| Wind Watch is a registered educational charity, founded in 2005. |
Wind energy supporter begging for more corporate welfare
Credit: The Times News | January 28, 2014 | www.thetimesnews.com ~~
Translate: FROM English | TO English
Translate: FROM English | TO English
The Jan. 25 column by Simon Mahan pleads for ongoing corporate welfare. Without access to taxpayer dollars (Tax incentives) businesses will close and private funds move elsewhere. What have we to show after 20 years of “investment”? An energy source described by the author as “proposed” or “opportunities”. Payment being made in the form of lost tax revenue that will be made up by others.
Well thought of in the abstract, wind turbines do not receive such glowing praise by those in earshot of the low frequency vibrations generated, or by those who find a favored view obscured by 150-foot towers.
Wind farms are 30 percent efficient (no wind/ no energy). What supplies the energy when it is needed but there is no wind? Gas turbine generators. Rate payers have the opportunity to pay for two production methods. Until energy storage is available for “renewable” energy sources, feast or famine prevails. Too much energy when not needed, and unreliable when needed.
Transfer of dollars from a large group who are unaware of the transfer (taxpayers) to a small group of recipients (wind farm projects) will always be favored by the latter. Consultants and lobbyists will explain how the sun will lurch from its orbit without a steady stream of funding. The complaint by Mahan that the nuclear industry received a 15-year subsidy and the wind industry must go hat in hand yearly does not necessarily need to be resolved with all parties receiving long term guarantees. Perhaps if the peoples representatives were forced to explain regularly why money should be borrowed from those not yet born they might feel less inclined to give it away, regardless of the purpose.
Bemoaning a mere $12 billion subsidy, while others received far more does little to endear one to the subsidy process. Based on percentage of energy generated, the wind team is receiving $2.16, as opposed to $1 by the fossil fuel crowd.
If the insecurity of the federal support is traumatizing this special interest group, perhaps they might consider weaning themselves away from the federal trough.
JEFFREY BYRNETT
Elon
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 Funding |
 (via Stripe) |
 (via Paypal) |
Share:
[ Short URL: https://wind-watch.org/news/?p=61012 ]
