[ exact phrase in "" • ~10 sec • results by date ]

[ Google-powered • results by relevance ]



Go to multi-category search »

LOCATION/TYPE

News Home
Archive
RSS

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

Alerts

Press Releases

FAQs

Publications & Products

Photos & Graphics

Videos

Allied Groups

Power switch?  

Credit:  Eric Rosenbloom ~~

Regarding “Power Switch,” in the Fall 2018 Voice:

What is actually being “switched”? The article describes efforts to replace one extractive energy source with another, one that in many ways is measurably worse – not just for our pocketbooks, as the article made clear, but especially for the planet as a whole.

The article describes wind and solar energy as commercially viable yet outlines some of the challenges facing its actual use that in fact make it commercially unviable, particularly integration into the grid, which requires extensive overbuilding, gigantic-scale battery backup, and thousands of miles of new high-capacity transmission lines and connectors.

That is due to the intermittency and variability of wind and solar, as well as their utter lack of correlation with actual customer demand. The attempts to resolve that problem begin to look like a Rube Goldberg contraption, and as such they also make our use of “conventional” sources less efficient and more harmful.

In addition, wind and solar are very diffuse resources, requiring ever larger installations to collect any meaningful amount, and therefore ever more raw materials – many of them toxic – for their manufacture and maintenance, not to mention the inevitably appalling land use burden.

A recent study out of Harvard (Miller & Keith, Environmental Research Letters 2018;13:104008) determined that if the U.S. wanted to meet its current electricity consumption from wind, it would require 12 percent of its continental land area. The land required is currently open or wild, often forested, and such development would obviously have substantial adverse consequences for animal and plant life as well as air and water quality. In addition to current consumption, the “power switch” is calling for even more by moving heating and transport to electricity.

It is indeed a challenge, but the solutions described will simply replace (or rather, only add to) one set of environmental and economic issues with a likely worse set. Until a real alternative is found – one that is more efficient, not less – we need to talk about conservation, as well as other ways of reducing greenhouse gases, such as eating less meat.

Eric Rosenbloom ’82
March 14, 2019

Source:  Eric Rosenbloom

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 to query/wind-watch.org.

Wind Watch relies entirely
on User Funding
Donate $5 PayPal Donate

Share:


News Watch Home

Get the Facts Follow Wind Watch on Twitter

Wind Watch on Facebook

Share

CONTACT DONATE PRIVACY ABOUT SEARCH
© National Wind Watch, Inc.
Use of copyrighted material adheres to Fair Use.
"Wind Watch" is a registered trademark.
Share

 Follow: