On Jul 19, 7:02*pm, Frank wrote:
On 7/19/2011 6:12 PM, HeyBub wrote:





Warning: It's not pretty. Summary of a report based on power usage by about
1/3rd of the nation's consumers (110 million) over three years.

"For years, it's been an article of faith among advocates of renewables that
increased use of wind energy can provide a cost-effective method of reducing
carbon dioxide emissions. The reality: wind energy's carbon dioxide-cutting
benefits are vastly overstated. Furthermore, if wind energy does help reduce
carbon emissions, those reductions are too expensive to be used on any kind
of scale. "

And in conclusion:

"The wind energy business is the electric sector's equivalent of the corn
ethanol scam: it's an over-subsidized industry that depends wholly on
taxpayer dollars to remain solvent while providing an inferior product to
consumers that does little, if anything, to reduce our need for hydrocarbons
or cut carbon dioxide emissions. The latest Bentek study should be required
reading for policymakers. It's a much-needed reminder of how the pesky facts
about wind energy have been obscured by the tsunami of hype about green
energy."

http://www.forbes.com/2011/07/19/win...-carbon_2.html

The report overlooks the fact that wind energy is for the children.

Nice, clean windmill sound nice but energy consumed in building them and
the need for back-up diesel generators are not considered.
They may or may not be putting them offshore here in Delaware and you
can imagine the compounding cost of installation and effect of salt
water on them, *They don't use above ground transmission lines either
and cables have to be run under the sea surface.

http://www.delmarvanow.com/article/2...ESS/107170308- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

All power plants have maintenance costs.