Don't get swept away by wind energy
The Associated Press article “Winds of change,” in the Aug. 24 Dispatch, pointed out some drawbacks to wind power but did not go far enough. The argument for clean renewable energy is compelling, regardless of whether you believe global warming is real or preventable.
Reducing our dependence on foreign oil has the potential for far-reaching economic, environmental and political benefits. However, wind energy is not the panacea that its proponents claim.
The true costs of wind energy include more than the upfront capital of $3 million per windmill, leases and noise pollution. The fact is the wind does not blow continuously. Consequently, redundant generating capacity must come from sources such as coal, oil and natural gas. The costs of operating and maintaining these plants at less than capacity must be considered.
If they’re idling in anticipation of shifting winds, are we saving as much as we thought? Aren’t we still pumping pollutants into the air?
As we search for alternatives to fossil fuels, we need to add reliability and sustainability to the criteria. Hydroelectric and nuclear are two examples. Conservation during peak-demand hours also can make a big impact.
It’s important that we not get enamored of a pie-in-the-sky scheme. We must demand that our leaders consider all facts and make reasoned judgments before promoting one option over another.
BILL THURSTON
Pickerington
2 September 2008
The copyright of this article is owned by the author or publisher indicated. Its availability here constitutes a "fair use" as provided for in section 107 of the U.S. Copyright Law as well as in similar "fair dealing" exceptions of the copyright laws of other nations, as part of National Wind Watch's effort to advance understanding of the environmental, social, scientific, and economic issues of large-scale wind power development. For more information, click here.
Blog it:
Tags: Wind power, Wind energy
|
