6 posts • joined 11 Sep 2012
Re: Here we go again
that assumes free interconnections (perhaps superconducting to eliminate losses -- designed for peak loads which exist ...what... 10%- 20% of the time?) and free extra turbines; how rich do you feel?
this is a bogus argument. Even if it were FREE, wind and coal are not comparable. Wind is variable and intermittent and neither wind nor wind power can be stored. Non-dispatchable. OK if you can live with you TV running only when it blows. Coal is not free. But coal can be stored and burned on demand within the limits of coal's relative inability to follow large load variations. But it is there all the time, as base load power. The two cannot be compared because wind can neither coexist with coal (it NEEDS gas) nor can wind really substitute coal. So, yes, wind may be cheaper, but it is like saying ONE hiking boot is cheaper than a Land Rover. The single boot may be free, but it won't get you far.
IRENA is yet another lobbying group with Central European origins promoting trivia, paraphernalia, snake oil, all designed to maximize revenue to enterprises that exist only on subsidies. Atlases, roadmaps, salvation...
I have a simplistic working hypothesis. The AGW tale is a 1985 invention by a Bert Bolin, that was temprorarily useful to many, but soon became the cornerstone for the new German plans for commercial dominance though exports to supposedely compensate for competitive disadvantages it itself carefully cultivated, though the UN and German sponsored environmental groups. If one considers the number of local allies created in the Green Craze this appears plausible. The US Democrats have more euro-socilaist tendencies than Republicans, and there are enough Democrats that come from coal states. UK politics are a mystery to me, but Mrs Thatcher did use "Green" in the coal miner srikes. As for climate, weather is not clmate, and model simulations are not data. Climate has been changing for about 4.5 billion years, and with some luck it will keep doing so for another 4.5 billion. And then we will fry in the not all harmless Red Giant.
Aahhh!... Finally! I am sending a copy of this to all those afraid that the sky is falling, including AGWarmingmongers. Snip, presto!
Hooking up all the hamsters and rats on a treadmill might be a more economical idea that wind contraptions. Wind power as a candidate for electricity production has been around since the mid 70's (the energy crisis, remember?), and since then they have been unable to replace a single tiny conventional power plant, anywhere on this planet. And it has surfaced lately that while they turn and churn and collect taxpayers subsidies they DO NOT even replace significant conventional fuel consumption. VERY expensive hot air. Try running a hospital, or an elevator on wind power (might work if massive superconducting cables were free.
- Vid Hubble 'scope snaps 200,000-ton chunky crumble conundrum
- Bugger the jetpack, where's my 21st-century Psion?
- Google offers up its own Googlers in cloud channel chumship trawl
- Windows 8.1 Update 1 spewed online a MONTH early – by Microsoft
- Interview Global Warming IS REAL, argues sceptic mathematician - it just isn't THERMAGEDDON