Many of you may already be aware that that the founders of Windaction.org have launched the Wildlife, Energy & Community Coalition (WECC).
Columnist Chris Tomlinson’s recent attack on Rep. Dan Crewshaw (R-TX) for repeating “tired talking points” about the silliness of wind and solar was itself filled with unsubstantiated and misleading declarations beginning with Tomlinson’s claim that wind and solar employ 143,000 Texans.
1. What is the wind production tax credit (PTC)?
Correcting the lies, yes LIES, proffered by big wind has worn down a generation of people working to raise awareness about turbine impacts, but Americans are tough, principled, and above all, abhor deceitfulness in any form. An extensive, well-connected network of those fighting wind has grown exponentially in the last two decades as the public learned more. ...People oppose their communities becoming the dumping ground for wind projects made up of grotesque flashing, loud-whooshing, bird-bat busting icons revered by green new deal followers.
As the White House and Congress negotiate a massive Covid-19 stimulus, the wind and solar industries are pushing for more PTC/ITC extensions. They are shameful and our political class can't be trusted. This letter to Congressional leaders emphasizes why the subsidies should expire as promised in 2015.
In another month, the wind PTC will finally expire after twenty-seven years. Taxpayers will still be on the hook for billions more in PTCs through the next decade but the burden should not increase. In that time, the wind industry has grown significantly reaching over 100,000 MW and now mainstreamed into the US electricity market. Big Wind is no longer a nascent industry, but one that must stand on its own, whether it's ready or not.
It’s now time for Anheuser-Busch to shed its superficial ‘green’ veneer and take corrective action to reverse the harms its wind purchases have caused. This includes publicly abandoning the ‘100% renewable energy’ goal which, if continued, is certain to bring more, and greater international destruction.
The wind industry is heavily invested in a propaganda campaign aimed at convincing the public that wind turbine noise is safe at any distance. ...but the damage from turbines can no longer be ignored. There are enough turbines operating worldwide, and enough people impacted, for the public to recognize turbine noise is intrusive and potentially harmful to neighbors.
The US Treasury estimates the PTC will cost taxpayers $40.12 billion in the period from 2018–2027, making it, by far, the most expensive energy subsidy under current tax law. ...After billions in public hand-outs, the wind industry has never been able to stand on its own and there’s no reason to believe this will change. Tax credits are now a required component of the industry’s economics. The outcome of an expired PTC is evident: wind installations will crawl to a near stop.
There’s no question, Georgetown is paying dearly for its surplus energy. With annual demand growing at roughly 3% per year, it could be 15+ years before the City’s consumption begins to match its contracted supply.
The Senate bill should serve as the PTC/ITC blueprint for the final bill. Any changes recommended by the conference committee should be addressed swiftly and fall within the envelope of the Senate bill. This is an important step, but only first step, toward a level-playing-field between electrical energies that will, longer term, improve grid reliability coast-to-coast, border-to-border.
The IRS flouted Congressional intent …and knowingly transformed the PTC phase-out into a 5-year PTC extension. Without reform, the PTC tax will grow to an additional $32+ billion in the next decade, not including the credits awarded projects already operating.
Big wind’s complaint that the language reneges on a previous deal is entirely unfounded. The so-called ‘deal’ AWEA is trying to preserve … was a backroom negotiation between industry and Obama-era IRS lawyers to craft guidance that went well beyond the statute. Congress is finally taking corrective action. ...[T]he GOP tax bill is headed in the right direction on wind energy development. But if the goal was to simplify tax legislation, the GOP should go further and repeal the PTC altogether.”
Market conditions back in 1992 no longer exist. Big wind no longer needs the Production Tax Credit, and certainly cannot justify the extraordinary benefits received [3.5¢/kWh pre-tax]. Retaining the subsidy in light of lower installation costs and increased production serves only to further distort the market and bestow a bounty on big wind that far exceeds what 1992 lawmakers could ever have envisioned.
Local resistance to wind power development is intensifying worldwide and project developers are feeling the heat of angry communities saying ‘no’ to their spinning towers. As policy wonks try to understand the opposition, the wind industry is quick to tout public gaiety in Denmark over operating projects. But like every claim involving the wind industry, there's a darker story.
RGGI proponents want us to believe that the program is delivering on a global environmental promise, but the reality is the nine-state cap and trade system is a colossal failure of resource allocation that should be repealed to leave more efficient market forces.
As California considers a 100% renewable-energy mandate, the state’s legislators should be asking what happens to California’s energy profile when the sun doesn’t shine and the winds don’t blow.
“The 30-year eagle take regulations are another example of the Obama White House rushing poorly considered policy that will have significant impact. Given the history of collaboration between Big Wind and FWS officials, the motives behind this push should be questioned by Congress and the public.”
...few realize that in the U.S. alone at least ten people have lost their lives in fatal aviation accidents involving collisions with U.S. sited wind turbines and meteorological (MET) towers.
This essay, the fourth in a series aimed at correcting the most harmful wind energy-related policies of the Obama era, examines how the U.S. Department of Energy has set aside its scientific objectivity and has assumed the role of chief advocate for wind power in the federal government. Prior essays can be found here, here and here.