The wind farm lobby is selling a placebo to the public | Opinion
Benjamin Riggs
Guest columnist
October 13, 2024
The rapid industrialization of the ocean off Rhode Island has resulted in a wide range of heated discussion and the realization of the existence of a dangerous disconnect between the problem and the solution that we would be well advised to try to understand before it’s too late.
On the one hand, we have statements by the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management that approved all these wind farms that they will have little or no impact worldwide on carbon output and airborne pollution. But scientists believe they will have a potentially massive, harmful effect on the ocean environment. We also have statements from Special Presidential Envoy for Climate John Kerry over the years admitting that “If all the industrial nations went down to zero emission ... it wouldn't be enough. Not when more than 65% of the world's carbon pollution comes from the developing world.”
Also, every study I know of that has been done on wind power, such as the ERCOT Bentek IV study on the impact of 2,300 wind turbines on the Texas grid, has reported virtually zero reduction of carbon and fossil fuel use because intermittent wind requires fossil fuel plants to ramp up and down to keep voltage constant. Meanwhile, a number of new U.S.-designed modular nuclear power reactors are now in production in several countries, and can produce far more power, all without creating waste fuel or emissions of any kind. In the interim, of course, natural gas is needed to allow faster replacement of coal use.
On the other hand, we have billions of dollars allocated to ramp up the implementation of wind power, and its supporters are vehement in their belief that this will “save our planet” no matter what the facts are. The short life cycle pollution footprint of these is, according to the U.S. Department of Energy, about a hundred times worse than a gas or nuclear plant.
Thousands of gallons of oil are needed at each wind farm, and many tons of neodymium are used to make the magnets for each unit. The material is so toxic that China has cordoned off the area where it is mined. When a gearbox fails and the oil lubricants catch fire, so do the magnets. They cannot be extinguished and the deadly plume of smoke will blow downwind. So how does this approach persist in an educated society?
One theory is that the massive taxpayer and ratepayer subsidies will make so many firms (albeit many foreign) so wealthy that they are willing to buy the silence, and even support, of virtually every nonprofit environmental group in the country with hundreds of millions in grants and donations. In addition, they can buy all the political support they need even more easily. Keeping the general public in line has been done with media blitzes and massive amounts of misinformation about efficiency, costs and job creation, all in the name of saving the planet.
Then what about nuclear power? Its big drawback is that it only creates clean, economical power. It doesn’t hand our discontented masses and their politicians the means to dismantle their perceived oppression by turning our country inside out.
In the end, as we spiral into the undoing of our economic, energy and national security, I can offer only one theory, however bleak: The wind lobby is selling a giant placebo that people can swallow in order to feel better while supporting their sense of moral superiority. Can anyone think of another explanation?
Benjamin Riggs, of Newport, is a retired naval aviator and aeronautical engineer who had a second career as CEO of several manufacturing companies. He is also a founding and active member of the Energy Council of Rhode Island.
Comments
Post a Comment