A few weeks ago I wrote about Public Act 295, called the “Clean, Renewable, and Efficient Energy Act.” This deceptively named law requires all Michigan utilities to produce 10% of their energy from renewable energy sources by 2015. Of course, the “renewable energy” they’re talking about is the kind we don’t have. Its water, biomass, and wind. It specifically excludes coal, nuclear and oil, three things we can buy or build that generate lots of cheap electricity. The kind of reliable, cheap power that people look for when they’re going to build a plant that employs people.

Wind power kicks in 0.05 percent of the state's power. In spite of this marginal contribution, there remains a widespread misconception that giant wind turbines, situated in the right locations, are a viable alternative. Unfortunately, big wind farms have prohibitive costs for infrastructure and construction and are inefficient. ...Huge, rotating 80-foot blades catch the wind and are connected by a mammoth driveshaft to convert mechanical power into electrical energy. This is like having a diesel locomotive balanced on a 200-foot pole.

For some reason she clings to her dream of Michigan leading a huge, well paying, windmill and solar panel industry. After decades of development the entire US wind generation industry employs less then 6500 people. Solar employs less than 2000. Over 750,000 jobs have disappeared from Michigan since Jennifer became Governor. If the entire renewable energy industry doubled in size and located everything in Michigan we're talking about a drop in the bucket when it comes to job creation.

"We are on the cusp of a global boom that will make the Internet explosion seem like a mild speed bump." This comment is guest columnist Peter Sinclair's. And no he is not referring to China, which is building one energy plant per week while eating our lunch. Sinclair is talking about how Michigan's energy needs and economy will be saved ... by the windmill. However, no energy policy, if implemented, is more expensive, unreliable and (ironically) environmentally unfriendly.

We applaud any effort to offer incentives to increase the use of renewable and alternative energy sources to power Michigan. But we hope the 25-percent goal can be reached by offering incentives, not by issuing mandates. The cheapest source of energy in the United States is coal. For the time being, at least, renewable sources of energy are a more expensive alternative. It would not bode well for economic development in Michigan if the state had astronomical energy costs.

From Barton, Vermont, to the German border with Denmark and from the shores of Lake Huron, to the Romney Marches of southern England, wind power advocates are fighting crosswinds from local residents. In Barton in mid-January, a referendum overwhelmingly rejected the wind power turbines that were planned near this upper Vermont community. ...In Germany, where one-third of the world's current wind power is generated, doubters have provoked a loud debate. The company that owns the grid that includes nearly half the wind-farms in Germany reported its wind farms generated only 11 percent of their capacity. The company said the winds vary so much the wind farm had to be backed 80 percent by the conventional power grid.

The debate state residents and lawmakers should be having about how best to harness our untapped wealth of wind power has been reduced to an emotion-packed battle between local control and state mandates.

But there will be much debate over how much emphasis should be placed on renewable energy. For example, if, as PIRGIM insists, wind-turbine production has the potential to provide "over 10,000 new jobs" in Michigan, there are ancillary questions: Are wind turbines to become as commonplace -- or more so -- than cellular towers? What are the implications of that?