close to the surface at times throughout the year. This water in northern Ohio flows through underground rivers to feed the cold trout streams in Erie County and eventually to the lake. Just one oil spill into these precious aquifers could have devastating environmental impacts.

Ohio’s two nuclear facilities provide 90 percent of the emission free energy in that state. Even if we buried an area of Ohio about the size of Rhode Island in industrial wind generators, they still would not produce the consistent, robust energy that our two nuclear facilities provide. In 2013, Ohio had an extended polar vortex in which natural gas pipelines could not keep up. What saved the day in 2013 and kept us all from freezing in northern Ohio? It was our two nuclear plants.

Call Senators Burke 614-466-8049 and Gavarone 614-466-8060. Tell them to do the right thing for Northern Ohio and pass HB 6…

http://www.norwalkreflector.com/Letter-to-the-Editor/2019/06/27/Not-so-clean-wind-energy-and-House-Bill-6

Advertisements

BigWind attacks Newsweek. Did they divert attention FROM the facts

Newsweek created quite a stir this week when AWEA ‘called them out’ for not vetting a college prof who wrote an op-ed piece about problems with wind energy. The attacks thrown at them, along with the defensive position that Newsweek has, subsequently , taken the story away from the facts. But isn’t this what BigWind is all about? Diverting you AWAY from the facts? The comments below this article are enlightening and chock full of facts. We have share some with you…

Texas prides itself on being a national leader, whether it be in barbecue, football or wind energy. That’s why when someone misguidedly attacks one of our strengths—as Randy Simmons did in an opinion article republished by Newsweek last week—as a Texan, I can’t remain silent.

Simmons’ op-ed on the “true cost of wind power” is the same tired slant we have heard from fossil fuel interests time and time again, which should come as no surprise when you learn who’s really behind the piece. Simmons lists his title as professor of political economy at Utah State University, but he doesn’t mention he is the Charles G. Koch professor of political economy. He’s also a senior fellow at the Koch– and ExxonMobil-funded Property and Environment Research Center. In other words, he works for oil companies.

So let’s expose this op-ed for what it really is: a fraudulent attempt to discredit clean, affordable wind energy and protect polluting coal plants….

Comment thread:

Kevon Martis: The author also disingenuously paints a false either/or scenario with respect to wind and fossil fuels. The truth is far different: wind energy binds ratepayers to fossil fuel generation in perpetuity, particularly gas-fired generation like that the produces more than 50% of Texas’ electricity. AWEA board member GE made that clear in testimony to the Obama White House: 

“Energy generation from renewable sources like wind and solar have zero
emissions and very low variable cost of generation. However, if flexible
generation assets, such as gas turbines, are not available, these renewable
technologies will not be deployed. In other words, gas turbines are an essential
component of renewable energy sources’ ability to penetrate the market.”

https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/assets/oira_2060/2060_07232013-1.pdf

And no one knows this better than the “fossil fuel front men” that inhabit the board of the American Wind Energy Association: http://www.awea.org/About/content.aspx?ItemNumber=779

Duke, E.On, AEP, Invenergy, FPL/NextEra: wall to wall fossil fuel.

That’s at least 3 strikes against this totally deceptive author….

Bruce Morgan Williams: FALSE. Recent studies by NREL, LBL, PJM, GE, and several universities have proven that we can integrate large amount of renewables and reduce fuel consumption significantly. It’s already happening. You post some political editorial BS that ignores real world data, and I post links to in-depth industry studies by grid operators.
You are either a Rube of a Shill (If you’re not sure, you’re a Rube)

http://www.pjm.com/committees-and-groups/subcommittees/irs/pris.aspx

Kevon Martis: Bruce Morgan Williams Actually the quote is from GE. You do know they are the biggest US wind turbine manufacturer and an AWEA board member? And the PJM study stipulates billions of dollars of new gas-fired generation right up front.


And it was done by GE as well.

The NEWIS study for ISO-NE (also by GE) says the same thing: gas is needed to integrate wind.

And NERC is saying the same thing about CAISO: nerc.com/pa/RAPA/ra/Reliability Assessments DL/NERC-CAISO_VG_Assessment_Final.pdf

Now show me where I posted editorial BS Bruce.

“Generating electricity from renewable energy rather than fossil fuels offers significant public health benefits. The air and water pollution emitted by coal plants is linked to breathing problems, neurological damage, heart attacks, and cancer. Replacing fossil fuels with renewable energy has been found to reduce premature mortality and lost workdays, and it reduces overall healthcare costs.”

Here is another whopper.

Notice how this quote conflates “coal” with “fossil fuels” and health impacts?

Here is the deceptive part: the alleged health impacts from coal emissions are derived from PM2.5 and/or Hg emissions. But natural gas-a fossil fuel- emits essentially none of those.

This author appears to be determined to deceive his audience at every turn….

Interesting that the wind promoters have decided to talk about water use in the generation sector as if reducing that use would end droughts.

Consider:

“When talking about water for power generation, two important terms must be explained and understood: water use and water consumption, said Dr. Susan Stuver, research scientist with the Texas A&M Institute of Renewable Natural Resources (IRNR) and Texas Water Resources Institute (TWRI).

“If you’re using water and putting it back where it came from, it’s water use,” Stuver said. “A power plant is not consuming millions of gallons; it just needs (the water) once and then puts it back, and keeps using the same water over and over again.

“Water is drawn from the reservoir, used to cool the power plant and is then returned to the reservoir where it can therefore be used for other activities such as habitat for wildlife or recreation.”...

The problem is that wind energy costs at least $80/MWh to produce and often much more in many markets yet can only save $25-35/MWh of coal or gas fuel costs. In the meantime it is reducing the profitability of existing dispatchable power plants which normally would be fine if wind were a replacement technology for coal or gas generators. But it is not. Wind energy has a parasite/host relationship with primarily gas fired generators and when the parasite siphons off enough of the revenue stream of it’s requisite host it either dies-thus killing wind too-or the host demands new revenue removed from energy sales to keep it alive and the grid stable. That is a poor economic construct.

John Thomas Jordan Jr: Sorry not buying in. I don’t have a problem subsidizing renewable resources of any kind, we already subsidize traditional energy directly and indirectly. I also don’t have a problem with using all the above. As we develop more and better means of storage which won’t happen if there is no demand the reliance on other types of energy will shrink and the market will determine who is the ultimate winner.

Kevon Martis: John Thomas Jordan Jr. I see you are a union guy. Consider this: the steel industry spends $18 billion per year on electricity. They employ 100,000 people who are largely union. A 10% increase in the price of electricity takes $18,000/employee/year off the table for fringes and benefits. Wind energy’s wholesale PPA price is typically 80-120% higher than the wholesale value of electricity in most markets. Good luck with that next pay raise…

David Davila:  live in the Banning Pass, where wind power has been for decades. I really wish those that support it take a very close look at the existing farms here. Many are obsolete and don’t even work. They can’t be upgraded easily, all foundations, structures and wiring must be removed before an upgrade, that’s why many owners just walk away and abandon them. Many leak oil like a sieve that blows all over the desert. I also read these articles and wonder whether the authors ever calculate the energy deficit that they start with. +/- 5 tons of copper, +/- 80 tons of steel and +/- 150 gallons of oil and there are many other materials need as well that increase that consumption of energy before they produce a single watt. These materials were not mined, created or smelted using wind power. The authors do not even mentioning scraping vast amounts of pristine desert, local wildlife be damned. Want a permit for a large construction project? Good luck. Want one for a wind or solar farm and they can’t write them fast enough. Nice job looking at numbers and linking to them, horrible job taking all factors into account…

The True Benefits of Wind Power.

BigWind leaks OIL? No! They are supposed to be GREEN!

Impossible!  All we hear from the media is that BigWind is GREEN and turbines will reduce our dependence on foreign oil! We have told you before that each gearbox could contain 200 gallons of oil, liquid gold.  Oil that gets dirty and needs to be changed, just like in your car. Additionally, there are thousands of parts inside that need to be lubricated. BigWind doesn’t reduce our dependence on foreign oil, it INcreases our dependence on it….

A Summary of Violations has been issued to Ocotillo Wind Express OWE (California) for alleged violations of state law due to hydraulic oil leaks observed during a complaint investigation…

Residents have documented oil leaks at over 40% of all turbines on the project. Now, they are voicing concerns voice concerns that oil leaks could contaminate the town’s only supply of drinking water.

“We worry that in time it’s only going to get worse as these turbines age,” said engineer and Ocotillo resident Jim Pelley.  He fears that in the future, turbine leaks could pollute the federally protected aquifer, or underground water source.  “No water – no town.  If the water gets polluted, all homes in Ocotillo could be red-tagged,” said Pelley….

Ewing added, “I believe all of the turbines leak oil,” though not all are doing so presently since some have been repaired or recently had new gear boxes installed. “The oil is very clear and normally becomes easily visible when the blowing sand and dust sticks to the oil.”…

Residents also allege that workers for Siemens, the turbine manufacturer, attempted to cover up the leaks….

Pelley said he and other residents have complained to “just about everybody we could think of” including the county, federal BLM officials, an environmental justice task force, and the state environmental agency. “Typically, we don’t get any replies back from our e-mails.”

Though the complaints have been well-documented with photos and videos now for many months, still the turbines remain in operation, spewing oil into the environment and white sludge with seemingly every major rainfall—all atop the town’s only source of drinking water….

via INVESTIGATION LAUNCHED INTO HYDRAULIC OIL LEAKS AT OCOTILLO WIND FACILITY | East County Magazine.