A recent Nature article offered up some shocking statistics about the number of wild animals likely killed by outdoor domestic cats each year, and it’s gotten a lot of buzz. According to the research, outdoor cats — most of them ferals — kill as many as 20 billion wild animals in the U.S. each year, including at least 1.4 billion birds. Some people, prominent environmentalists among them, are citing these truly shocking numbers to argue that the threat wind turbines pose to birds and bats is numerically far smaller, and thus not a big deal.
Congress revived a key tax credit for wind energy Tuesday — but only for two weeks.
Wind advocates had urged legislators to pass a multi-year extension of the tax credit, which expired at the end of last year. Under the bill passed overwhelmingly by the Senate late Tuesday, only projects that started construction this year — or that start construction before Dec. 31 — will be eligible for the tax credit.
For the wind industry, that’s a minor victory at best. According to the American Wind Energy Association, new wind construction all but evaporated this year due to uncertainty over whether the tax credit would be extended, meaning few projects stand to benefit from the retroactive extension.
I’m sure you’ve seen anti-uranium mining propaganda displaying unsavory images of “dirty” uranium mines and the strip-mined wasteland they leave behind. It’s a favorite tactic of anti-industrial activists: show people how sausage is made, and they’ll hopefully never eat the stuff again. And they’ll fight tooth-and-nail to block any sausage factory from ever being built anywhere near where they live.
The tactic exploits our basic human fear of the unfamiliar and evokes an instant emotional reaction, but provides zero information. If you’ve never seen a mine before (or a sausage-making factory) you will be disgusted by the first sight of one. But most people have no idea what they’re looking at and have no way of contextualizing what they’re seeing. All they see is a gaping hole in the ground, scarred earth and puddles of presumably toxic water all around.
by Alec Salt, Professor, Department of Otolaryngology, Washington University School of Medicine
Last week I was reading of an Australian study, by a Professore Gary Wittert, which had shown sleeping pill usage for those living near wind turbines was no greater than the general population . The study compared those living within 10 km of turbines with those living more than 10 km away. There have been similar studies with property values using a 5 mile or 10 km radius that showed property values are not affected by wind turbines. Had you ever thought why they pick a 10 km radius?
January 30, 2014 WGN Farming America radio interviewed Ted Hartke on the problems with wind turbines, especially the ones at the California Ridge Wind Farm in northern Vermilion County Illinois. The farm is operated by Invenergy. Ted and his family were forced to move from their home due to the noises and other issues generated by the turbines. The Vermilion County Board has stood as an obstacle at every turn when this family sought help.
A subsidy that benefits the wind energy industry is likely to be renewed by the House on Wednesday, but it will be on the chopping block in the next Congress.
The House is due to vote on a year-long extension of expiring or lapsed tax credits, known as extenders. The most expensive is a credit for electricity generated from renewable sources, mainly wind power. It is unclear whether House Democrats will offer an alternative.
House votes to extend massive package of expired tax breaks _ but only through end of month
WASHINGTON (AP) — The House rushed through a last-minute measure Wednesday to extend a massive package of expired tax breaks for banks, investment firms, commuters and NASCAR track owners.
The bill would enable millions of businesses and individuals to claim the tax breaks on their 2014 returns. It would add nearly $42 billion to the budget deficit over the next decade.
The more than 50 tax breaks benefit big corporations and small businesses, as well as teachers and people who live in states without a state income tax. More narrow provisions include tax breaks for filmmakers, racehorse owners and rum producers in Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands.
Well, the Greenwich Neighbors United Chili Rally & Raffle has past, but it certainly will not be forgotten! The show of community support from all who donated raffle items as well as putting in their time and creative abilities to work to make this event happen is nothing less than amazing!
We have much to be thankful for, our community has rallied in support in just saying “NO” to industrial wind facility intrusion, not only in Greenwich, but in all of Ohio! Make no mistake about it, we are just getting started and this will be a hard fight! Keep your eyes on future announcements and events which will be posted here on this website and on our Facebook page as well. Now let’s go back and revisit our GNU Rally & Raffle from last Thursday by perusing through some pictures of the event, enjoy! Watch the slide screen presentation or click on the “show thumbnails” for complete gallery. Please be patient as the pictures load, there are a lot of them !
Todd Hill for the Telegraph-Forum November 7, 2014
“Stop the wind turbines!” “Say no to wind turbines!” “Wind turbines, go away!”
Drive around rural Ohio long enough, particularly the parts of the state that are flat and dominated by large, agricultural fields, and you’re bound to see signs voicing these sentiments in the front yards of property owners.
Fifteen miles north of Mansfield, just north of the Richland County line near the Huron County village of Greenwich, red and white anti-wind farm signs have sprouted like weeds. A subsidiary of Windlab Developments USA Ltd. wants to build a 25-turbine wind farm on 4,600 acres of leased land just south and east of the village.
The Greenwich Wind Park was approved by the Ohio Power Siting Board in late August.
“We first identified the site and approached landowners to discuss the project concept in 2010. Since that time, the project has benefited from significant community support throughout an extensive development and OPSB process,” Monica Jensen, vice president of Windlab Developments USA, said.
“Now that the project has been approved, Windlab looks forward to completing this project for the benefit of both involved landowners and the neighboring community.”
As STT followers are acutely aware, wind power is an economic and environmental fraud. Because wind power can only ever be delivered at crazy, random intervals – and, therefore, never “on-demand” – it will never be a substitute for those generation sources which are – ie hydro, nuclear, gas and coal (see our posts here and here and here and here and here and here and here and here).
Were it not for government mandates – backed by a constant and colossal stream of subsidies (see our post here) – wind power generators would never dispatch a single spark to the grid, as they would never find a customer that would accept power delivered 30% of the time (at best) on terms where the vendor can never tell customers just when that power might be delivered – if at all (see our post here).
Ultimately, it’ll be the inherently flawed economics of wind power that will bring the greatest*rort of all time to an end. The policies that created the wind industry are simply unsustainable and, inevitably, will either fail or be scrapped.
* Rort: a fraudulent or dishonest act or practice. “a tax rort”, a wild party. (Australian slang).
It has been a curious experience to watch the news about the “largest climate march in history” from Japan. There weren’t any marches here in Tokyo. Indeed, 350.org, the group that was a lead organizer of the march in New York City, doesn’t even appear to have a presence in Japan.
The energy-related headlines in the Asian newspapers over the past week or so haven’t been about climate change or the march in New York City. They have largely been about nuclear and coal. And therein lies the mismatch between the rhetoric of the marchers and organizers, and the hard realities of the global energy market.
Sure, some 300,000 people showed up in Manhattan to express their desire for action on carbon dioxide emissions. But if the marchers and the organizers behind the march are serious about addressing climate change, then they should be holding a march against coal use. Instead, according to a key observation on the march made by Ed Crooks, a reporter for the Financial Times, the marchers were overwhelmingly demonstrating against, wait for it . . . natural gas.
In a Twitter message, Crooks wrote, “Anti-fracking signs here outnumber anti-coal signs by more than 10:1.” In another Twitter message, Crooks noted that anti-fracking signs were “by far the most popular” and that there were “possibly even more” signs about hydraulic fracturing than there were about climate. Continue reading Climate Rhetoric vs. Reality→
Note from Webmaster: I received the following response by email from Senator Sherrod Brown on September 18th of this year. Less than two months later I found the Senator not quite up on his facts. At least not according to the American Wind Energy Association statistics. There are a number of other interesting figures this decidedly pro wind website has to offer and you can check them out here http://www.awea.org/Resources/state.aspx?ItemNumber=5395.
Their figures concerning jobs read more like this:
Total direct and indirect jobs supported in 2013: 2,001-3,000. State Rank: Ohio ranks 12th for number of wind-related jobs.
Some other little tidbits I also find interesting were the following:
Percentage of Ohio’s electricity provided by wind in 2013: 0.8 percent
Equivalent number of homes Ohio wind farms now power: over 100,000 average Ohioan homes
Wind power is capable of meeting more than 98 percent of the state’s current electricity needs. (at best this statement is delusional, at worst it is disingenuous!)
To think of the millions, yes, billions of dollars spent on wind energy in Ohio and the best we can do is wind’s paultry o.8 percent portion of total production? How did this even become a selling point? And so far as the seemingly impressive reference to 100,000 average Ohio homes being powered by wind farms, well that’s a bit of a misnomer and quite a bit dishonest. Why? Because if your were one of those homes powered by just wind farms (as the statistic seems to suggest), because of wind’s intermittent nature you would be definitely experiencing disruptions in service a.k.a. blackouts; brownouts! Continue reading Sherrod Brown’s Response To My Letter→
Congressman Gibbs has been very ambiguous and non-committed regarding any firm stance on subsidies and the general “out of control ” behavior of Big Wind Developers, especially in our area. I believe you will still see this same thread running through his response to Mrs. Ledet. In a meeting that I had attended in Norwalk, I asked him to comment on our situation and I remember his response having something to do about the “property rights” of land owners. Too bad that at that time I did not have an answer like the one Kevon Martis shared with us…” A man has every right to swing his arms any way he wants to until at some point he makes contact with my nose!” I also wrote to him a couple months back and received the same middle of the road political rhetoric. And, even though he too was invited ( by formal invitation and by me personally) to our informational gathering back in September, he nor anyone from his office was noticeably absent. I believe we should not take for granted that our interests are being served by Congressman Gibbs in the same manner as we have experienced from both State Representative Terry Boose and State Senator Gayle Manning. Please write to Congressman Gibbs and continue to voice your concerns.! Encourage him to just say no to special interests and truly represent us, his constituents. Continue reading Response from Congressman Bob Gibbs to letter written by Marcia Ledet→
John Coleman, who co-founded the Weather Channel, shocked academics by insisting the theory of man-made climate change was no longer scientifically credible.
Instead, what ‘little evidence’ there is for rising global temperatures points to a ‘natural phenomenon’ within a developing eco-system.
In an open letter attacking the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, he wrote: “The ocean is not rising significantly.
“The polar ice is increasing, not melting away. Polar Bears are increasing in number.
“Heat waves have actually diminished, not increased. There is not an uptick in the number or strength of storms (in fact storms are diminishing).
“I have studied this topic seriously for years. It has become a political and environment agenda item, but the science is not valid.”
Mr Coleman said he based many of his views on the findings of the NIPCC, a non-governmental international body of scientists aimed at offering an ‘independent second opinion of the evidence reviewed by the IPCC.’He added: “There is no significant man-made global warming at this time, there has been none in the past and there is no reason to fear any in the future.”Efforts to prove the theory that carbon dioxide is a significant greenhouse gas and pollutant causing significant warming or weather effects have failed.
After Fukushima, Japan gets green boom — and glut
By YURI KAGEYAMA, AP Business Writer
Updated 12:19 am, Thursday, October 30, 2014
TOKYO (AP) — Like other Japanese who were banking on this country’s sweeping move toward clean energy, Junichi Oba is angry.
Oba, a consultant, had hoped to supplement his future retirement income in a guilt-free way and invested $200,000 in a 50 kilowatt solar-panel facility, set up earlier this year in a former rice paddy near his home in southwestern Japan.
But Kyushu Electric Power Co., the utility to which he must sell his electricity, has recently placed on hold all new applications for getting on its grid. Four other utilities have made the same announcement and two more announced partial restrictions.
The utilities say they can’t accommodate the flood of newcomers to the green energy business, throwing in doubt the future of Japan’s up-to-now aggressive strategy on renewable energy. Another challenge is that supplies of power from sources such as solar are not reliable enough or easily stored.
Gov. John Kasich and Senate President Keith Faber made clear in a press release this week that they support mandating renewable energy. Even though energy mandates are costing job creators and consumers.
The senate recently passed S.B. 310, which pauses an Ohio “green energy” mandate. Currently Ohio’s Renewable and Advanced Energy Portfolio Standard (RAEPS) requires electricity suppliers produce at least 2.5 percent of their output using so-called renewable energy.
Very simply, supply must be continuously matched to demand. There is no large-scale storage of electricity on the grid.
What is the difference between base and peak load?
Load is the amount of power in the electrical grid.
Base load is the level that it typically does not go below, that is, the basic amount of electricity that is always required.
Peak load is the daily fluctuation of electricity use. It is usually lowest in the wee hours of the morning and highest in the early evening. It also varies seasonally.
Are base and peak loads provided differently?
Base load is typically provided by large coal-fired and nuclear power stations. They may take days to fire up, and their output does not vary.
Peak load, the variable part of the electrical supply and demand, is provided by more responsive and smaller plants whose output can be quickly ramped up and down or that can even be quickly turned on and off.
How does wind power affect base load?
Wind power has no effect on base load. However, since base load providers can not be ramped down, if wind turbines produce power when there is no or little peak load, the extra electricity has to be dumped. Continue reading FAQ — The Grid→
2 Jun 2014
“Feeding the masses on unicorn ribs”. That was how Walter Russell Mead once poured scorn on Obama’s misbegotten attempts to revive the US economy by creating five million “green jobs.”
Mead was quite right, of course. And there was plenty of evidence to back him up, such as the 2009 report by a Madrid university professor Gabriel Calzada Alvarez that for every expensive “green job” created by government subsidy, 2.2 jobs were destroyed in the real economy.
The Obama administration responded as only the Obama administration knows how: by calling in its left-wing attack dogs. Friendly organisations including George Soros’s Center for American Progress and various well-funded wind industry lobbyists were recruited to monster this unhelpful evidence, which was dismissed for its “lack of rigor.”
It’s in this context we need to view the Environmental Protection Agency’s dispiriting announcement of its latest swingeing assault on US industry – disingenuously billed as a “commonsense plan to cut carbon pollution from power plants.”
The pain will be felt most acutely, of course, in the coal-producing states. But the damage will extend right across America for at least one very simple reason which was perfectly evident five years ago when Obama launched his “green jobs” scheme and is even clearer now: the expensive, unreliable, intermittent renewable energy which Obama and the EPA are trying to promote is no substitute for the cheap, abundant, reliable fossil fuel energy which Obama and the EPA are trying to kill.