To everyone who showed their support on Election Day!
Big Wind’s depredations continue, whatever the results yesterday. If you did not already, you can contribute to National Wind Watch now and at any time. Every dollar (pound, euro, krone, yen, etc.) goes to keeping the web site running.
Stripe: |
PayPal/Venmo: |
Maryland makes a weak argument for offshore wind farms
Credit: By Editorial Board, The Washington Post, www.washingtonpost.com 20 February 2012 ~~
Translate: FROM English | TO English
Translate: FROM English | TO English
Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley (D) wants to subsidize the construction of large wind farms off the state’s Atlantic Coast. But Maryland law already requires electricity suppliers to derive a fifth of their power from renewable sources by 2022. Why force them to choose one type of clean power over another, potentially cheaper, type?
When we posed that question last month, we received a response from Malcolm D. Woolf, the director of the Maryland Energy Administration. In a letter, Mr. Woolf said that the state shouldn’t continue to “import” electricity from its neighbors; Marylanders should support “home-grown” energy instead of sending “ratepayer dollars to other states” that might produce cheaper renewable power.
Is this the best argument remaining to supporters of the O’Malley plan – that Maryland should be energy-independent? If so, why stop with “home-grown” electricity? Maryland doesn’t build many cars or trucks, yet 4 million Marylanders drive. How about a charge on the purchase of vehicles to subsidize the production of “home-grown” cars, so that Maryland motorists stop sending their dollars to Detroit? Marylanders eat millions of oranges every year. Imagine how many jobs the state could create if it promoted the local fruit industry by building a complex of immense greenhouses.
Among too many political leaders, the argument that carbon-free energy is as much – or more – about “green jobs” as it is about addressing global warming has turned from a politically expedient talking point into an economically dubious article of faith. Confusing the goals of clean energy leads politicians to saddle their states with expensive policies, such as Mr. O’Malley’s green-power protectionism, instead of seeking to secure the best deal for electricity consumers and the environment. It would make far more sense for the state’s suppliers to look all over the Eastern United States for renewable electricity, including in places where, for example, the wind blows powerfully and consistently – and onshore.
Don’t believe us? Then take the word of Mr. Woolf’s agency, which in 2010 opposed the policy Mr. O’Malley now favors. The reasons? Uncertainty about the effectiveness of wind farms to provide electricity to the state, about where wind turbines would go, and about how expensive the whole project would be compared with other options.
This article is the work of the source indicated. Any opinions expressed in it are not necessarily those of National Wind Watch.
The copyright of this article resides with the author or publisher indicated. As part of its noncommercial educational effort to present the environmental, social, scientific, and economic issues of large-scale wind power development to a global audience seeking such information, National Wind Watch endeavors to observe “fair use” as provided for in section 107 of U.S. Copyright Law and similar “fair dealing” provisions of the copyright laws of other nations. Send requests to excerpt, general inquiries, and comments via e-mail.
Wind Watch relies entirely on User Contributions |
(via Stripe) |
(via Paypal) |
Share: