They are doing one. The house passed its version a while ago, the senate just passed their version. They now gotta do the conference committee bit and weld the two bills into one. Obama has said he will sign it. It's gonna spend $10 billion or so.
On what? There is some unspecified research and development money. Probably another try to convince people that solar or wind power is worthy and green, rather than a scam on tax payers and rate payers. I, and a lotta other people and industries, need the power to stay on all the time. We cannot stand hearing the electric company calling to say, "Sorry, the wind dropped, (or the sun went down) and we are going to shut your juice off for six hours." For me, that means the furnace won't work and my pipes will freeze. For industry it means that batches of product under going various heat treatments will be ruined. Every something as old and well understood as baking bread cannot tolerate the oven going cold before the bread is baked. High tech processes are even more sensitive.
And there is money to work on "storage" of electricity on a utilities scale. That's batteries which are ridiculously expensive. A lead acid battery big enough to crank my V-8 car engine for a couple of minutes costs $50. A lithium battery big enough to run my laptop for a couple of hours costs $50. A battery bank big enough to run a small town would cost billions. For that sort of money I can build a nuke plant, or two or three natural gas fired plants. How do you say total waste of money?
And there is some unspecified subsidy for those evil fossil fuels. The ones that produce dependable power. Even at today's price of oil, they don't need a subsidy.
They tried to slip in a provision to clean up Flint Michigan's city water problem. Worthy but hardly an energy concern. There is probably a good deal more pork buried in it, which is why Obama said he would sign it.
The TV newsies haven't said a word about it.
Showing posts with label wind. Show all posts
Showing posts with label wind. Show all posts
Thursday, April 21, 2016
Friday, December 28, 2012
Diane Rehm pushing wind and solar on NPR
She had a bunch of "alternate energy" enthusiasts on, pushing hard, claiming that reducing fossil fuel use would solve global warming and save the earth. Trouble is, wind doesn't give you any juice when the wind stops blowing. (It has been dead calm all day up here). Solar quits when the Sun goes down.
Up here we need juice all the time. Without juice the oil burner doesn't work and the pipes freeze. I want electricity to run the lights AFTER the Sun goes down. Electricity isn't optional. In winter we cannot just wait in the dark for the power to come on.
So, the utilities have to build real power plants, the kind that work all the time, enough of them to serve all their customers when the wind stops and the Sun goes down. And, the real cost of electricity is paying off the cost to build the plant in the first place. Fuel costs and payroll are neglible compared to paying off the plant. And, they have to pay off the plant whether it is running or not. So, my outrageous electric bill just gets more outrageous when ever PSNH gives money to wind or solar producers. Buying "alternate energy" does not reduce the need to make the mortgage payments on the real power plants. They have to pay the mortgage on time even if the plant isn't generating electricity.
In short, "alternate energy" just raises my electric bill. Even if "alternate energy" were as cheap as real energy, buying it raises my electric bill. And it ain't cheap. "Alternate energy" costs about ten times as much as real energy.
So why do we want to mess with "alternate energy" since it is just a cost enhancer? Is it the desire of the greenies to return to a Hiawatha standard of living? Is it a desire for the political power that comes from control of the electricity supply? Is it a belief that 380 parts per million of carbon dioxide has a noticeable effect compared to 300,000 parts per million of water vapor? Water vapor is as strong a green house gas as carbon dioxide, and there is a lot of it, and with most of the world covered with water, its gonna stay abundant. Is it failure to notice that the world hasn't warmed up at all in the last ten years?
Up here we need juice all the time. Without juice the oil burner doesn't work and the pipes freeze. I want electricity to run the lights AFTER the Sun goes down. Electricity isn't optional. In winter we cannot just wait in the dark for the power to come on.
So, the utilities have to build real power plants, the kind that work all the time, enough of them to serve all their customers when the wind stops and the Sun goes down. And, the real cost of electricity is paying off the cost to build the plant in the first place. Fuel costs and payroll are neglible compared to paying off the plant. And, they have to pay off the plant whether it is running or not. So, my outrageous electric bill just gets more outrageous when ever PSNH gives money to wind or solar producers. Buying "alternate energy" does not reduce the need to make the mortgage payments on the real power plants. They have to pay the mortgage on time even if the plant isn't generating electricity.
In short, "alternate energy" just raises my electric bill. Even if "alternate energy" were as cheap as real energy, buying it raises my electric bill. And it ain't cheap. "Alternate energy" costs about ten times as much as real energy.
So why do we want to mess with "alternate energy" since it is just a cost enhancer? Is it the desire of the greenies to return to a Hiawatha standard of living? Is it a desire for the political power that comes from control of the electricity supply? Is it a belief that 380 parts per million of carbon dioxide has a noticeable effect compared to 300,000 parts per million of water vapor? Water vapor is as strong a green house gas as carbon dioxide, and there is a lot of it, and with most of the world covered with water, its gonna stay abundant. Is it failure to notice that the world hasn't warmed up at all in the last ten years?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)