Started by Hoofer, April 25, 2021, 06:06:50 AM
Quote from: Hoofer on April 25, 2021, 06:06:50 AMQuick, easy read - the stuff the Greenies seldom mention.https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2021/04/why-wind-and-solar-energy-are-doomed-to-failure.phpWHY WIND AND SOLAR ENERGY ARE DOOMED TO FAILURE"Wind and solar energy are both essentially obsolete technologies. There is a reason why only the very rich or the very adventurous sail across oceans: the wind is unreliable, and at best produces relatively little energy. Nevertheless, liberals have concocted fantasies whereby all of our electricity, or perhaps our entire economy, will be powered by those fickle sources.There are a number of reasons why this will never happen, but a paper published last week by Center of the American Experiment argues that land use constraints are the most basic reason why wind and solar are inexorably destined to fail. "-snip-"Robert's paper acknowledges that there are multiple reasons why wind and solar energy will never meet America's energy needs, but focuses on the particular problem of land use:Of course, other factors, including the incurable intermittency of renewables as well as the massive amounts of materials, including steel, concrete, copper, and rare earth elements, will limit the deployment of wind and solar. But the biggest barrier is the land-use problem. The ferocity and extent of rural land-use conflicts are showing that any attempt to convert the domestic economy to run solely on renewables is destined to fail.Why is land use such a problem for wind and solar, but not for coal, nuclear or natural gas? Because wind and solar are pathetically low-intensity energy sources, as reflected in this chart from Bryce's paper:Because wind and solar produce so little energy per square mile, an enormous amount of land would have to be devoted to panels and turbines if we seriously tried to get all of our present electricity needs from those weak sources:Miller and Keith determined that "meeting present-day U.S. electricity consumption, for example, would require 12 percent of the continental U.S. land area for wind." A bit of math reveals what that 12 percent figure means. The land area of the continental U.S. is about 2.9 million square miles, or 7.6 million square kilometers. Twelve percent of that area would be about 350,000 square miles or 912,000 square kilometers. Therefore, merely meeting America's current electricity needs with wind energy would require a territory more than two times the size of California.Suffice to say that this just isn't going to happen."-----------------You can BET on it - since we cannot dedicate enough land - we'll need to reduce our energy consumption.
Quote from: Hoofer on April 25, 2021, 06:43:47 AMCommunities who are saying, NO! to these Wind & Solar farms.https://www.americanexperiment.org/windrejectiondatabase/"Top officials in the Biden administration are also forecasting huge increases in renewables. In March, Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm said, "We have to add hundreds of gigawatts to the grid over the next four years. It's a huge amount. And there's so little time(10)."Regardless of which academic, political or economic scenario is considered, it's clear any attempt to convert the entire domestic electric grid — not to mention the entire economy — to run solely on renewables will require covering vast territories with oceans of solar panels and forests of giant wind turbines. Further, that effort will have to occur at the same time that rural politicians and landowners across the U.S. are fighting against the encroachment of large-scale renewable energy projects.These land-use conflicts are the binding constraint on wind and solar energy expansion and they are slowing or stopping these developments all over the country. Since 2015, according to published media stories, about 300 government entities have moved to reject or restrict wind energy projects (See Figure 1).""Among the recent examples of the backlash against wind energy: On April 7, the planning board in the town of Foster, R.I., voted 5-1 to ban wind turbines. The board took action after hearing from residents of the nearby town of Portsmouth who had turbines built near their homes. According to an April 14 article by Jaquelyn Moorehead, a reporter for The Valley Breeze newspaper, the Portsmouth residents warned the board "about their experiences, complaining about constant noise disturbances, vibrations, and loss in home values from turbines in their neighborhood."The ban in Foster reflects the broader backlash against Big Wind. Objections to large-scale renewable energy projects include concerns about negative health effects from the noise generated by wind turbines, reductions in property values, protection of existing view sheds, and potential loss of tourism.These conflicts, seldom covered by major media outlets, provide a stark example of the urban-rural divide. They are also a harbinger of future fightsas environmental groups, renewable energy companies, and their allies in state and federal governments continue pushing for dramatic increases in renewable energy, and slashing (or banning) the use of coal, oil, and natural gas."-------------It is REFRESHING to read of people, even governmental officials representing the private land owner rights to say, "NO!" to further government intrusion & the loss of their property rights.Link to the PDF quoted:https://files.americanexperiment.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/Not-in-Our-Backyard-Robert-Bryce.pdf