3 Comments

Using weather to provide energy

Today, Rush Limbaugh said Europe was “using weather to provide energy”.  I thought that was in interesting way of looking at wind and solar.  Bottom line, that is what wind and solar generation is doing–using weather to create energy.  We all realize how unpredictable and changeable weather is and to realize that we are staking our economic futures and the safety and warmth of our homes on weather really brings home just how bad and idea is.  Wind and solar are not renewable and never were.  However, I suppose renewable was an easier sell than “using weather to provide energy”.

Advertisements

3 comments on “Using weather to provide energy

  1. Hey RC, good point.

    Do you find it at all odd that that the same government officials who are bending over backward to promote wind and PV are not the slightest bit interested in further exploiting tidal power? I do, and I think it’s suggestive that they know exactly how useless wind and PV are for grid power, and are promoting them, not despite but because of their huge inadequacy to that task. What do you think?

    Richard

  2. My belief is wind and solar are used because they are so visible. Tidal power is not visible. Turbines and solar panels have become the symbols of saving the planet, along with the polar bears. I do agree that most people promoting the turbines and panels are well aware of their inadequencies and don’t care. They are interested in the subsidies and the symbolism, not the actual function. Even Warren Buffer candidly admitted wind is not viable without massive government cash infusions, as did T. Boone Pickens. Big government is wise to promote these because it means more dependence on government—bad for the citizens, good for the government.

  3. Well stated! I still think they’re trying to cause major power shortages, though. If it were really just about symbolism, this impli they’re sincere about trying to keep the grid running without rolling blackouts, they’d be interested in trying to prove that they can run the whole system on carbon-free energy sources. So why not try something that’s invisible and/or lacking in their preferred symbolism?

    If they’ve actually admitted that they know their alternative energy strategy is unworkable, and if they’re definitely committed to major reductions in coal, oil, and nuclear generation, and holding the line on gas and hydro … doesn’t that imply that they’ve made a conscious decision to break the grid, i.e. create a new regime of chronic outages?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Wolsten

Wandering Words

NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE KNOW THAT

“We do not believe any group of men adequate enough or wise enough to operate without scrutiny or without criticism. We know that the only way to avoid error is to detect it, that the only way to detect it is to be free to inquire. We know that in secrecy error undetected will flourish and subvert”. - J Robert Oppenheimer.

%d bloggers like this: