Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
"By the end of 2015, our expected megawatt total will be 6,300, which will be over 30 percent of our entire generation for the state of Iowa that will come from wind power," he explained.
Due to Iowa's high amount of wind generation, electrical rates in the state have remained low.
"Iowa's electricity rates are below the national average and 30 percent below Wisconsin's rates," Prior explained. "Only 2 percent of Wisconsin energy is wind generated compared to Iowa's 28 percent. Wind energy is a good, clean, renewable energy that does a fantastic job keeping our energy rates low."
"By the end of 2015, our expected megawatt total will be 6,300, which will be over 30 percent of our entire generation for the state of Iowa that will come from wind power," he explained.
Due to Iowa's high amount of wind generation, electrical rates in the state have remained low.
"Iowa's electricity rates are below the national average and 30 percent below Wisconsin's rates," Prior explained. "Only 2 percent of Wisconsin energy is wind generated compared to Iowa's 28 percent. Wind energy is a good, clean, renewable energy that does a fantastic job keeping our energy rates low."
In all the glowing appraisals of wind power, you rarely see the glaring downsides of industralized landscapes, noise, bird & bat kills and general "green" hypocrisy. At the end of the day, these are massive development projects, only benign in a hypothetical world where they occupy no vertical space. Some people still pretend the only land affected is the tower pads - ridiculous.
That said, I can tolerate giant machines much better on flat, developed farmland than when they're planted on ridge-lines. They should be banned from all hills and mountains, no matter how convenient. It just makes them visible and audible from even further away.
The photo below gives an idea of what wind turbines would look like if they were smokestacks without a ton of "green" rationalizations behind them. I doubt you'd see starry-eyed wind warriors calling smokestacks "beautiful" as they robotically do when turbines blight the landscape.
Cefn Croes Wind Farm, UK, before the blades were installed.
"By the end of 2015, our expected megawatt total will be 6,300, which will be over 30 percent of our entire generation for the state of Iowa that will come from wind power," he explained.
Due to Iowa's high amount of wind generation, electrical rates in the state have remained low.
"Iowa's electricity rates are below the national average and 30 percent below Wisconsin's rates," Prior explained. "Only 2 percent of Wisconsin energy is wind generated compared to Iowa's 28 percent. Wind energy is a good, clean, renewable energy that does a fantastic job keeping our energy rates low."
Before you get too cozy with the whole concept of "renewable energy," realize that it's only possible with fossil fuels, which we still have the luxury of enjoying at our disposal. It takes a lot of fossil fuels to manufacture, transport, install and maintain wind turbines and other industrial architecture. These grandiose electricity sources rarely stand on their own and occupy huge amounts of land for intermittent power. As fossil fuel sources keep peaking (like the global crude oil plateau in 2005, and U.S. shale oil fracking by ~2020) we'll see the true cost of massive energy sprawl.
I assume you've seen the truck trips required just to move wind turbine components? That's a lot of diesel, plus all the coke needed for smelting, etc. Evidence shows they only last a few decades in service with reliability problems that don't make news. One tornado slung a wind turbine blade into an Oklahoma day care center. They keep supplanting them with larger models as "progress" moves forward, which means more fossil fuels needed.
People need to realize that nothing may ever replace oil's dense energy and portability in the heavy transport sector, and we also need it for most aspects of modern farming. An all-electric economy is a pipe dream that has never run solo. We may see some serious economic downsizing after the "real" Peak Oil kicks in and supplies can't keep up with industrial demand.
Articles for the sober-minded: https://www.google.com/search?q="fossil+fuel+extenders"
Aside from the fossil fuel quandary, I'm in favor of solar power on roofs and parking lots that already exist, but not in large desert arrays. Wind power is too visually disruptive; an outgrowth of the obsession with building skyscrapers (in inappropriate locations). I consider it a major step in the wrong direction and an untenable blight on nature. I doubt most of them will get properly torn down if they get abandoned.
I suggest the Op google that and see the government stats. Texas leads in wind energy produced and for good reason. We are a lot bigger with areas that can produce so much energy with less consequences .
Its all in how the numbers are crunched, expenses for wind turbines are depreciated on a 5 year schedule, yet they will produce power for 15-20 years, its all about the write-offs
LOL, yeah, like the guy who buys a big house, yacht, fancy cars and claims all his dinners as business expenses and then says it's about the write offs.
Write offs means you are losing money because everyone is paying for them.
In all the glowing appraisals of wind power, you rarely see the glaring downsides of industralized landscapes, noise, bird & bat kills and general "green" hypocrisy. At the end of the day, these are massive development projects, only benign in a hypothetical world where they occupy no vertical space. Some people still pretend the only land affected is the tower pads - ridiculous.
That said, I can tolerate giant machines much better on flat, developed farmland than when they're planted on ridge-lines. They should be banned from all hills and mountains, no matter how convenient. It just makes them visible and audible from even further away.
The photo below gives an idea of what wind turbines would look like if they were smokestacks without a ton of "green" rationalizations behind them. I doubt you'd see starry-eyed wind warriors calling smokestacks "beautiful" as they robotically do when turbines blight the landscape.
Cefn Croes Wind Farm, UK, before the blades were installed.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Wind turbines are just "fossil fuel extenders"
