Comment Up
Palm Beach County has given the go ahead on a firm, Wind Capital Group from St. Louis, to install Wind turbines on thousands of acres of sugar land near Belle Glade.
Wind turbines were recommended on our beach redevelopment and are extremely noisy. As those involved say that even turtle lighting will cost us millions, perhaps the lofty idea of wind turbines has been eliminated from our beach. Michael Trebilcock, a Professor of Law and Economics, University of Toronto, says:
An excerpt from his article written in April 2009 says, "There is no evidence that industrial wind power is likely to have a significant impact on carbon emissions. The European experience is instructive. Denmark, the world’s most wind-intensive nation, with more than 6,000 turbines generating 19% of its electricity, has yet to close a single fossil-fuel plant. It requires 50% more coal-generated electricity to cover wind power’s unpredictability, and pollution and carbon dioxide emissions have risen (by 36% in 2006 alone).
Flemming Nissen, the head of development at West Danish generating company ELSAM (one of Denmark’s largest energy utilities) tells us that “wind turbines do not reduce carbon dioxide emissions.” The German experience is no different. Der Spiegel reports that “Germany’s CO2 emissions haven’t been reduced by even a single gram,” and additional coal- and gas-fired plants have been constructed to ensure reliable delivery.
Indeed, recent academic research shows that wind power may actually increase greenhouse gas emissions in some cases, depending on the carbon-intensity of back-up generation required because of its intermittent character. On the negative side of the environmental ledger are adverse impacts of industrial wind turbines on birdlife and other forms of wildlife, farm animals, wetlands and viewsheds."
According to the article in the PB Post, that is exactly what environmentalists are worried about--killing migrating birds. The County does not care about that at all. Has it done its research? Did some outside company give them a song and dance? What will this end up costing our environment?
Do you remember when McVoy went on TV to recommend putting a wind turbine at the beach for educational purposes. You, I and McVoy had a discussion about that as I said that the wind speed at the beach was barely enough to start the turbine, let alone get it to generate a single kw of power.
ReplyDeleteNo sense in worrying about our environment, Lynn. Rick Scott is doing everything to ruin that.
ReplyDeleteThe wind turbines are still a part of the beach project. I was asked to submit a bid from Solar Concepts the company which installed the Photo Voltaic panels on our home that I am the Sales Manager for. The reality of it is that there may not be any funds available for wind turbines or the PV panels with all the "additional" costs popping up as the project trudges forward. I will keep you informed as we continue negotiations with the electric engineer on the job and Mark from Morganti.
ReplyDeleteMark A. Parrilla
I would recommend that your readers conduct a little more research on their own into Wind Generated power.
ReplyDeleteStudies other that the one you site by Michael J. Trebilcock offer a different perspective of wind generation's place in an integrated power network.
I would also encourage your readers to research bird mortality in relation to wind turbines.
Studies suggest that the average birds killed by each wind generator is 2.19 per year. While 100 to 900+ million birds are killed each year by striking buildings and windows. Additionally cars kill 50 to 100 million birds annually.
On the subject of noise there have been interesting advances on that front as well. A look through available studies on the internet suggest the noise impact of modern wind turbines is less that that of normal road traffic.
Like all things there are many sides to this subject that need to be explored before approving or condemning its value.
Tom McGow
I don't need to encourage them...you do that for me, Tom. There will ALWAYS be different sides to a story depending up where you are coming from.
ReplyDeleteWind mills have never been cost effective. Electric cars are not cost effective. We had a solar panel at City Hall at the fountain. That was never cost effective either and they took it out.
ReplyDeleteTom,
ReplyDeletePlease get real. The cost of the initial installation (entirely government subsidized), the cost of the backup generation (required because wind power is not effective 80% of the time, the inherent inefficiencies of wind power (30% maximum at its peak production) added to the cost of additional CO2 both the wind turbines and the additional generation give off, makes wind generation one of the single largest boondoggles the US has ever encountered. Additionally, the harmonic displacement that is wrecking havoc to every wind farm in the US is creating a nightmare for the utility providing this generation.
While this may be a consultants dream, it is the worst case scenario for the consumer.
From yesterdays paper:
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/275673/texas-wind-energy-fails-again-robert-bryce#
Oh ugh, we'll get to look at some dead pelican depending on whether or not we can find a parking space at the top level.
ReplyDeleteNo, it will probably be one of the wild green parrots that have disappeared since they removed those palm trees at the beach where they were all hanging out.
ReplyDeleteThere is no business model for wind power that can make it an economic alternative to nuclear, gas, coal, thermal or even solar. As many in the industry say: Wind power is a load of horse shit , but you can make a bundle shoveling it. These same engineers provide a similar commentary for Smart Grid.
ReplyDeleteA Guy in the Know
We had damage from a little wind from Irene. Can you imagine a full fledged hurricane and a wind turbine? It will end up in Belle Glade with the rest of them.
ReplyDeleteJust like any type of alternative energy source, wind energy is also evolving and improving in types of generators to effectiveness.
ReplyDeleteWhere I think it has a long way to go...turbines are currently being used on high rise buildings very effectively with little issue of safety and the designs are not like what you see with giant blades...
Is Wind Energy right for Lake Worth? Probably not if you are looking at the most popular models and the new technology is far out of our affordable reach.
With that said please do not discount the future of wind power or energy based on Ocean currents...the main part of this is location of these types of technology and not every place in the world is the right place but if it can save on any scale on an affordable level our carbon foot print....Maybe in another 10 years it will be a good alternative.
In the mean time we have the technology to convert to many other sources such as bio-fuels, Hydrogen and many other gateways to make changes today...Even Solar has come a long way but still would like to see the price drop for the common homeowner. (Those of us that can not afford a $50K Car can't afford a $50K solar installation even with the rebates....)
Ask your self one question, Especially Guy in the know...Is our political and private industries that depend on Oil Based Money willing to take the risk and invest (REALLY Invest) into the alternatives? As Oil supposedly gets scarcer the price goes up to record profits.
Why can't someone invent a simply small engine propeller that doesn't cut and slice the backs of Manatee's? Oh wait...they do but there is no legislation forcing that industry to use the technology and at what cost to the boaters?
(My opinion - We are a country of waste and irresponsibility...If I want the newest and greatest I can through my old one away....)
Change will only come until we start changing our thinking and question ourselves on how we live....An easy one is do you place your recycle and garbage out every single week for pick up? My recycle is out every week but because I'm making sure I recycle my garbage only has to go out once a week and sometimes once every two weeks. But because I changed my thinking and not just take the easy way out and toss everything in the garbage....(Yes I know you can argue on recycling as well) Just a couple of thoughts.
To the Poster above:
ReplyDeleteThere are two wonderful alternatives to oil: Miscanthus and Algae. I will let you conduct your own research on each. If the government would permit the growth of miscanthus on the 34 million acres currently in CRP, and permit power plants to feed algae with their scrubbers of CO2, the US could be energy independent in a few short years. Miscanthus can provide both oil and feedstock for power plants. Algae reproduces at such an extreme rate that it can supply oil daily.
Owing to algae's fast growth rates and their ability to grow practically in any environment, algae are possibly the only biomass that can capture most if not all the CO2 emitted by power plants and other concentrated industrial sources worldwide. This makes algae based CCS a sustainable form of CO2 abatement.
ReplyDeleteSome strains of algae biomass are rich in oil; thus, there is a possibility of the algae biomass grown to be used as a feedstock for producing biofuel – ethanol or biodiesel, or under some circumstances, even both. This could turn what was earlier considered a cost center into a profit center!
Thanks Anon on the Miscanthus and Algae info....I will definitely research this...
ReplyDeleteVery interesting and if you have links please post..
MIT Energy Research Council:
ReplyDeletehttp://web.mit.edu/erc/spotlights/alg-all.html
Miscanthus:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/07/080730155344.htm
The trick here I suppose is to find government officials who are knowledgeable enough to release the 34 million acres of CRP land (this is land that the government pays farmers to NOT grow crops on) for Miscanthus production and then permit the coal burning generation plants to begin channeling their CO2 into algae beds, thereby eliminating the ozone depleting gas. But so far the current administration has shown no desire for energy independence....maybe the next one will.
http://globaleconomicanalysis.blogspot.com/2011/08/obama-spent-535-million-on-solyndra.html
ReplyDeleteLynn , green energy is a big LIE , its just propaganda by the governments , most of it is being propped up by tax payer money. Solar energy is not the next stone that we step on to cross the river to new energy , not yet , because there is no incentive to go there as long as governments ( which is controlled by oil lobbyist) is in the way, the manufacturing of it is still tied to oil , all of it.