So you take a technology (commercial wind power generation) that generates electricity intermittently/inefficiently, and cannot be stored for use when needed. Next you force consumers to buy it (with the assistance of their tax dollars). Because there is still not enough money there to make it economically viable, due to added grid integration costs, you raise consumer power rates. AND then, after creating this mandated over-priced market for your product, you inform everyone of the need to spend billions of dollars more to transport the product to the consumers. Yeah, I would buy some lobbyists too. The final insult... ...is that the product being force-fed to everyone will not reduce green house gas emissions or reduce dependence on foreign oil. In fact, in some places this has been tried, it has increased it.

The U.S. Department of Energy's declaration last week of high-priority "energy corridors" in the Southwest and mid-Atlantic regions, coupled with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's approval of a new California policy on transmission financing, removed two potential stumbling blocks to the construction of new high-capacity power lines.

While expanding the nation's power supply and transmission grid remains complex endeavor, in a nutshell the two decisions make it easier to connect wind generators in remote areas to consumers in the big city.

The unique arrangement is seen by wind proponents as benefiting both the development of remote wind farms and satisfying growing requirements that utilities obtain a specific percentage of their power from renewable sources.

So, let me see if I have this right...

Wind power lobbyists "assist" the passage of federal and state laws that:

* Lower wind developers' federal tax requirements (IRS tax clause: 5-year double declining balance accelerated depreciation - 50% recovered in the first two years or less).

* Pay them extra for producing power (also from federal taxpayer money the Production Tax Credit).

* Exempt them from state sales and use taxes (Washington State - exemptions on all turbines, supporting equipment, and labor/services when a wind farm is built).

* Remove local authority in permitting their facilities (Washington State - 2001 EFSEC rule change).

* Mandate the use of their product and eliminate the most viable competition (I-937 in Washington State mandating 15% renewable power from utilities, but not allowing hydro-electric to count).

Summary?

So you take a technology (commercial wind power generation) that generates electricity intermittently/inefficiently, and cannot be stored for use when needed. Next you force consumers to buy it (with the assistance of their tax dollars). Because there is still not enough money there to make it economically viable, due to added grid integration costs, you raise consumer power rates. AND then, after creating this mandated over-priced market for your product, you inform everyone of the need to spend billions of dollars more to transport the product to the consumers. Yeah, I would buy some lobbyists too.

The final insult...

...is that the product being force-fed to everyone will not reduce green house gas emissions or reduce dependence on foreign oil. In fact, in some places this has been tried, it has increased it.

 

Web link: http://hedleyrobertson.com/?p=62