News Home

[ exact phrase in "" • results by date ]

[ Google-powered • results by relevance ]


Subscribe to RSS feed

Add NWW headlines to your site (click here)

Sign up for daily updates

Keep Wind Watch online and independent!

Donate $10

Donate $5

Selected Documents

All Documents

Research Links


Press Releases


Publications & Products

Photos & Graphics


Allied Groups

News Watch Home

Consider all options in state greenhouse-gas study  

Credit:  By Editorial Board | As of Friday, March 29, 2013 | Union-Bulletin | union-bulletin.com ~~

Reducing greenhouse gas emissions is good for the Earth and the humans who live on it. Given that, it’s no surprise Gov. Jay Inslee’s proposal to study reducing greenhouse gas emissions had bipartisan (mostly Democratic) support when it won final approval of the Legislature last week.

But limiting the scope of the study so it does not look at all viable options as well as the economic realities will produce an incomplete look at things.

A Republican amendment to Inslee’s proposal calling for consideration of hydropower and the long-term viability of solar and wind energy was defeated along party lines. The rejection is based on politics, not reality.

Hydropower is clearly renewable energy. The same water can be used over and over again, and it is. Water flow down the Snake and Columbia rivers through the turbines in a dam and then moves on to the next dam until it eventually makes it to the sea.

Democrats rejected the amendment because it could undercut Initiative 937, which requires large utilities to increase the amount of power obtained from renewable sources – specifically wind, solar, geothermal and certain woody biomass – until it reaches at least 15 percent by 2020. Hydropower is not included because backers of the initiative wanted to give an edge to wind, solar, etc.

Not having hydro included is ridiculous. So, too, is not considering the viability of wind and solar power, which are now heavily subsidized by taxpayers.

Even now, not all of the electricity generated by wind is used. Some simply goes to waste because the transmission lines are overloaded. That has to be considered.

To be clear, harvesting energy from the wind and sun are fantastic. However, if generating that power is prohibitively expensive over time, then the future of wind or solar is dubious.

When looking for ways to meet our energy needs while reducing harm to the environment, it is essential it be done with eyes wide open. Ignoring critical aspects that should contribute to making well-reasoned decisions is foolish.

The study, which will be conducted by an outside consultant, is expected to review Washington’s ongoing efforts to cut carbon emissions and juxtapose it with efforts elsewhere.

We can always hope the outside consultant looks past politics to deliver a report rooted in reality and of use in curbing greenhouse gases.

Source:  By Editorial Board | As of Friday, March 29, 2013 | Union-Bulletin | union-bulletin.com

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 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 Funding
Donate $5 PayPal Donate


News Watch Home

Get the Facts Follow Wind Watch on Twitter

Wind Watch on Facebook


© National Wind Watch, Inc.
Use of copyrighted material adheres to Fair Use.
"Wind Watch" is a registered trademark.