Monday, December 12, 2011

Wind Turbine Projects Stopped

OK Greenies, you need to come clean. You don’t want solar panels in the Mojave Desert because of some tortoise and a bug. You don’t want nuclear power because of the issue of burying the waste miles underground. You don’t want fossil fuels because of the environmental damage done during extraction, production, and usage. You don’t want wind farms because of the slight possibility it could kill some birds. And you want to remove dams that generate hydroelectric power because of the salmon runs.

So just how do you propose we generate our electricity? I know how much you guys like your bicycles, maybe you could get a bunch of your friends together and have a power generation party. You could sip fine wines and eat cheese and crackers while riding your bikes in place, kind of like hamsters on a wheel

Before anyone gets their knickers in a knot over this post, I do have to tell you that I am a fan of alternative power generation. I do believe that we need to reduce our consumption of oil and coal. But I also think we need to be smart about it. Right now, other that nuclear power, there is not a source of energy generation that can touch oil and coal for it's deliveralbes (energy). Solar, wind and other sources cannot touch oil, it isn't even close. To replace oil and coal we need massive projects, somewhere on the scale of the building of the interstate highway system. But I also feel we should tap into the resources that we have while the other forms of power generation become much more mature.

Two recent events here in the PACNW goes to show just how far in the sand the environmental movement has buried its head.

Two decent sized wind turbine projects have been canceled due to environmental hurdles that have proven to be too high for the companies that want to build the turbines to clear.

In Western Washington a wind farm was scheduled to be built over the next couple of years that would have generated 80 megawatts of power, enough to light about 23,000 homes. However, the companies have shuttered the project because the Department of Fish and Wildlife have placed further restrictions on the wind farm.

…[E]nergy Northwest learned a draft for a required Fish and Wildlife environmental impact statement would require that the wind project be shut down for six months of the year in the daylight hours. Instead of a 25-year permit, only a five-year permit with extension would be granted. (Source: KOMO 4 News)

Kind of sounds like the Obama Administration doesn’t want this project started or completed. You would think that our "Green President" would have stepped in and green-lighted the project. Hasn't he already dumped billions into green projects? I wonder if the leaders of the companies involved with this project forgot to send their donations to the Obama campaign.

Seattle Audobon (sic) called the decision to abandon the project a major victory.

Although it supports projects to reduce climate change, the harm to the marbled murrelets outweighed the benefits of reduced carbon output, the group said.

“There are significantly better locations to site renewable energy projects that Radar Ridge,” said Shawn Cantrell, executive director of the Seattle Audobon (sic), in a news release. (Source: KOMO 4 News)

Another wind project which would have generated 104 megawatts of power, enough to light about 30,000 houses, was also cancelled due to heavy restrictions proposed by environmental groups. This project was going to be built in southeastern Oregon, near the Steens Mountains. The Aududon Society of Portland opposed the project.

So the environmentalists are more than willing to turn our lives completely upside down to achieve the goal of a carbon neutral world and to reverse so-called global warming, but they are not willing to sacrifice a few little birds that are listed as threatened under the Federal Endangered Species Act in the name of climate change.

I really believe this gives you a very clear very of how these people think. I also think that it might hint at the fallacy that is climate change. If getting the world weaned off of fossil fuels and on to alternative sources of energy production was so danged important you would think that a couple of bird losses would be acceptable when measured against the plight of the whole world. Do you suppose that there is a possibility these people don’t believe in climate change/global warming other that as a means of controlling the population? Global warming has always been nothing more than just a theory developed by a bunch of dues who can’t even tell if it going to rain this weekend. But the loss of a bird or a tortoise or a salmon run is real. Kind of makes me go hmmmm.

Oh BTW: Another series of PACNW dams are going to be removed. This time it is four dams along the Klamath River, which starts in south-central Oregon and flows through northern California. These dams generate a little more than 80 megawatts of power. There really is no question that these dams HAVE done damage to the salmon fishery. The costs to bring the dams up to speed, regulation-wise, has proven to be cost prohibitive. The $200 million-plus price tag to take out the dams will be passed along to the consumer. So the region is going to lose 80 megawatts of electricity generation with nothing to replace it since the environmentalist who want the dams removed, also seem to oppose wind turbine construction at nearly every turn.

1 comment:

  1. What gets me going is that these people who are spearheading the "green" power movement are probably still hooked up to the grid. If they feel so strongly about the environment, then they should pull the breaker box at their homes. If they haven't, then they should shut up. And it's always a case of NIMBY too.