TEXAS FOLKS - Time to react.

[Valveman]

Science and technology are so skewed by politics these days I am skeptical, especially if the government has a finger in it at all. I am not one for "normalizing" or "level-izing". I just figure how much a piece of equipment cost, how much it cost to maintain over its lifetime, and how much it will produce in its life time. If the amount it produces doesn't add up to as much as it cost, it is not viable.

There is a lot of fiberglass, carbon fiber, copper, steel and other things in a wind turbine that take fossil fuel to produce. There is also a lot of fossil fuel used for vehicles as well to manufacture, install, maintain, and recycle wind turbine parts. I think the science is being skewed by those who want wind energy to work at any cost.

Here is an article on the Electric Vehicles. I would assume something similar is happening with wind turbines, just nobody wants to catalog the deficiencies.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/tilakd...s-of-clean-electric-vehicles/?sh=28126dcc650b

 

[wwhitney]

Apparently we have differing accountings. Likely some are more politicized and others are more balanced. I would expect that the people who are accusing others' accountings of being politicized are in fact the ones doing the politicized accountings, because they don't like the results of the balanced accountings.

In other words, I think you're listening to the wrong accountings. : - )

Cheers, Wayne

 

[Sponsor]

 

[Gsmith22]

Science and technology are so skewed by politics these days I am skeptical, especially if the government has a finger in it at all. I am not one for "normalizing" or "level-izing". I just figure how much a piece of equipment cost, how much it cost to maintain over its lifetime, and how much it will produce in its life time. If the amount it produces doesn't add up to as much as it cost, it is not viable.

There is a lot of fiberglass, carbon fiber, copper, steel and other things in a wind turbine that take fossil fuel to produce. There is also a lot of fossil fuel used for vehicles as well to manufacture, install, maintain, and recycle wind turbine parts. I think the science is being skewed by those who want wind energy to work at any cost.

Here is an article on the Electric Vehicles. I would assume something similar is happening with wind turbines, just nobody wants to catalog the deficiencies.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/tilakd...s-of-clean-electric-vehicles/?sh=28126dcc650b

I read the article and I suspect it is mostly accurate especially with respect to where the necessary minerals are coming from for the battery components. However, I would point out that the analysis of total lifetime carbon emissions relies heavily on the EV being charged by a relatively "dirty" mix of electrical generation. What if that electrical generation is mostly made up of solar, wind, and hydro? I'm guessing the lifecycle carbon emissions change radically in favor of the EV and I think since that study wasn't conducted (only the study with dirty electricity) the outcome wouldn't have fit the narrative of the story that was trying to be conveyed. More broadly, I think it is important to test everything I read, see, hear with alternatives and see if the story still holds up. There is definitely a lot of "here is the outcome I want, how do I craft a narrative/study/whatever that fits the desired outcome." in the universe of media these days. And it is definitely not one side more than the other; some are just better at disguising it.

I would just point out that this thread keeps coming back to wind and turbines but I suspect heavily that the future is solar. Its already there on a cost basis. More importantly, it can be deployed pretty much everywhere. So you don't need to be in West Texas or North Dakota to frack, or on a mountain ridge for wind, or near a river for hydro or nuclear, or near rail for coal shipments, etc.

 

[Valveman]

I read the article and I suspect it is mostly accurate especially with respect to where the necessary minerals are coming from for the battery components. However, I would point out that the analysis of total lifetime carbon emissions relies heavily on the EV being charged by a relatively "dirty" mix of electrical generation. What if that electrical generation is mostly made up of solar, wind, and hydro? I'm guessing the lifecycle carbon emissions change radically in favor of the EV and I think since that study wasn't conducted (only the study with dirty electricity) the outcome wouldn't have fit the narrative of the story that was trying to be conveyed. More broadly, I think it is important to test everything I read, see, hear with alternatives and see if the story still holds up. There is definitely a lot of "here is the outcome I want, how do I craft a narrative/study/whatever that fits the desired outcome." in the universe of media these days. And it is definitely not one side more than the other; some are just better at disguising it.

I would just point out that this thread keeps coming back to wind and turbines but I suspect heavily that the future is solar. Its already there on a cost basis. More importantly, it can be deployed pretty much everywhere. So you don't need to be in West Texas or North Dakota to frack, or on a mountain ridge for wind, or near a river for hydro or nuclear, or near rail for coal shipments, etc.

I agree! But with solar you still need the sun to shine and to have necessary backup for cloudy days. A lot fewer moving parts on a solar system than a wind turbine. I think eventually we will find out wind turbines are one of the biggest boondoggles ever played on the American public. Warren Buffet said they don't make since without the subsidies. The subsides include paying about 70% of the installation costs. So they just jack up the prices by 30% and the taxpayers are paying 100% for the wind turbines, and letting private companies get the profits. Then we pay another $18 to $23 per MW for the power they make, on top of what they can sell it for on the market. Too much politics and not enough common sense anytime the government has a finger in it.

Oh and I forgot to mention none of these things would even be an issue if there were not too many people for the planet to take care of.

 

[wwhitney]

subsidies.

To be clear, the subsidies are a negative tax. We don't have the political will to properly tax pollution, so as a second best market intervention, we are negatively taxing non-polluting energy sources.

Cheers, Wayne

 

[Valveman]

To be clear, the subsidies are a negative tax. We don't have the political will to properly tax pollution, so as a second best market intervention, we are negatively taxing non-polluting energy sources.

Cheers, Wayne

We just need to make sure what is polluting and what isn't. Again, there is a lot of fossil fuel "pollution" in the making of things like wind turbines and Electric Vehicles, and I don't think that is being factored in.

 

[WorthFlorida]

Fossil fuels has always been a highly taxed commodity. When a renewable energy replaces fossil fuels, those taxes from fossil fuels needed to be made up for. Governments rarely will allow the tax income to decrease when the tax base shrinks if they can't help it.

A little over ten years ago most of Florida was in a drought situation and the South Florida Water Management district instituted strict water use, maily irrigation of lawns, even irrigation using wells as I had. Fines were being given out as I had received one myself where I had the timer set wrong. The old mechanical ones were hard to see what day of the week was set. Water use drop so much that the local water companies (Palm Beach County Water Utility District) claimed they couldn't pay the bills since their revenue shrunk. Guess what happened, the rates and meter charges went up about 30-40% and of course they never went down. Another anomaly of this was the water mains were being flushed out (at hydrants) all over the county because before the water reached the homes from the treatment plant the chlorine or disinfectant chemicals became too in the pipes for safety.
Government regulations working at its best.

 

[Terry]

Fossil fuels has always been a highly taxed commodity. When a renewable energy replaces fossil fuels, those taxes from fossil fuels needed to be made up for. Governments rarely will allow the tax income to decrease when the tax base shrinks if they can't help it.

It's a way to pay for the roads that the cars are driving on. On my ski trip to Oregon last week, I was mentioning to my nephew Rex how many of those freeways that we use were planned for in the 50's, when we taxed the heck out of rich people. Kinda nice driving on that stuff now. When I ski at Stevens Pass, it's still a two lane road, one of the most dangerous highways there is. Rex knew all about Eisenhower getting the idea for the freeways from Germany with their autobahns. It was interesting hearing someone in their 20's explaining to me the history of that. It made me glad the the future generation has some knowledge of where we have been coming from.

 

[Weekend Handyman]

OK, I'm getting a serious case of snow-envy now. Tonight I was racing on the rained-on & re-frozen hard stuff.

Thanks Terry!

Skiing in t-shirts in Nova Scotia today ... my kids thought it was great ... time is ticking on the season tho.