To the editor, the Guardian:
It's amusing to note that Toynbee calls it heroic to stand against the apparent popularity of nuclear power, but excoriates opponents of industrial wind power (not the 17th-century models!) by citing their apparent popularity.
She ably sees through the nuclear industry's propaganda, but sadly not that of the wind industry.
categories: wind power, wind energy, environment, environmentalism
May 22, 2005
Unaccountable
The New York Times today writes about the continued bullying of Latin America by the U.S., this time in trying to get the Organization of American States (OAS) to set up a committee for monitoring the "quality" of democracy in the different member countries. As the price of supporting the new secretary general José Miguel Insulza, the U.S. forced him to stand with Condoleezza ("revenge of the sith") Rice last month and state, "The elected governments that do not govern democratically should be held accountable by the O.A.S."
Now Rice is going around calling it Insulza's plan to attack Venezuela's government. Why does the U.S. hate Venezuela's president Hugo Chavez so much? Because he is popular. He rejects the banana republic assumptions of U.S. dominance in the region and has turned Venezuela's oil wealth to making life better for all Venezuelans rather than only a few.
As far as "elected governments that do not govern democratically," the glaring example is the U.S. itself. What is fight about the filibuster, i.e., the right of the minority to demand a larger majority than 51% for controversial votes, than a desire to remove perhaps the last barrier to absolute one-party rule?
Now Rice is going around calling it Insulza's plan to attack Venezuela's government. Why does the U.S. hate Venezuela's president Hugo Chavez so much? Because he is popular. He rejects the banana republic assumptions of U.S. dominance in the region and has turned Venezuela's oil wealth to making life better for all Venezuelans rather than only a few.
As far as "elected governments that do not govern democratically," the glaring example is the U.S. itself. What is fight about the filibuster, i.e., the right of the minority to demand a larger majority than 51% for controversial votes, than a desire to remove perhaps the last barrier to absolute one-party rule?
May 20, 2005
Embrace the Revolution
"Embrace the Revolution" is the name of the British Wind Energy Association's government-sponsored campaign to convice people that they really do like giant wind turbines as much as investors do. Calling these ineffective but hugely intrusive industrial machines "revolutionary" is like saying that war is peace, submission is freedom.
One of their tactics has been a continuous stream of surveys showing that two-thirds to three-fifths of the public want lots of giant wind turbines all over the U.K. They say this even as every single proposed facility faces strong and broad-based opposition. The embracers are obviously asking the wrong people (or by design the right people, for their purpose).
As BWEA's head of communications Alison Hill told an international meeting in London last November, "Most people don't understand climate change and they don't understand wind turbines."
And that is clearly all that their surveys show. Rather than address that shortcoming, the BWEA and its dupes are only trying to exploit it.
categories: wind power, wind energy
One of their tactics has been a continuous stream of surveys showing that two-thirds to three-fifths of the public want lots of giant wind turbines all over the U.K. They say this even as every single proposed facility faces strong and broad-based opposition. The embracers are obviously asking the wrong people (or by design the right people, for their purpose).
As BWEA's head of communications Alison Hill told an international meeting in London last November, "Most people don't understand climate change and they don't understand wind turbines."
And that is clearly all that their surveys show. Rather than address that shortcoming, the BWEA and its dupes are only trying to exploit it.
categories: wind power, wind energy
May 19, 2005
Incredible
"People are dead because of what this son of a bitch said. How could he be credible now?" --Pentagon spokesman Lawrence Di Rita.
I couldn't have said it better myself. Except there's many more than one such "son of a bitch" in the gang of pirates we're stuck with instead of a government. Too bad there's no other group to rally behind. Maybe we should ask George Galloway, late of the U.K.'s Labour Party, to come over and start a real opposition.
I couldn't have said it better myself. Except there's many more than one such "son of a bitch" in the gang of pirates we're stuck with instead of a government. Too bad there's no other group to rally behind. Maybe we should ask George Galloway, late of the U.K.'s Labour Party, to come over and start a real opposition.
Wind advocacy rather weak
The Southern Alliance for Clean Energy (SACE) issued an amusingly inept response to Tennessee Senator Lamar Alexander's Environmentally Responsible Wind Power Act of 2005.
I agree with them about the "siren song" of nuclear power, and I am glad to read that Alexander has worked with them to protect the Smoky Mountains and pursue cleaner use of coal.
While they criticize him for listening to energy lobbyists more often than good sense in supporting the current energy bill, however, they also criticize him for trying to insert this bit of good sense against the wishes of energy lobbyists.
What are their answers to Alexander's charges against the wind energy industry?
SACE correctly recognizes the seriousness of our energy issues, including reducing pollution and preserving wild places. But they forget to show how industrial wind power helps in tackling these issues. In fact, they can't. Giant industrial wind facilities are scarring our landscapes and ruining the lives of their neighbors. They are destroying wild places and the lives of animals on the ground and in the air. And they are not giving us anything in return.
categories: wind power, wind energy, wind farms, wind turbines, environment, environmentalism
I agree with them about the "siren song" of nuclear power, and I am glad to read that Alexander has worked with them to protect the Smoky Mountains and pursue cleaner use of coal.
While they criticize him for listening to energy lobbyists more often than good sense in supporting the current energy bill, however, they also criticize him for trying to insert this bit of good sense against the wishes of energy lobbyists.
What are their answers to Alexander's charges against the wind energy industry?
- A blindfolded person can tell the difference between the noise of a freight train and that of a wind turbine facility.
- Thousands of giant wind turbines will not scar the landscape as much as mountaintop-removal coal mining.
SACE correctly recognizes the seriousness of our energy issues, including reducing pollution and preserving wild places. But they forget to show how industrial wind power helps in tackling these issues. In fact, they can't. Giant industrial wind facilities are scarring our landscapes and ruining the lives of their neighbors. They are destroying wild places and the lives of animals on the ground and in the air. And they are not giving us anything in return.
categories: wind power, wind energy, wind farms, wind turbines, environment, environmentalism
May 18, 2005
"Utilities put cap on wind power"
An article in the May 18 Asahi Shimbun:
Just when it looked like smooth sailing for wind power generation, electric power companies, its main buyers, have placed limits on their purchases, citing the unreliability of the clean energy. ...categories: wind power, wind energy
Until recently, regional utilities have cooperated by purchasing all of the electricity generated by wind power suppliers.
But introducing too much of the electricity, whose supply can fluctuate wildly, can cause problems for utilities' power grids.
According to Tohoku Electric, which purchases about 40 percent of wind power generated nationwide, wattage can change between zero to 80 percent of its capacity within a single day.
Electric power companies worry a supply shortfall will result in blackouts, while excess supply may destabilize frequencies, which could cause malfunctions at factories, for example.
To avoid such risks, utilities control supply by monitoring shortages and sufficiencies and compensate by raising or lowering supply at thermal generators by means of computer-controlled systems.
If there is no wind, the utilities must rely entirely on other facilities. And even when wind power can satisfy all of the demand, they must continue operating thermal generators to be ready for any abrupt shortfalls in wind power. ...
May 17, 2005
"100 percent wind-powered"
The Sunday New York Times Travel section went to Boulder, Colo., and recommends an eatery that boasts it is "100 percent wind-powered."
The claim is amusing, since they're getting the same electricity their nonwind-powered neighbors are getting. They're just paying extra so they can say it's different.
categories: wind power, wind energy
The claim is amusing, since they're getting the same electricity their nonwind-powered neighbors are getting. They're just paying extra so they can say it's different.
categories: wind power, wind energy
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)