Turbinoscopy and you - The hard truths:
Prior to the turn of the last millennium, the word “green” was generally associated with either the country of Ireland, the paper currency of the United States of America, the trademark of the Boston Celtics basketball team, or the metaphorical superiority of our neighbor’s lawn. But over the past ten years, “green” has been co-opted by a growing army of politicians, economists, scientists, government regulators, environmental activists, corporate image consultants, and entrepreneurial alternative energy enterprises, some of whom claim the high moral ground in a populist war on carbon emissions and fossil fuels. (“It’s for the good of the country, the good of the whole town,” we hear from the echo chamber on the shrinking side of our Charlestown Town Council.)
Each division of the Green Corps has its own marching orders complete with strategies and tactics designed to earn the “mission accomplished” merit badge. And no division has more to gain than the Wind Energy Brigade, composed of a battalion of wind turbine manufacturers linked together in the global marketplace. Their goal is to sell wind turbines and make money for investors, absolutely a solid business model.
But as with all legitimate business ventures in a democratic society, it is consumers who must ultimately decide which products are good investments and which ones aren’t worth their money. If the product performs as advertised, the business thrives. Alternative energy products should not be exempted from this most basic of all economic elements.
The wind industry, a global conglomerate, assigns itself an Ivory Soap-pure energy pledge. Industry publicists wisely play up a turbine’s disassociation with air pollutants typically produced by fossil fuel power plants. But they steer clear of the reality that wind turbine technology is incapable of replacing the consistent levels of energy output necessary for the needs of an industrialized society and disregard other equally critical environmental issues. Similarly, turbine manufacturers fail to disclose unbiased cost-effectiveness studies of their products, another wise strategy. Energy produced via wind turbine technology is more expensive to the consumer than any other form of energy, fossil-fuel or otherwise.
Denmark hosts over 5500 turbines, producing 20% of the country’s electricity. Nonetheless, not a single power plant has been shut down. Wind velocity is intermittent, requiring a range of that can only be meteorologically predicted, not guaranteed. Consequently, power plants must be kept running 100% of the time to compensate for variations in wind velocity below requisite levels. Ironically, when the turbines are performing optimally, the surplus power generated by fossil fuel power plants is sold to other countries at a discounted price, a great deal for everyone except the taxpayers of Denmark. The country has been canceling plans for offshore wind sites and withdrawing government subsidies from others.4
The wind industry is having difficulty validating its advertised claims of cost-effectiveness. Environmental issues abound with both the construction and operational phases of industrial wind turbines. When 400 foot tall structures with 60 foot wide girths and bedrock anchoring systems are imposed on fragile geological sites, earth moving equipment manufactured in Asia will alter the landscape to make way for industrial wind turbines, also manufactured in Asia. Imported vernal diversity in the biome is another thing our local turbine salespeople failed to mention. It wasn’t even in the fine print.
The preeminent argument promoted by wind turbine enthusiasts and corporate salespeople alike is the save-the-planet advantage of turbine technology. The graph below challenges the sacred cow of the wind farm publicists. No additional commentary needed.
CO2 emissions in Denmark starting in 1996 to 2006. Emissions (blue) did not go down as the number of turbines (red) increased. 2
Sources:
1. Permitting of wind energy Facilities, 2002
2. http://www.wind-watch.org/pix/displayimage.php?pos=-515
3. http://www.aweo.org/problemwithwind.html
4. Rosenbloom, Eric The Low Benefit of Industrial Wind, 2006