Green energy will never be sustainable as we know it, by 2050 the population of the earth is forecasted to double, we will need to double our agricultural output, we will have to double even though the new population will take more productive ground out of production, and we are then supposed to grow our fuel?
Solar, wind and ethanol are all reverse energies, they consume more energy to produce than they put out, but it gets Obozo the green vote so he will spend anything without regard to promote it
Such has not been the case here in Oregon and far sourther Washington. And with the prevailing winds these generators are replacing decommissioned outdated hydro projects, allowing restoration of fish runs in these rivers formerly blocked by dams lacking inadequate or even any fish ladders. In fact, these wind projects have made so much power that they've created problems during times when the BPA is producing excess power.
Hydro power is the BEST type of power this country ever developed. Wind power is the dumbest!! Water is a Constant, where wind is a Variable(not reliable).
They plugged the wind power into the hydro existing lines, Sooooo when the wind turbines are generating power the dams have to cut back. BUT when there is a drop in wind speed the dams have to quickly bump the power up to stay with the demand. Creating more damage to the dams turbines and switching devices.
Electricity is a supply the demand utility, they don't store any, anywhere.
Sparks fly when the switches are connected and disconnected! Brass splatters everywhere! The rate payer has to absorb the increased cost of replacing switches and rebuilding the turbines more often.
As for the FISH, 99% of the problems are propaganda generated. Read the Mullen Report(ten year study by 10 biologist and scientist on the Carson Stock) and talk to the old retired Federal fish hatchery managers who aren't afraid of losing their retirement. You'll find out the real truth! Bruce Babbit was Chief Propagandist while in power.
I beg to differ about the lack of fish problems with dams.
A recently decommissioned dam here, the Little Sandy Dam was a major impediment to fish passage. And quite provable too. The river was entirely dry below the dam, and fish cannot swim where there is no water. It's sister dam, Marmot Dam on the Sandy River, had a very inefficient fish ladder that prevented many fish from getting access to the upper river.
Portland General Electric owned both dams, the holding lake (Roslyn Lake) and the powerhouse. Even though PGE rebuilt Marmot Dam in 1989, the fish ladder was still incapable of unobstructed fish passage. PGE decided the costs of relicensing and providing proper fish ladders for both dams was too high compared to the cost of decommissioning and investing in wind turbines. As a result the dams were destroyed and Roslyn Lake became a large field (it was pretty flat and fairly shallow after nearly a century of silt buildup).
I don't believe in removing dams without a very sound reason. But these two dams are classic examples of how to build dams that destroy fish runs. The fishing groups Northwest Steelheaders and Trout Unlimited campaigned for decades to get better fish ladders installed because fish runs were being depleted.
In fact, Marmot Dam when built had a fish ladder, which was soon swept away by a flood. The replacement was also swept away a few years later, and no fish ladder was installed for the better part of a century. The old timers in the area remember that the stench of rotting salmon piled up at the base of the dam could be smelled in the town of Sandy when the wind was right. These salmon were cut off from the upper reaches of the river and never spawned.
The sad irony about Marmot Dam was that it was a wooden dam until it was replaced by a concrete dam in 1989. The new dam only lasted 18 years. Pity that so much money was put into a new dam, but wind turbine technology was not viable at that time.
Another sad thing is the loss of Roslyn Lake. Even though it was a man-made lake, it was a popular fishing spot and a lot of people picniced there for about 100 years. My family fished there often, sometimes three to four times a week in good weather. Saddens me to see it gone. But the destruction of the fish runs simply was not worth the cost.
Marmot Dam was the largest concrete dam to be taken out, with over a million yards of silt behind it. It was closely monitored because it became a blueprint for other dam removals.
And the Condit Dam on the White Salmon River on the Washington side of the Columbia River Gorge had no provision for fish passage. It blocked salmon from 14 miles of river and steelhead from 33 miles of river. This is the largest dam removed thus far in the US, but another dam will take that spot later this year.
I guess it and the Bull Run Hydro Project above must be the 1% with real problems by your assertion.
This dam was breached last October. Unlike the Marmot Dam, the Condit Dam has had downstream silt issues, particularly at the mouth of the river. The sediments have turned the mouth into a shallow area, and ruined fishing holes. These will eventually be washed out.
The decision to remove the dam was made by its owners, who were under orders to install fish ladders. It was cheaper to decommission the dam and switch to wind turbines than to install fish ladders. The height of the dam made fish ladders even more expensive than the Bull Run Hydro Project dams.
Having said all that, again, I want to stress that I am not in favor of dam removal without very good cause. There are plenty of examples of properly designed dams that are not an impediment to fish passage. Another issue is that some dams are also very important for flood control.
BTW, note at the end of the video the muddy shallow areas above the dam. That's silt. The main channel was carved out again when the dam was breached, but the silt is going to be eroded over quiet a period of time. This is another factor for decommissioning smaller dams... the silt builds up to the point where they simply do not have the water capacity to function. This dam had not reached that point, but already the dam was on a power cycle of running two turbines for peak load, then switching to one turbine or none to allow the pool to fill back up. A fish ladder would have made the refill cycle even longer.
Also, this is a very nice river to raft. A lot of action in a short stretch. My wife and I have rafted it, and our take out was just above the dam. Some day you'll be able to raft all the way to the mouth.
GREEN jobs my ass.... only green is lining the pockets of the dems ... wanna bet if you follow the money trail of all these FAILED green companies they lead back to the Obama campaigns financial supporters?
BANKRUPTCY NUMBER SIX: The world’s largest solar plant, with the second largest ever Department of Energy loan guarantee, has filed for bankruptcy.
The "Solar Trust of America" is based in Riverside, California and received a $2.1 billion conditional loan from the Obama administration.
The company was a keystone of the President's effort to promote solar energy.
Wind power, aside from being unsightly, is the biggest boonedoggle ever invented. It's completely uneconomical and only survives because of the 2 1/2 cents per kilowatt hour subsidy the taxpayers involuntarily provide. Since it's unreliable and electricity can't be stored, it has to be backed up 100% with other, reliable power plants, i.e. coal, natural gas, etc. It's so uneconomical that it's not unusual for the owners of the turbines to give the power away for free so they can continue to suck up the subsidy you and I throw at them.
That's bad enough but it doesn't end there. The greatest amount of wind energy in the country is in the great plains and it peaks in the fall and spring. Guess when the greatest need for electricity is? Yes, it's in the summer and winter, months that wind makes very little contribution. Yes, coastal wind is far more reliable, but the liberals don't want them where they can see them, they only want them in flyover country.
Just talk to people who allowed those white elephants to be built on their land what they think of them. Ask them how many of the rosy predictions about their royalties came true. Ask them about the fires they start when the generators melt down, not an unusual occurrence.
Wind power is nothing but typical liberal, feel good BS- sounds good in theory but sucks in reality. The only thing that will allow it to make sense is if some way of storing electricity were invented. Even then, it will continue to cost far more than conventionally generated power.
And then we have the Sierra Club, they want to destroy all the hydro dams, because of what Brian posted, they want to shut down the wind turbine, they call them the Cuisine Arts of the sky, killing predatory and migrating birds, they want to shut down some solar arrays in the Mojave desert, as they are ruining habitat
And we all know where they stand on coal, gas, and nukes
Better stock up on candles
All green energy is a joke, maybe sometime it will be harnessed, but dumping billions into it ain't the way to do it
Quite a while ago Babcock and Wilcox, a huge boiler manufacturer, designed a small nuclear boiler that is small enough to bury in your back yard, it will generate electricity for a long time, I think it was 15 yrs, then they dig it up, replace the fuel, it holds very little, and reinstall.
The type of reactor used is beyond super safe, I would put one in if possible
But you know that won't fly until there is no other power source
Wind is not an issue where the wind turbines are placed here. The problems are the environmentalists who don't want them placed because they spoil the looks of the desolation and they kill birds. Yet they want the dams torn out, the coal plant shut down, no natural gas plants, and don't even think about nukes. Basically they want a freeze on power at best and at worst they want to curtail power. The only way that will work is to start shifting our economy towards a third world economy. And bingo, that fits hand in glove with what the Dems and Obama have been doing, helped along by some RINOs. It's been the goal of socialists and communists for the last 100+ years to eliminate the middle class, and their modern day progressives are working on that. Eliminate the middle class and you cut capitalism significantly. And look what the new health care does.. it adds so many people that health care will be rationed, increasing the mortality rate.
This does not mean there are no dams that should not be taken out. But this needs to be done carefully, using facts and proper science, and there should be a replacement in hand for the lost electrical production.
Brian one huge problem they are having with the turbines is pollution they hold thousands of gallons of gear lube, and when the shaft seal starts leaking they sling the gear lube all over the area, repairing the shaft seal is about as high priced as erecting the turbine in the first place, so they just keep topping them off until they get caught
Wind turbines are real good at doing one thing, making the rich richer
Wind generated electricity is not such a bad concept, but we are seeing alot of problems with the existing technology particularly on the large scale units. The smaller turbines that are sufficient for a single dwelling are quite reliable and are capable of supplying sufficient power year round in many areas. Right now that may be the scale that we need to focus on, I don't know.
But what I do know is that we need to continue developmental work on the various alternative energy technologies and not let the fear of failure prevent us from trying something new.
Thats right, tungsten and wolfram are the same - just different languages. Just got done reacting about 20 tons of the stuff -yumm...
I just want to know how I can market 'wind credits' kind of like Al Gore's carbon credits only wind credits absolve the gas bags of all guilt. We could extend those credits to old dogs like my big yellow dog. Dangerous to have open flames around the back end of that guy.