Written back in 2008, and still right-on seven years later...
ENVIRONMENTALISTS NEED TO RE-THINK WIND ENERGY
Nov 5th, 2008 by Administrator
By Margaret Collins
One of the most bizarre aspects of the debate over “wind farms” in
West Virginia and surrounding states is the unquestioning acceptance by
many environmentalists of wind energy as a credible and environmentally
friendly energy source. I have read many articles and letters written by
dedicated environmentalists touting the benefits, and discounting or
completely ignoring the adverse consequences of wind energy. The
prevailing belief of these individuals is that we must embrace wind
energy as at least a partial solution to the increased burning of fossil
fuels and global warming.
This belief, while
undoubtedly sincere, represents a triumph of hope over reality. While
wind energy appears at first glance to be a clean, renewable source of
energy, it brings with it two fundamental and essentially insurmountable
problems, particularly in the eastern U.S.
First, it does not and cannot be made to accomplish its sole intended purpose, that is, to reduce CO2 emissions from America’s electric utility industry. Second, even if it could be made to do so, the environmental consequences of wind in the eastern forested mountains would be so great in comparison to the benefits, that wind should not even be considered in a rational society.
Although most people believe that wind turbines can replace
fossil-fuel generating facilities, this is a fallacy, relentlessly
promoted by the wind industry and its very slick and effective ad
campaigns, lobbyists and promoters. No scientifically valid study has
ever shown that the tens of thousands of wind turbines already operating
in the U.S. have displaced any CO2 emissions. In fact, a 2007 report of
the National Academy of Sciences concludes (assuming extremely and
improbably optimistic conditions) that at best, by the year 2020, CO2
savings from wind energy would amount to only 1.8% - a trivial quantity.
The ugly truth is that no matter how many thousands of wind
turbines we build, they will have no meaningful effect in reducing the
burning of fossil fuels or alleviating global warming. They have not and
will not result in the decommissioning of any existing power plant or
negate the need to build new conventional fossil-fuel plants.
How can this possibly be? How can America currently be on a course
to spend over a TRILLION taxpayer dollars on an alternative energy
source that doesn’t work? If wind energy is completely emission- free,
how could building more wind turbines not result in reduced CO2
generation? The reasons are complex, but become obvious upon undertaking
a little research.
BASIC WIND ENERGY FACTS – WHY WIND WON’T WORK
Let’s begin with the fact that wind turbines are very inefficient. A wind turbine nominally rated at 1.5 megawatts (MW) will actually produce only a small fraction of its rated capacity of 1.5 MW. “Rated capacity” or “nameplate capacity” has nothing to do with how much electricity a wind turbine actually produces. It simply reflects the amount of electricity a turbine could produce over a year’s time if it was working at full output, 24/7.
Turbines don’t begin generating electricity until wind speeds hit
around 8 mph, and their output is very low until wind speeds reach 32-37
mph, at which point they achieve their rated capacity. At wind speeds
over 55 mph, turbines must be shut down to avoid gearbox damage. Because
of wind’s unpredictable intermittency (a 100 MW wind facility, for
example, might generate at a rate of 80 MWs for a few minutes and a few
minutes later generate at a rate of only 5 MWs) engineers use the term
“capacity factor” to assess what percentage of its rated capacity a wind
turbine is likely to deliver over the course of a year.
According to the U.S. Energy Information Agency, the average
capacity factor for U.S. onshore wind turbines is a paltry 26%. No wind
plants located in the United States—and few in the world—have achieved a
capacity factor of more than 30%.
Consequently, a 100 MW wind plant (approximately 70, 1.5 MW
turbines) will actually produce on average, less than 30 MWs annually,
which is 30% of its rated capacity. Although no power plants work at
their rated capacities all of the time, the intrinsic capacity factor
for wind is far below other power sources (conventional coal and nuclear
plants typically operate at capacity factors of 90% or better). And in
summer months, when demand for electricity is highest, but average wind
speeds are at their lowest, the capacity factor for wind is less than
10%.
But inefficiency is just the beginning of the problems with wind. A
much more serious limitation is the random variability of wind and the
fact that the electricity produced by industrial scale wind turbines
cannot be stored. There are no batteries large enough to store the
electricity produced by a large turbine, and no reasonable expectation
that there ever will be. Other technologies for storage such as pumped
hydro, giant flywheels, compressed air and supercapacitors are for
various reasons, impractical in the eastern U.S. This has profound
consequences for “The Grid.”
West Virginia is one of 13 states connected to the PJM Grid, the
largest in the U.S. This grid, like all others, requires that
electricity be produced as quickly as it is consumed. For grid
operators, insuring that supply and demand remain roughly equal is akin
to a high-wire balancing act. When customers on the grid increase their
demand for electricity by turning up their air conditioners, some
generating facility connected to the grid must begin to produce more
electricity. When customers reduce their demand for electricity, the
output from some generating facility must be reduced.
If too much or too little is produced, brownouts, surges and grid
shutdowns occur. Nuclear, coal, gas and other fossil-fuel plants produce
steady amounts of electricity more or less continuously. These sources
of electricity are able to provide base load (the minimum amount of
steady electrical power required 24/7), load following (small changes in
output in response to moment-by-moment fluctuations in demand) and peak
load (the maximum load during any period). Grid operators control and
adjust output through a complex, computerized grid monitoring system
which accurately predicts demand within plus or minus 1%, based upon
historical usage data, temperature data and other factors.
Now imagine connecting to the grid a power source that is
constantly fluctuating, with an unpredictable and uncontrollable output
that varies greatly, minute by minute. Adding any significant amount of
wind energy to the grid will substantially complicate the already
difficult task of instantaneously balancing demand and supply. Because
it is unpredictable, uncontrollable and variable, windgenerated
electricity is fundamentally different from, and far less useful than
electricity generated by other sources. Wind cannot provide base load,
load following or peak load. Backup generation from fossil-fuel plants
is essential.
As more wind turbines connect to the grid, more conventional
generation will be necessary to ensure system adequacy and reliability
during periods of peak demand or low wind, and more ramping up or down of fossil-fuel output will be required to compensate for the extreme variability of wind plant output.
The random unpredictability of output and resultant need for backup
generation is the Achilles Heel of wind energy. Since base load
generation cannot be rapidly varied to match the unpredictable
fluctuations in wind plant output, more fossil fuel plants will need to
be built and these plants will need to over-generate and maintain a
higher level of spinning reserves (idling, but producing no power) to
compensate for periods of low winds. This over-generation will be wasted
when winds are high. This will in turn, cause more burning of fossil
fuels and more emissions than would otherwise be the case. Thus, the
more windmills we have, the more back-up generating capacity from
conventional fossil-fuel plants we will need and the more
over-generation from these plants is necessary. This will result in a
near one-to-one duplication of generating facilities, all in a futile
attempt to accommodate the transient nature of wind.
How will this reduce emissions and global warming? Of course, it
won’t, and in accordance with the law of unintended consequences,
erecting thousands of wind plants may, when all of the CO2 - increasing
activities attendant to the construction and distribution of wind power
are considered, actually cause an increase, rather than a decrease, in
the burning of fossil fuels.
Our system of regional grids is based upon the assumption that
output of our generating facilities can be controlled to produce
“dispatchable supply.” Utilities are obligated to provide electricity
instantaneously, when customers demand it. Wind does not, nor can it
ever, do that, since it cannot provide base load, load following or peak
load. In fact, even when the wind is blowing and the turbines are
spinning, it is likely that their output is not being used, because the
grid cannot accept the spikes and troughs inherent to wind generation.
Because of the unpredictability of wind and the distance of
ridgetop wind plants from the energy-hungry east coast, it will require a
near-complete rebuilding of our regional grids to accommodate wind
energy of any significant amount. This will require many thousands of
miles of new transmission lines, interconnects and substations, which
will cost hundreds of billions of dollars, destroy even more of our
fastdisappearing rural landscape, and take decades to accomplish.
Electric rates will skyrocket. Add the clearcutting of thousands of
acres of CO2-absorbing trees to make way for the wind turbines, access
roads and additional transmission lines and interconnects and the
thousands of square miles of valuable land that must be taken and you
begin to appreciate the absolute insanity of this technology as a
“solution” to global warming.
These basic facts make it clear that industrial wind energy is
essentially useless, or worse. While it does produce electricity, it
does not increase capacity, since it cannot be controlled to produce
dispatchable supply. In other words, it has an “effective capacity” of
zero. Contrast this to the effective capacities of coal, gas and nuclear
plants which is above 99.9%!
Contrary
to the claims of wind energy developers, electricity produced by wind
turbines does not simply “go into the grid” where it can be used when
needed. It will not “power” any homes without the backup generation
available for dispatch when the winds are calm. It will not replace any
fossil-fuel generating plants and it will not reduce C02, mercury or
other emissions, but may actually increase them. Even if we windmilled
every ridge in the East, the reduction in fossil fuel use and global
warming would be essentially zero. All of this is disputed by the wind
industry, but they have not and cannot show that it is false. They offer
only self-serving trade association “research” as evidence (which does
not survive even casual scrutiny) and promises for future technological
solutions that
never seem to materialize.
ENVIRONMENTAL NIGHTMARE
The inefficiency, cost and impracticality of wind should alone be sufficient reason to abandon it. But far more problematic is the environmental destruction about to be inflicted on the entire Appalachian Range, from Maine to Georgia.
In the West and Midwest, wind turbines are placed mostly in remote
cornfields, prairies and desert lands that are easily accessible by
roads, are not forested and are not wilderness. The environmental
consequences, while significant, are not catastrophic. However, in the
East, the only locations windy enough to justify installing wind
turbines are ridgetops. Modern wind turbines are immense - over 450 feet
tall, with blade diameters wider than a football field, and getting
larger with each new generation. Would you be concerned if a drilling
company proposed to erect thousands of drilling rigs on our mountain
ridges? Well, they would only be about one-tenth the size of a wind
turbine, and they don’t move.
The construction of an array of wind turbines on a forested
mountain ridge is a case study in environmental mayhem. Access roads
must be bulldozed and blasted out and heavy equipment must be moved into
formerly pristine mountain ridges. Hundreds of acres of trees must be
clearcut. Topsoil and large rocks must be blasted away and removed to
level the ridgetop. The entire mountain ridge becomes a vast
construction site up to 15 or 20 miles long. Large foundations (over 60
feet square) are dug and blasted out, and thousands of yards of concrete
are trucked up the mountain and poured. Oversize trucks then begin
delivering the column and blade sections and giant cranes are moved from
site to site as the structures go up.
After construction, security fences are installed and patrolled.
Massive erosion and sediment runoff from what is essentially a
mountaintop removal job fills streams and creeks. What was once many
miles of quiet forestland becomes a huge, constantly spinning industrial
complex. The effect on wildlife is catastrophic. Eagles, hawks,
songbirds and bats which migrate along ridgetops are chopped to pieces
by the thousands. Forest fragmentation and the relentless noise cause
habitat loss far beyond the actual acreage affected. Large mammals such
as black bears are driven out.
Wind farms will virtually destroy the lives of families who live
near them. The constant noise, strobe lights and slowly turning blades
create an alien world that permeates all daily activities. Many will not
be able to leave, since their property will be significantly devalued.
Hiking, backpacking and other outdoor activities in the mountains in a
forest of giant spinning turbines will be a strange experience, to say
the least. All of the mountain ranges in the East are at risk, even
National Forest lands. The transformation of the last remaining wild and
scenic areas into industrial wasteland will be accomplished in just a
few years if wind developers have their way.
When wind developers target a community they typically employ three
very effective strategies. First, they cleverly use their “green”
facade to gain acceptance by local politicians, environmentalists and an
uninformed public. Second, knowing that few people understand the
complexity of wind power issues, they make unsupportable claims.
Finally, if the first two don’t work, they garner support from locals by
essentially buying them off – with taxpayers’ money! Other than a
handful of property owners who will make a few thousand dollars a year
leasing their land for wind turbines, the only people who will benefit
are the outof- state wind developers and their wealthy investors who are
hoping we are too foolish to realize that we are once again about to be
exploited.
Unquestionably, mountaintop removal and strip mining have been
harmful to our mountains, but building thousands of wind turbines will
not result in any reduction in these activities. Why would we accept and
even encourage another round of devastation from those seeking to
exploit us? How can true “environmentalists” possibly condone the
conversion of our signature ridges to the industrial wasteland they will
become? How can anyone who truly loves mountains possibly support this
absurdity? We need to think clearly here and do our homework, rather
than just accepting without questioning the lies and distortions being
pushed by big industrial wind interests.
WHY ARE WE DOING THIS?
If wind turbines don’t work and are immensely damaging to the environment, why are we building them? As you no doubt have guessed by now, it’s all about the money. The only reason wind turbines are built is because they are fantastic tax shelters for wealthy investors. Federal tax subsidies for wind now exceed $7 billion, and at over $23.00 per megawatt hour, far exceed those for any other type of generation facilities. These billions are shrewdly applied by the wind industry to hire lobbyists and make political donations, thus keeping the subsidies flowing. Taking advantage of the fear of global warming, the industry has very skillfully lobbied and placed promoters in government positions so as to influence Congress, governors and legislators to enact “renewable energy mandates” and provide ever-increasing tax breaks favorable to wind development. Crafty entrepreneurs like T. Boone Pickens create $50 million saturation ad campaigns to curry public support for continuation of these massive taxpayer subsidies. He does not plan to lose money.
Gullible local officials are
easily swayed by the promise of huge tax revenues that rarely
materialize. Unions and workers support these projects, hoping to get a
piece of the action, only to find out later that most construction work
is performed by out-of-state workers, and permanent jobs relegated to
one or two low-paying maintenance positions.
Sadly, the vast majority of
people have successfully been brainwashed and are clueless as to the
folly of wind turbines and the damage they will cause. Support for wind
energy is based solely on politics, ignorance and smart lobbying, not on
science.
At some point it will become
apparent that wind simply does not and cannot be made to work, just as
it is now becoming obvious that corn-based ethanol does more harm than
good. Eventually, governmental and public support will wane and the
increasingly expensive tax credits will be eliminated as we turn to
clean energy sources that actually work, such as geothermal and nuclear
energy. But before that occurs, many more billions will have been wasted
and much damage will be done, irrevocably. Wind developers hope to get
as many turbines up as quickly as possible before the subsidy spigot is
turned off. When that happens, there will be wide-scale abandonment of
existing wind turbines. Since removal costs will be prohibitive, they
will become rotting hulks, littering hundreds of miles of ridgetops, a
sad legacy to inflict upon our children.
So, I ask all
environmentalists who “believe in wind” to please do some research and
become informed of the realities of industrial wind energy in the
eastern highlands. Be skeptical of the claims of those who have
financial incentives to promote this scam. Go to www.wind-watch.org , www.windpowerfacts.info and www.windaction.org
to learn more and view the destruction occurring under the guise of
“green energy.” Consider intervening in PSC hearings and oppose the
coming onslaught of “wind farm” applications. If nothing is done, in a
few years our
once-beautiful mountains will be littered with thousands of massive
industrial wind turbines, strung along the ridgetops in every rural,
mountainous county in the East, especially West Virginia. Their slowly
turning blades, flashing lights and relentless noise will permeate the
entire Appalachian Plateau. You will not recognize this place. It will
become a vast and otherworldly industrial site. If we let this happen,
we will forever regret it. Surely, we are smarter than this.
This article was written by Margaret Collins of the WV Highlands Conservancy
0 comments:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)