Wind Energy: Pros and Cons
We live in a time of great partisanship among our country’s leaders, and with even greater willingness to tell bald-face lies in order to manipulate voters.
Most of this, of course, has nothing to do with renewable energy.
For instance, if you listen to our president, you might believe that:
• The crime rate is at an all-time high, immigrants more likely to commit crimes than native born Americans, and immigrants’ presence is a net negative for the U.S. economy.
• The common American received a $4000 raise as a result of the tax reform.
• The entirety of the U.S. intelligence community is conspiring against him, and that only he is telling the truth.
• Whatever else: inauguration size, take your pick among the 4229 other false or misleading claims in 558 days.
Occasionally, however, such argumentation is directed at one of the flavors of renewable energy, and, make no mistake about it, there are “cons” against each one; there is no such thing as a free lunch, as I make clear in my video series: “The Pros and Cons of Renewable Energy.”
However, as suggested above, we tend to be prone to misinformation, usually, deliberate lies. That’s where this piece comes in when the discussion turns to wind energy. Yes, there are cons, but they are usually exaggerated. The piece linked above contains some facts to refute various claims.
Craig,
You have a rare talent for discovering obscure websites and Facebook postings of increasingly dubious merit.
Armed with such peculiar and unsubstantiated information,(or propaganda), you continue to rant with an impressive lack of relevance against the current administration.
As for your source of Wind Power information, it appears to be little more than an anonymous, almost identical, press release from the American Renewable Energy Institute circa 2014.
Governments, environmental lobbyists, renewable fuel advocates etc, boast Wind turbine have an effective life of 25 to 40 years or more.
In reality, recent surveys reveal wind turbines may continue to generate electricity effectively for a mere 12 to 15 years on average.
Prof Gordon Hughes, an economist at Edinburgh University and a former energy adviser to the World Bank, has just completed the most comprehensive audit of over 3300 wind turbines across Europe.
This study discovered the “load factor” (the efficiency rating of a turbine based on the percentage of electricity it actually produces compared with its theoretical maximum)is reduced from 24 per cent in the first 12 months of operation to just 11 per cent after 15 years.
Professor Hughes methodology and accuracy has been verified by a wide ranging number of highly reputable institutions and peer reviewed papers.
Another independent study into decline in output of offshore wind farms, based on a study of Danish wind farms, is even more dramatic. The load factor for turbines built on platforms in the sea is reduced from 39 per cent to 15 per cent after 9 years.
Prof Hughes said in his conclusion: “Adjusted for age and wind availability, the overall performance of wind farms in the UK has deteriorated markedly since the beginning of the century.
Dr John Constable, the director of the Renewable Energy Foundation of the UK,said recently: “Several recent independent studies confirms suspicions that decades of overly generous subsidies to the wind industry have failed to encourage the innovation needed to make the sector competitive”.
Gordon Edge, director of policy at Renewable UK, lobbyist for Britain’s wind farm industry, replied to the report saying: “Wind farm developers need continuing subsidies in there fight against climate change”
He continued “ I’m sure future Wind Turbines will be developed so it’s absurd to focus purely on the past as this report does, and pretend that that’s the way things are going to be in the future”.
Gordon Edge also claimed oil companies were behind the criticism, and the UK government should continue to suppress information against Wind Power as it damages the national environment.
I agree with Gordon Edge, wind technology will continue to improve, but the idea of suppressing negative information, no matter how valid for fear of losing taxpayer funding, is a very dubious suggestion and if advanced by private enterprise would be considered criminal fraud.
Recently, a University with whom I am associated, decided to divest Shell oil investments to purchase shares in a large a Wind Farm operator. I inquired whether Prof. Hughes’ report had been considered and discussed with the board of the Wind Turbine operator, and if Wind farm had a recent comprehensive audit of their turbines.
Naturally, this caused quite a stir, especially among the more ardent ‘greenies’. Despite the animosity, I held firm pointing out the liabilities and responsibilities associated with investing other peoples money,
After considerable debate,I proposed a resolution that the income from the existing Shell oil investment be spent on the deployment of Solar roof tiles tho replace the aging and dilapidated condition of many of the college roofs, thus killing two bids with one stone.
In other news, U.S. Energy Information Administration reports coal-fired power was still the major source of generation on a state-by-state basis in 2017, though natural gas-fueled electricity production slightly outpaced coal overall
The EIA’s report said 18 states relied on coal for the bulk of their power generation last year, while 16 states primarily relied on natural gas. Nuclear power led in nine states and hydropower led in six. Depressingly, Petroleum was the primary source of generation in Hawaii.
Natural gas-fired units provided 34% of the nation’s power in 2017, with coal-fired power at 32%. The EIA report noted the decrease in coal’s share of generation over the past decade. In 2007 coal was king in 28, but replaced in 10 states by natural gas by 2017, although coal still remains a significant generator.
Everything has cons, including fossil fuels. The problem is that none of the politicians care about it, they only care about the money they will make from fossil fuel investments they’ve made in the past. Unless we figure out how to make money unimportant in their eyes, we’ve got no chance.
Susan,
Politicians are not the problem. When you talk about “politicians only caring about money”, what you really mean is politicians worry about the economy.
Politicians get elected by voters mainly by creating or maintaining a prosperous economy. “Money” is important to legislators, because it’s also very important to voters.
The World economy depends on fossil fuels to create wealth and feed 7 billion people. As yet, and for a long time into the future, fossil fuels will provide most of the world’s energy. This is unavoidable as despite a lost of intestine in research and development, the technology to capture and store alternate “usable” energy remains very primitive and inadequate.
This is why it’s so important to develop more technology to mitigate the harmful emissions associated with fossil fuels, rather than just rely on developing alternate energy technology.