Crusading for Wind Off Cape Cod

While I have generally been opposed to large scale wind-power, my objection has been simply because the amount of power available from such installations does not seem to balance to costs involved. However, when people start to object to something like this on esthetic, environmental or other grounds, I tend to take notice. This sounds like the same sort of thing that all but crippled nuclear power in this country for decades.

The problem here is that, in my observation, those who march with signs all to often have only the vaguest idea of what it is that they are actually protesting. What is really interesting to me though is, who is paying for the propaganda to stir up the masses and the lawyers filing the lawsuits?

Native American tribes, supported by the Massachusetts historic preservation office, have filed suit to stop the project.

From CNET:

Two tribes of the Wampanoags, who are descendants of the people who greeted the 17th century Pilgrims to Massachusetts, say they have long opposed Cape Wind because an unobstructed view of the ocean is vital to their culture, which calls for them to greet sunrise each day.

More info here about the project itself.

The question remains. Who's paying the lawyers?

At first glance, I would say this alliance, along with the Native groups mentioned. I'm not sure that opposition runs any deeper than local interests and monied landowners. Unless you're implying something else that has a bearing on the decision?

A wise man once said, follow the money. In fact, I can think of at least a few classes of people that might have a vested interest in seeing such a project fail. Some of which might be rather wealthy enough to pay for attorneys and for whatever it might take to stir up other troubles. And, it's hardly the first time such a thing has happened, if this is in fact what it is.

My point here is that I would very much like to know who is paying the fees for the attorneys that are filing the injunctions. I'd also like to know who's been talking to the tribes. And please believe that I am perfectly willing to admit the fact if I am proven wrong.

I do understand that there are those who would pay to have the wind taken out of this project's sails _(sorry), or any like it. A preliminary search doesn't reveal much, but if I find more I'll pass it on.

As it stands, I think the project has a fair chance of receiving its federal permit in April. But you never know.

Well that would be big oil. So much negative propaganda is spread that it becomes impossible to know what to believe and how valid the "facts" really are. Many oceanfront towns are installing turbines. Locals who live right below them do note some low frequency noise. They also kill the occasional seagull, but those are the only two real issues I've heard of.

So are they also suing the Medical Industry because syringes wash up on the beach? The Fishing Industry for catching all the fish, Chemical companies for poluting the waters and air? I want to sue my parents for not sending me to college. Has anyone tried explaining global warming to these Natives? Sorry, just want to understand this and I don't.

The coal industry, that's who. The alliance to protect Cape Cod is headed by a former coal executive

Sir, Dr Moose;

Your query as to backers for "grassroots" oppositions with obvious bucks is what we have noted to the supposed anti American and anti-Israeli protests in the Palestine, Iran, and even broke Afghanistan riots and marches with poster and billboard sized signs, often with Kodak quality photographs on them, and mostly all written in English, but held by people in rags who probably can't hardly read or write their own national language, never mind be able to write that English hating sign. In thseose "refugee camps" in Palestine, destroyed neighborhoods, living like rats in a maze, but if a child is killed, a lifesized poster photo is distributed in hopes of making the news.

With power generation needs outgrown current municipally accepted industries, we can expect the signs and marchers to come out against whatever is proposed that's different and we know who will be paying for those organized oppositions that see their record profits coming to a time of depletion, if the communities are committed to financial survival of individual households and the schools, govt bldgs, commerce. Everyone needs for some of these monthly bills to get off their backs, and poor suggestions are bound to be proposed which will obviously benefit the producers of those industries, but we must stick to benefitting the people of the community in all changes to power usage. For the Cape, with all that water powering past the shores every 6 hrs, hydro should have been the logical conclusion to benefit the people of shore communities, with water all around, use water. But I don't have any figures to flesh out the actual available power production per acre.

The noise wind turbines make is a low frequency "thud" that drives some people nuts. Many a noise pollution battle has been generated over this.

Putting them out to sea may minimize the noise pollution some and may also minimize the risk of personal injury that could occur when one of those monsters fail, which does happen.

Cape Codders who are fighting this on aesthetic grounds are on a weak footing IMO, but I wouldn't worry if I were them.

The first time a strong Northeaster blows through the area, the horizon will be clear of wind turbines and the beaches will be littered with composite debris.

L.J.

Hi Moose!

Hello L.J.

I confess that I've not researched this carefully. I was aware that in a high wind and if not feathered, these things can tear themselves apart. However, I was unaware of a high rate of catastrophic failure. Could you elaborate?

Actually it is the southwest wind that we worry about in Nantucket Sound.

This area is protected from the northeast by the mainland. The northeast storms are a problem in Massachusetts Bay, not Nantucket Sound.

Ted Kennedy thought they would interfere with his sailing, and should be put closer to the unwashed masses. Now that he has attained the status of 'Good Kennedy' it should go forward.

Ted's dead--Should give the project more impetus... I thought I had read about a huge Windfarm project going into the upper Midwest, over 100 sq. miles, with Govt' funding and GE, Siemans and other large conglomerates participating--The problems mentioned were "line loss and grid infrastructure " Wish I could remember where I saw the article.--I drive through Altamont Pass frequently, ( behind the San Francisco Bay/ Oakland area). When it blows , everything is great---But oftimes, those huge turbines are just sitting motionless. I wonder how they factor the input of these turbines into the "Always on, constant need", Grid?--Not an Electrical engineer.--Would love to learn more.. C-MAC

Have family history on the Cape. There are 10 years of arguments on this subject, including economics as well as asthetics. These are not, "Offshore," as the Texas Towers were, but between the southern shore of The Cape and Nantucket and Marthas Vinyard. A very busy waterway and source of much economic content.

They will be visible in part from the most popular summer swimming beaches.

I live in California now and cringe everytime I take Route 1 along the Southern California coast and am forced to view the remaining Oil Platforms close to short.

Progress ?

Unfortunately, Senior Senator John Kerry who is also very much opposed to the project is still alive.

His family owns Nashon Island near the proposed wind turbine project.

You may have just answered why there is a Cape Wind project at that site, since there is no more fun in politics than to come up with, and promote something to be a really big thorn in somebody's side, when somebody puts out a lot of bills. It is the very essence of the political game to have something out there that your opponent, or somebody you want to control, doesn't want to see come about, then you have something they want, or at least, they want to get rid of and will have to trade bills with you for it. Since the project must have had to pay big bucks for a site study along with all the other consulting fees paid out to cronies, then it could not have been a fluke to have been sited around Nashon, since that site would have had the attention of both Ted and John. A few yrs back, when I could walk, I had the honor to represent the interests of several bowhunting groups and the sportsmen's group at a state legislature, and learned a lot about how our gov't works. Unfortunately for this world, it isn't too different anywhere else, at any other time, only the lingo and threads change; people are still motivated for the same things. The game players care little for what the bills they are playing will do to or for this country, they only care what if they can get the votes, and how they can get the votes for it, if it has a big enough payoff to their bosses or some other contributor.

This is why it is so important to get our heads out of the sand on this energy crisis and go for what's right, and make sure that it gets gotten for in the right way, not the usual way, not us paying some chinaman's or indonesian's paycheck out of our nation's unemployment. There is no one best thing we should stick the whole country with, for new power plants; because every area has some good best way to go, such as plenty of rivers (not needing any damming or damning) for the micro hydro generators that can be easily built from American-poured and tapped parts and American assembled turbines/generators and power control electronics & distribution lines, or perhaps there is someplace best suited for a few smaller wind turbines, but certainly, every rooftop of every structure can be outfitted or retrofitted with the solar collection roofing "tiles", and if nothing else, then all these measures will certainly go to cutting back on the number of nuclear power plants needed now, and remember that the electric vehicles coming will be also taking away from the gas station and tapping into the home outlet or commercial outlets. Batteries can be manufactured here also. I don't see any reason for nuclear power to be trying to kick away any other type of power industry when these uses don't always overlap, and no one can really think that every county in every state can hold a power plant or two.

To be realistic, in light of what our political games are that hold our energy future in it's greasy grips, folks who do want what's right for America and American jobs need to be glad for the company of each other, even if we know our answer is the right one, we all do know which are the wrong ones, and they start with the same people who talk about the myth of 'foreign oil", clean coal as if it was more than a theory, and American economy stimulus money going to a Chinese company to provide their solar collector materials for us to put together and install to save us some money on foreign oil. I was 25 when I first heard about solar electric, and here we are 37 yrs later getting ripped off for 16 mpg vehicles right off the lot brand new.

It would seem that there has to be some other configuration of wind turbines that can make electric energy, without being 500 feet tall and rattling teeth miles away or annoying the yachters at martini times? How is it that the farmers put up a small windmill to power their well pump and run lights or some machinery, and such a thing wouldn't at least give some power to some appliances or lights in a residence or small business?

I just finished a steam generator replacement at a nuke plant here at home and one of the things that I heard from a few people was that if the wind turbines were put up in Texas and in that area, the cost of building up a grid for them would be comprable to building 3 brand new nukes (which are already attached to the grid). I realize that wind energy is a good idea but this and photovoltaic just would not put out enough energy in comparison to gas/coal/nuclear/thermal generated electricity. A bit of help, yes. An answer, or replacement? No.

Cheers

Ferris

Thank you for a well written reply Mr. cwarner 7 11. It seems that most of the starry eyed environmentalists miss the fact that you still have to have units on spinning reserve to ramp up for compensation when the whirligigs quit turning. Nuclear plants are the most efficient means, short of hydro, to produce reliable supplies of electricity. You just have to educate the "washed masses".

Cape wind will be connected to the same grid that supplies the entire east coast. So the 70 percent figure is a estimate based on the predicted power produced compared to demand on cape cod. At any given time it will be a very small part of a pool that supplies a very large region.

Cape wind is required to put in escrow the funds to decommission the towers at the end of the life cycle. A test tower has been collecting data for a few years. The towers will be equipped to handle storms.

The opposition has been very fast and loose with the facts. The concept of these 'environmentalists' shilling for big coal is kind of bizarre.It is also strange that the Indian tribes have teamed up with rich, vacation home owning, white people.

It is funny that the same people who don't want to look at the wind mills are fine with the air pollution and the single hulled barges filled with crude oil navigating in the same waters.

The other thing people seem to miss is that the area in question, horseshoe shoals, is to shallow to navigate. So no one sails there now.

It baffles me why they install wind towers offshore. I would assume there is much more potential energy located in the water currents than the air currents above the surface. There still will be the navigation problem, but at least the eyesore is gone.

It sure would be nice if the environ types would back off and not get in the way of a few nukes getting built here in California. The new types are supposed to go together a whole hell of a lot faster than the first generation. Something like 1/2 the time compared to those built in the 70's and 80's. But no, you have people like the mayor of San Fran saying that he wants to close down all of the power houses in his area in order to help the green movement. It sure would be good to see how fast the people in that area would last without any power generation going on for their consumption.

G/A going to you...

Cheers

Ferris

Show me a nuke plant that can buy insurance on the open market and I would be for it. The fact is they cannot and exist only when governments exempt them from liability.

I believe another major insurance carrier just pulled out of Florida.I don't think that would make the state uninhabitable. This is truly a poor arguement.

First of all houses in a flood zone are not a good idea. And if one power plant melts down the damages would be measured in the billions. It is a terrible idea to build nukes. We have a nice fusion plant a safe distance away. It's called the sun.

We waste more that half the power we produce through inefficiency. There is energy everywhere. We need to be more intelligent in the way we use power.

You seem to gloss over the terrorist threat. A nuclear power plant requires a standing army. Perfect record or not. Accidents happen. One of the basic elements of a civil society is that business assumes the liability that they incur. So far every every nuke operating is insured by a government. A policy on the open market would render the power un-competitive. Solar power is very reliable and predictable over a reasonable time window. We just need big grids and storage.

Sir, I say again, once the hype and hysteria are brushed aside, nuclear power is a superior option to coal or petroleum. You are free to disagree, but show us the numbers by which you do. Your objection on the basis of insurance is a purely artificial cost, again based upon hype and hysteria. Nuclear power plants are designed from the ground up to minimize radioactive releases and to insure than any such releases cannot go far in the first place.

As for the threat of terrorism, that is a constant danger no matter what you are doing, and the proper solution to terrorism is to take the fight to them and stomp the bastards back into the sand that they came from.

As for land-based solar, again, show us the numbers. What I know of solar energy is that it streams by at an average rate of 1.4KW/m² at Earth orbit, or 1AU. By the time it gets to the surface it is attenuated to 300W/m² at the equator, and considerably less most other places, and constantly interrupted by the day/night cycle and by clouds.

Furthermore, conversion efficiency ain't all that great. The very best photo-voltaic cells are around 20% efficient, and are very costly. Less expensive cells are little more than half as efficient. Solar thermal generation, using solar heat in the same manner as a conventional or nuclear plant, would be about the same efficiency as a conventional plant, but it might be difficult to set up a big enough mirror to collect enough sunlight to power a really big plant.

So, let us assume that we are getting an average solar flux at earth surface of 150w/m² at our plant. Let us assume that we are getting a 25% conversion efficiency, which means that each square meter is yielding us about about 38 watts. and let us further assume that our plant gets an average of ten hours of sunlight a day, year around. (These assumptions might be a little charitable.) This nets us 38 watt hours per square meter per day.

Your average house uses around 2 kilo-watt hours per day, which is 53m² under these assumptions, plus sufficient storage to cover the hours of dark and cloud.

Total US electrical power consumption is estimated to be on the near order of 19.2 tera-watt hours per day. To supply that, our hypothetical solar infrastructure would need more than half a million square kilometers of collector. Now figure that it terms of the price of your collection and storage devices plus the cost of the land!

Dr. Moose-

Some figures I have come up with for land use demand for various sources of power:

Biofuels- 200 hectares per MW

Wind Energy- 50 Hectares per MW

Solar Energy- 20 Hectares per MW

Hydro-electric- 5 hectares per MW

All the above are based on local conditions here in Panama. Hydro-electric is, of course, very sensitive to local geography, and may require significantly more.

I do not have relevant data for conventional nuclear plants, but I suspect it requires significantly less land than most other sources (including hydrocarbons and coal, when one considers fuel storage requirements). However, have a look at what Toshiba has on the drawing board (currently seeking licensing in Alaska) for a mini-nuke. 25 MW, if my memory serves me right. NO terrorist threat. NO meltdown threat. Major drawback- political resistance.

Good answer, but now convert that to mega-watt hours and figure in the amount of storage needed to balance the peak load. It's that peak load and the lack of storage that is killing us.

Storage is the Achilles heel of all these pie-in-the-sky "alternatives", and no one has even come close to demonstrating a viable solution (I happen to be working on one utilizing tide energy, but we are talking years before we have proof of concept!). Meanwhile, the only option is to keep conventional systems on standby (i.e., burning fuel) for when the wind stops blowing or the sun stops shining...

First off while terrorism is indeed alway a threat, putting a large container full of deadly poison near population centers is a much more tempting target. Solar power tends to be distributed and is constructed with non-lethal materiel so it does not require the robust defense a nuclear plant does.

Second your efficiency numbers are out of date. The good pv cells are approaching 40 % and in the south west, solar thermal power plants are producing power at competitive prices without subsidies using concentrating collectors to drive steam plants.

Also a large part of the power we use is wasted. Leed certified buildings and increases in appliance efficiency will help a lot.

But even taking your numbers at face value A piece of dessert a few kilometers across would do the trick.

So what we have is a storage and transmission issue.

Focusing on the safety issue for a second---one needn't always fear the terrorists when we can do it ourselves. Witness the explosion that killed 5 people at the combined cycle gas-fired plant under construction in Connecticut this past weekend. A gas leak! In a population center!

I'm all for solar and wind and geothermal, and nuclear, too. I'd just as soon see new nuclear construction as new gas-based construction.

A piece of dessert a few kilometers across would do the trick.

I'd pay to see a piece of pie that large.

Another factor not considered with large scale solar panels (I'm talking these theoretical umpteen thousand square kilometer projects) is that on this scale, the color change of the ground leads to significant increase in surface temperature, which changes the wind patterns and alters the local climate.

Basically the thermal island effect noticed in cities, only on a much larger scale.

I don't think this is environmentally desirable.

We are pumping thousands of tons of carbon into the air on a daily basis and you bring up the "thermal Island effect" Yes it might be a factor. My guess is that if you could measure it, it would be a few orders of magnitude less than the carbon it offsets. But I'm guessing there is a oil company that would pay you to raise the alarm. Fear, un-certainty, and doubt are the tools of the people who are invested in the current system. That is why nothing changes.

Nothing changes because the payback isn't worth the grief inflicted by the self appointed Guardians of the Social Good and the government's army of bureaucrats acting on behalf of the same.

A friend of mine built his own solar collector to make domestic hot water before the idea had gained any real recognition. Using the formulas available at the time, it was 108% efficient; which points out obvious problems with the formula. It was made from home made boxes covered with old windows and utilizing a profusion of old car radiators to act as the heat exchanger.

Needless to say, the town officials took a dim view of my friend's green efforts, and the project was eventually decommissioned.

Rooftop solar hot water heaters are a really great idea, and, although I generally am not supportive of solar energy as a primary source of electrical energy, I am a strong supporter of rooftop solar water heaters- to the point of recommending, sourcing and installing them as a part of my consulting business. The main issue is that most commercially available units are about 5 times the cost of a conventional hot water heater, and most of my clients are not "do-it-yourselfers".

How do you measure "efficiency" of such an installation? Efficacy would be a better measure, I believe. Do you still have hot water when you have had very little sun for three days? If so, you have a good system. (This is important for a couple of clients of mine who happen to be running resort hotels. They are generating their own electricity, and the actual savings in fuel consumption are difficult to quantify, but estimates suggest we are looking at more than 10 years payback for the difference between the cost of the solar heaters vs. conventional heaters. It will probably be less, because the cost of diesel keeps going up. A significant benefit to these hotels is that these big solar collectors on the roofs add to their "Green" credibility...). One of these hotels is using direct solar energy to partially keep their water storage tanks topped up, but would not be able to rely on this completely for their water system. We also see a lot of windmills pumping water in remote location to keep stock tanks topped off.

These sorts of applications actually make sense. General electrical power generation? Most "Green" solutions are actually more disruptive of the environment than current approaches (especially nuclear), and without a viable storage strategy, they are a waste of scarce resources, because they do not replace the need for conventional generating facilities...

Have you ever actually seen one of these mega-solar installations? In Southern California, between San Bernadino and China Lake somewhere, is an older solar farm that I have visited- not photovoltaic, and not a thermal tower, but a large field of articulated reflectors, probably heating water.

Nothing grows under these reflectors. No plant life means no animal life (and, of course, no carbon sequestration, but we don't need to go there). No plant life means no absorption of solar radiation, which means higher temperatures. Deserts, especially in the United States, are not dead zones.

If you want to put your solar farms in other areas, the environmental impact is the same- nothing grows under them. You are removing land from the natural environment- about 20 hectares for 1 MW of energy, if you have a good sunny site.
You are not REPLACING any other method of producing energy, only reducing your fuel consumption, because you still need the backup when the sun ain't shining. For wind, you generally need 50 hectares of land for 1MW. It makes sense that wind requires more land than solar, because wind is one conversion step away from direct solar- winds are produced as a result of thermal gradients which are caused by uneven heating from the sun. So, wind is naturally going to be less efficient than direct solar...

thanks for the image of the solar maga-installation being "unfriendly" to earth, but there would appear to be plently of small scale, residential, commercial and municipal uses for solar collection and distribution. My vision is that every roof surface would be a solar collection unit, including vehicles. Roofing collection material is already being done commercially, and flexible collection material available that would allow shaping to vehicle surfaces. If a backpack can collect power for radio and cellphone batteries, why should I be paying the electric company for lamps and other low-draw electric usage inhome or at the shop? Every school that is cutting out music, arts, sports and even toilet paper and educational materials, because of insufficient budget, should all be looking at investing in overhead-cost cutters like these to be able to plan on a less expensive school budget in a few years time when the collection materials were paid off in reduced electricity costs to the county or school district.

Now, if we were actually writing out paychecks to Americans who made the materials and built the parts that these solar or hydropower units consist of, then we'd really be doing something good for America all around. One of the best thing I can say for nuclear plants is that it is Americans being paid to build them, for the most part.

Yesterday the news exposed the idiocy built into so much of our bureaucracy, when one of the stimulus programs, selling solar systems, was found to be importing Chinese solar collection cell material, and it was only last year that a statistic showed a 20% increase in American based solar manufacturing businesses. Before we even think about how we can fix our energy needs in North America, perhaps we better find a way to fix what's broken in the decision making sector first, since we can come up with all the fixes we want, but some Washington guy with someone in his pocket is liable to just sign away all the benefits to some hongkong, Indonesian, or other foreign beneficiary while we go without grocery and bill money here. It is so important to me that America be smart again, and put Americans first, even if it takes some kind of radical stand against the status quo that has had no problem seeing Americans be the world bankers' cash cows and blaming us for 45% unemployment in some pop. sectors, elderly going hungry and without medical care in the world's best medical system, if you believe G.W.

We have the perfect opportunity in this need for change in our energy industry, since everyone has something at stake, something to gain, but way too much to lose to let any govt, economy, pet dogs, energy biggie, nor the halfA .. to get in front of us and take our say away from US in this. There is the time when concensus and committee is the only way to get in all the ideas/plans and get the best ones picked and implemented, and this is it.

But I'm guessing there is a oil company that would pay you to raise the alarm.

People are always making this claim but where's the money? It's always someone else "they" pay, certainly not me. I have never been paid by them, nor would I ask to be as it would hinder me from being honest. Most of the people making this claim are paid to promote the opposite view, but they never seem to be accused of allowing that to bias their views, no matter how much they have fudged the figures or distorted the truth (eg "climate-gate")

In fact, I believe most of this claim is a red herring to avoid examining the issue on it's merits.

When you look closely, a lot of the global warming is simply an artifact of the heat island effect. Almost all measuring stations have been affected as urbanization creeps out towards, and over, the measuring stations.

There has been a real increase in global temps, but not as large as claimed. (We are still well below the average temperatures of the medieval warm period - a period of significant prosperity.) Because of the length of their records, heat island affected stations are usually the ones used as "base stations" to obtain the trends so sometimes they "adjust" the figures to compensate, (in other words apply a fudge factor), and then claim the result is accurate and realistic. However, the "fudge factor" used is based on assumptions as to what it should be doing, so of course the results are automatically skewed in that direction.

With uncertainties of several degrees from each station, we are then told, in all seriousness, of rises of 0.2C. Not mentioned is+- 2 or 3 C uncertainty.

Fear, un-certainty, and doubt are the tools of the people who are invested in the current system. That is why nothing changes.

This is a strangely cockeyed statement. The major tool of the anthropogenic global warming fraternity has always been "fear, doubt and uncertainty" as to where we are going, therefore the prudent course is to rush headlong into action to eliminate the "uncertainty" and "doubt" leaving only the "fear" to ensure those lovely research grants keep coming.

Any one who dares to point this out is immediately pilloried with the smear that they are somehow being "paid by vested interests", when it is vested interests who are paying the alarmists!

Why would big oil want to put any spoke in the wheel of solar and other alternative energy systems? They are some of the biggest investors in the area and are making heaps out of it.

They actually have a vested interest in encouraging solar and wind energy while discouraging nuclear and hydro, which is exactly what we see happening.

End of rant

The coal industry is opposing Cape Wind. They put all these bogus arguments about how expensive the power is. The reality is that the power will be sold on the spot auction and the price will be determined by fuel prices, just like now. They have complained that because of the grid, that the power will go the the rest of the country. Sort of a ridiculous argument but one that gets traction with the un-informed. They are even complaining about the couple thousand gallons of mineral oil for the backup power even while all the single hulled barges filled with millions of gallons crude navigate through the canal daily.

Back in the 70's Exxon built an all solar house, off the grid. It was several million dollars. It "proved" that solar was too expensive. (and soaked up federal grants that could have been used for useful research).

If you buy into the "Global warming is a myth argument", you are not paying attention. Dig into "climate gate" you will find some very artful PR but no smoking gun. The fact is that there is indeed clear consensus that co2 is heating the atmosphere. It is also clear that the oil industry has a strong economic interest in keeping the price of oil high. If you follow the money you will see the millions Exxon spends on "astro turfing".

We have fought two wars in the middle east for the right drive around in SUV's. The rest of the civilized world consumes much less power then we do while maintaining a much higher standard of living (longer life expectancy, lower infant mortality, more vacation time, better food). Mean while we here in America are fighting for the right to keep wasting power in the name of freedom. Europe is moving ahead with all kinds of energy projects while we litigate endlessly over one little wind project because someone might "GASP!!" have to look at a wind tower. Pathetic..

This 40%+ has been achieved with special multi layer cells in research labs.

Real efficiencies are no better than about 25%. Not bad when the theoretical maximum for a single layer cell used to be quoted as 22%.

Solar thermal could achieve quite high figures as the potential boiler temps are very high. One problem not often mentioned is that when the sky clouds over (which it does, even in the desert) the concentrators are unable to concentrate and the plant ceases working.

To allow for this, there must be stand by power of the same capacity.

This is also needed at night because we have not yet managed to get a concentrating solar thermal plant (or normal solar cells) to work at night.

The question of terrorist risk to a nuclear plant I have dealt with in a previous post here.

Actually in Spain they have a plant that has a great deal of mass in a big tower that produces a thermal up draft when the sun shines on it. The mass of the tower is great enough so that the power flows night and day.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_updraft_tower

Also it is important to remember that the cost of energy drives efficiency. So higher prices will produce a drop in demand as people invest in more efficient technology. And contrary to the hype that comes from the oil industry. It does not mean a drop in the standard of living. Quite the contrary. Efficiency is a very good investment. More efficient technology is usually much cheaper over it's life-cycle.

How does artificially driving up prices via bureaucratic schemes such as carbon trading improve our standard of living? (Increases employment - all those extra bureaucrats need to be employed, at our expense. Also Europe have found nearly all of it has been scammed with no benefit to any one, except the criminals.)

Efficiency gains don't come from higher prices as such. They are driven by a desire to make more profit.

As older plant is phased out, overall efficiency improves.

Look at the efficiency of coal fired power stations.

While energy prices were low and coal prices low, the efficiency increased significantly to enable a profit to be made out of low priced power.

If power prices rise, you make a profit anyway, so why bother increasing efficiency?

Historically, the trend has always been that when the producers are squeezed by low prices, they work hard on improving efficiency. When prices are high, they don't have the same pressure.

I agree---I don't have the real stats, but, how long have we had a Nuclear Navy, and what is the track record? Now, these enlisted men, who run and service these ships, are not nuclear scientists, they are enlisted men, with officers who have more experience. The service record is still exemplary. My 2$--C-Mac

Hey Mac. Actually, it's usually the enlisted men who have more experience, and usually a great deal more common sense than their officers. I retired as a second class Petty Officer, about equivalent to a Sargent. Junior officers used to cringe when they would hear my quiet voice behind them saying "Sir, I am required to advise you..." There is a certain amount of humor there, in that I lost track years ago of all of the publications, instructions and and procedural guides that I wrote. I am reminded of a quote from Star Trek. "Don't quote me the book, I wrote the bloody thing!" Capt. Montgomery Scott.

As my grandfather told me almost half a century ago, there are two kinds of engineers, be they military or civilian. There are those who sit at desks in clean, air conditioned offices, and never understand why their designs don't work. And then there are the kind who roll their sleeves up and get their hands dirty. I am proud to say that I, like my grandfather before me, am the second kind.

Chernobyl. Three mile island. All the "incidents" that were never reported because regulators had to save face for the nuclear community. Sure it works, and it's got a pretty good track record. But why not harness the "limitless" energy from our Sun? FOREVER. I believe anything more than a thousand years is pretty much forever, but what about the people living 1100 years from now?

Tell me how you plan to store it until it is needed, and you will have me on board...

Do your homework. The main problems with solar have been pointed out in this forum repeatedly. The only truly good way to harness solar energy is to place the solar power stations in geosynchronous orbit and beam the power back down, though this is not without problems either. If this were ever seriously proposed, I would be absolutely in support of it, as would every serious thinker within this community.

As for the "incidents" you speak of, I suggest you start by citing places and dates. Without hard data, I would have to call that accusation meaningless. Two accidents in 50 years (Three Mile Island and Chernobyl) is a pretty impressive safety record, and as I recall, Three Mile Island wasn't all that serious.

I say again. Do your homework before you post here.

I might point out also that, any time a worker at a nuclear power plant so much as slices open a finger or scrapes a knuckle, it has to be treated as a radiological incident for the same reason that these workers are required to wear film badges, because they work in a radiological environment. Never the less, a scraped knuckle hardly qualifies as a nuclear accident, or even an incident.

thanks, sceptic, for fleshing out the realities, for people like me who were fed a steady, subliminal diet of nuclear panic even while nations were planning and building nuclear-powered electrification plants all over, which they forgot to mention. The difference between nuclear bombs and nuclear power (with it's waste products) never really is made clear, never separated.

One reason for that lack of separation is that not everyone is satisfied with traditional things that go "boom", they seek out the biggest, baddest "boom" they can find and seem to have all the money in the world to go at their destruction causes.

We live in a world of fiends and fools and some just ignorant folk who cannot imagine the repercussions of deeds and materials produced and set loose into the world. Most people think anything that's for sale in a store must be safe and beneficial. Most people believed that all of a sudden, eggs and dairy butter was gonna kill us, even though these foods have been eaten obviously since before recorded time, as earliest records include them. Cholesterol medicines sales required the hype about "good and bad" cholesterol, even though our Creator put all those cholesterols into our bodies with purposes and interrelationships.

Just one example of all the stuff we are clever enough to manipulate in our environment, but not Godly enough to control everyone's use of.

Your clear description of the professional processes for containment, security and longterm storage/waste of nuclear plants is what would be possible if only you and I and other conscientious folk were around these materials. We don't control the world or any cuckoos in it. Perhaps there is low contamination potential for most nuclear plant waste, but that's because we probably aren't sitting around trying to come up with stupid, rotten stuff to do with nuclear waste. And, just as a forinstance, if nuclear products weren't so attractive to bad guys, it wouldn't have rated mention in bin Laden's plans, nor be the darling of Iran's crazies.

But, I'm no hater of nuclear power, and the fact that we use it here for electrification is proof of how useful it is, although I don't know of anyone bragging about how cheap the electric bills are in their nuclear-powered area. We just cannot confine our concerns to "best case" scenarios, since the devil was let loose into our world with lots of deceived demons that have no problem infecting human minds with their evil ideas and intentions.

May I please just counter the nuclear option with the undefeated ideas for including solar, hydro, wind power technologies as timely options, along with the hydrogen fueled vehicle engines. Since it seems that our nation would need to build more nuclear plants to satisfy our grown needs, then it would seem all of these power answers are starting on equal footing, other than the need for R & D on turbines and batteries efficiency. It is really going to be hard to handle seeing some Japanese or Chinese or Russian company come up with the winning tickets on that, if we let the need sit around unaddressed by our academics, techs and manufacturers.

Why not go along with that hack mayor from San Francisco and do away with the plants in that vicinity (or wherever else)?

I know many, many people in the power generating business that would love to do this to a community of this size to get their point across - You need Us.

If we are not making good use of the power being generated, why not get rid of the ugly, irritating eye sores?

I mean for a photovoltaic system to power the likes of New York city, I have heard that the array would need to be the size of Vermont...hell, we can even use the idea of imminent domain and kick WHOLE communities out of their houses in order to start using that "safe" fusion plant that is 93 million miles away.

Whether it is gas, coal, nuke, wind, sea currents, thermal (steam from the ground), solar (going to photocells), or solar mirrors (super heating liquids into steam in order to turn a steam turbine) something needs to be done in order to keep up with the growing demand for power.

Huh? Wait something was done... obama said that he would lift the EPA emmisions on older plants of ALL sorts in order to keep them burning longer - hell that'll help out a ton when cap and trade comes into effect.

Photovoltaic is a great idea, it is not going to run whole communities though, just as it is not going to be running this nation in the future.

Can we as a country learn to be more effecient? Maybe. I know that there are plenty of people that are "trying" to do their part(s) - all you have to do is look at the way that those terrible little flourescent lamps are being pushed onto us all of the time. Energy Saver? Maybe... Full of mercury and bad for the environment? Yes.

Go figure.

Cheers Ferris

thanks for that fact, of the hydro electric power plants being used for over 60 years in some places are not good design nor in horrifically destructive implementation: altogether, the fact that the design for harness of hydro energy has been detrimental to our mutual universal HOME is proof further that it is our technology that must change, in concert with locale planning under local residents input, with all sciences contributing to the safest, most efficient and reliable electric energy production. The point of wind plants relative (failure) (no one wants to say it out loud) is again proof to be compared to the success of combined hydro turbines in moving natural water bodies, especially rivers and shoreline areas of strong tidal movements, with addition of available solar collectors, successes such as that English island, Ei, or something like that, and many other communities on many continents but especially remote places that adapt to available energy harnessing for their lifestyle needs. Every roof or available sunny ground should have solar collectors. Why flip a switch and pay through the roof when the roof could be paying you? This technology has not had that significant breakthrough in collection materials or storage and distribution yet, but neither have we seen universal concetration on this development. Without our wholehearted commitment to change, to breaking free from that power company and gas company's monthly bill, we will not see any developments that benefit us; only developments that make the corporate sponsors of power sales richer while we still pay through the nose. Alternative energy now....without sacred cows to particular industries or technologies; if it's broke, fix it. If someone has background to the Cape Wind project, I'd love to hear it, esp. from locals who know at least on the surface, what the oppositions have been, and if other technologies were even proposed and researched other than 440 ft wind turbines. thanks

"They are what keeps millions of people who live in former flood zones form getting flooded out on a regular basis." I am sure that this is correct in many cases, but come speak to the families in Mozambique who have their homes destroyed and their families killed by flooding every few years because the "natural flood planes" are not being cleared every rainy season because some pratt put in a damn dam.

I know, I have to fly up there regularly in a milatry helicopter to rescue them.

Sorry but my references come from the civilized and modern parts of the world where proper engineering and public works projects where done decades ago by people who didn't want our parts of the world to be well, a crappy place to live really.

I cant do anything about some other places poor civil engineering issues brought about by bad political planning and in site. Just because someone screwed it up in Mozambique doent mean flood control in my part of the world is a bad thing.

And Americans wonder why the whole world despises them?

Here we only despise anonymous cowards

So what if we get despised by everyone who didnt plan and work to develope them selves like our country did. WE became who WE are by finding the best of the best and getting them to come here and do our public works projects right the first time.

Perhaps the reason so many other places are still crap and a half in comparison is because they don't get the best of the best to do the work right the first time but instead get the corrupt politician and his village idiot friends to do the work.

Figure it comes down to simply you get what you pay and worked for. WE did and thats why it doesn't suck to be us!

dear guest;

the subject of hydropower is not always a discussion of "what a dam can do for us", and, sorry, I didn't realize you may not have read the discussion prior to that which described current micro units that are small enough to be installed even in streams and small rivers, with best results being a "battery" installation of many smaller units altogether feeding the power storage batteries site, which regulates the power from there out to facilities connected to the system. Manhattan has such a site in one of the 2 rivers, and it seems it was designed to record available power generated and to answer opponents who feared little fishies would swim into these units and be chummed. The news item was that these micro hydrogenerators foiled all arguments against them, as they were feeding power to nearby commercial buildings and sonar studies showed all size fish swimming around these without a problem. Come to think of it, I never have seen a fish swim into the side of a dock, or boat or seawall, so why wouldn't a NY F & W biologist have been able to easily beat that baseless idea?

What has me really concerned about this, is that you all seem not to have heard about micro hydropower success studies, while the fantasy about "clean coal" technology was draped all over Obama's campaigning, state to state, in every newspaper, when it appears that there is not actually any such operable machinery usable by any grid. If I am wrong about that news report on the lack of any usable clean coal technology for electrification, pls. let me and MSNBC know. thanks, fastmari

Geez! You should have just come right out in front and said so. Then we we wouldn't be burdened with: undocumented situations, concerning undocumented bad engineering, in an undocumented location, at an undocumented time, concerning an event that that has not been documented to those on this site. Opinions are great, but please keep them relevant to music,food, clothing, and movies. Thank you. C-Mac

# 34 in response to # 32 , Guest. Did not clarify---C-Mac

Another case of "The Few" dictating their needs/wants over "The Many"

The imaginative but ludicrous misinformation that 440 foot wind turbines could be a navigation hazzard ..... overlooks that they are about as difficult to miss as an Island..

This sort of diversion keeps us from the only true element in this discussion... Someone doesn't want to look at these Turbines.

And because of all the smoke and obfuscation, few realize that the ordinary sea haze, cloudy days, sun reflections and the like will mean that only very keen eyes will ever glimps this necessary future, and only occasionally.

Why not a lie etector test for each side.....

to all interested in the cape's wind saver; it may seem trite to note that any permanent structure rising 440 feet within sight of an island, where there aren't many places to hide other than the bathroom or behind drawn shades from, is essentially getting "in the face" of the inhabitants of said island, and must be considered as either intentionally sabotaging itself with its inappropriateness, as laid out, or that "opponents" must include those who believe their "being indisposed by an inesthetic govt appliance" was worth some sort of substantial payoff, along with the many "influential" and wealthy landowners, business and vacation folk who know how to dial Boston's State House or lean on their country club contacts. There is just no way to say how much say all islanders had in the details of this project's look, feel, impact and benefit, because what our govt so frequently considers to be their considering the citizens opinions, and expertise, is seldom more than miniscule condescendence and outright impudence toward competing scientific or professional theory or developments that paid politically correctness does not suffer from. We should have done more to rigorously enact protections as Pres. Eisenhower warned against the mil-industrial complex he saw as America's #1 enemies.

Should the Cape Wind project truly be swept aside by the shadowy forces which refuse to allow any of us off their grid billing system, that may be the worst of all the impacts of the waste of all that consulting and preliminary money on just another thing of hope that we cashcows are being denied....like that football getting yanked out from in front of our gullible kick, poor Charlie Brown. How can he ever trust or hope again? We may have become the dumbest nation on earth now; we just pay and pay and pay, watch football, baseball, basketball, wrestling, racing, 6th grade humor for 38 year olds, allow our lives to be imprisoned by outrageous credit schemes from cards to homes to "insurance" and "medical coverage" ripoffs at the paycheck and at the doctors, drugstore, hospital, dentist and optometrist again and again....why do we put up with it? We hear of all kinds of businesses and people who just don't pay taxes, and they are rich, well known, and never get caught, but the little guy or woman with the little paycheck, let them not get something right on a return and they are hundreds of times more likely to get auditted than anyone earning over a half million a yr. Go figure that out, because I know we all thought " change" would have started with that. And next would be that we could afford medical care, and that all that money taken out of our paychecks would be what paid for it, not that plus the month's grocery money, the rent or mortg. money or phonebill money. About the number one cause of bankruptcies for over 15 yrs, and no one bothered to do anything about it? And we really thought that was what "they" were talking about when "universal medical coverage" first got brought up for federal legislation, seriously, and come to find out its just another bribery deal that serves up everyone on platters to the same medical "insurers" who have been bankrupting us for 2 decades? We don't need a tea party, we need a dose of retribution against these highest profiteering corporations that mostly roll our dough out into other bogus investments, and finance the move of American jobs oversees, so that you can hardly understand any of these phone clerks from the insurance, the banks.

The Cape Wind project needs new backing, maybe a renovated project scale, such as lowering those turbines down from 440 feet, since anyone who has ever been out off of Cape Cod or Nantucket can tell you it's windy as hell and there's no nearby mountains or treeline to block the wind, and there's not too many 440 foot waves to surmount. The problem with too many over-indulged mariners who like to blast around, day and night is that it doesn't take much to be a navigational hazard for them, and small aircraft are supposed to be looking out for blinking lights around them, so we really do need to address the aesthetics of these structures with their siting being key, and height with adequate warning lights and the newest motion activated warning broadcasts modules for every tower, such as landmines should have built in, but then not all landmines are commercial products, are they? There are less occupied sections of the island, and low visibility paints. There would appear to be so much customization that a landmark, groundbreaking project could do in order to save it's own life, rather than be a right off the shelf commercial sale for some Wash. DC crony. We can hope for more, we can demand reasonability if not outright change, and someone must be held accountable for all that wasted money if nothing actually begins to bless Nantucket with cheap, truly clean electric power, such as we all should have had for the last 50 years in this bovine nation. I want mine and I appreciate that you brought this crucial matter to this forum, to my attention which our censored socialist news media, owned by the same people who run the banks, has forced a blackout on, so no one would get any ideas about truly clean, cheap or free electric energy. We all should just keep paying $100-300 a month for, forever, while they toss silly things like nonexistent clean coal or more nuclear plants at us, or the really big laugh, "domestic oil and gas", as if any of the oil and gas corporations in the world are purely patriotic or nationalistic entities....as if we don't know those familiar names from the '50's on the neon signs and gas pumps to now be so inbred with every other energy corporation's profits and processes. The real sign of our weakness as a people is that we really do feel guilty when some creep angrily accuses "socialism" against those who cannot afford the medical care that they so desparately need, which premiums for are taken out of their paychecks, so that they cannot afford to live even below their means anymore, they suffer with illnesses and agonies they shouldn't have to if this truly is the nation with the best health care industry. Just another ripoff; all this talk about "change" to the energy industries, the healthcare industries, the paycheck ripoff industries, the banking and mortgage industries that all got rich by overvaluing our homes and then making us pay for it at the sale, at the annual prop. tax bill, at the monthly mortgage year after year...and they took all that undeserved, unearned profit and still blew it somehow, someway, and we just stared blankly and then turned the channel back to the ballgame.

If not now, my dear countrymen, when?

DrMoose-

Two points- first, we could get the government back to where it belongs if we would stick to the original constitution. Read the 9th and 10th ammendments- if it ain't spelled out in the document, the government has no business sticking their nose into it.

Second point. It is upside down taxing income. Tax consumption. Income represents what you add to the commonwealth (i.e., labor, capital, etc.). Consumption is what you take out of circulation. Taxing income discourages people from producing. Taxing consumption discourages people from spending, and encourages savings, which makes more wealth available to be loaned to more producers, rather than having to invent wealth by disguising risk in derivatives...

Sir, Dr Moose:

thanks for the thoughtful counter, filling in the many holes to my small thoughts, and the reminder that what we are and have been living in and through is riddled with every type of problem which shows failures in the choices made by individuals in power, or of wealth, choices that benefitted their person, their business, whether for insurance, or industry contracts, or regulatory failures, or medicine, representation of the people has been let down in moral and criminal ways, instituting variance upon variance, deception and fraud upon more and more until we are a civilization of loopholes, things stuck between lines, until there is perfectly justified thieving on all sides, with money ruling the day. It may be ranting, but it is one way to prevent falling into the mental rut of accepting wrongs, turning until I run out of cheeks to turn, bankruptcy continually returns uninvited, undeserved, surgeries and therapies are unaffordable, despite weekly $100 premiums paid for me by my always-working husband, it is a farce when that viciously depleted paycheck is asked to then fork over hundreds more just to use the insurance we thought we had. Then, finding out that the doctors can't do anything for you except charge you more for more tests, more ineffective and dangerous prescriptions that also are unaffordable, and there is no real responsibility practiced to the patients.

We raise heritage breed turkeys and some other fowl, trying to keep a few dairy goats, but there is no way to make a profitable or even sustainable income from the situation where feed is too expensive and its contents are not our choice of true nutrition, but a corn product base with unknowable amts of whatever else ends up in there, and around our few acres flow all other manner of animals, trying to prey on our little birds, hawks nesting above our house the last 4 yrs, black rat snakes some 8 ft long and fat from all my chicken eggs they ate run all over day and night trying to squeeze into cages and seek out stray nests, possum, coon, fox, feral cats, hungry and dumped dogs, all seeking to take from our flocks their lives, and from us our property and responsibility to succeed in their defense, something like our money in the bank that gets eaten up left and right with fees, charges, overcharges, erroneous charges, overpricing of every little necessity or desire. Should there be no regulation to control the hordes of predators, or locks on our doors or vehicles, free access to our little bit of providence for our family and selves?

I propose that the real problems with regulation can be ironed out as soon as we get responsible, moral management types with close following of the concerned public to have both the realities of the human ventures needing regulation then to be rewritten with a mission statement, an objective; that which the venture must be allowed to accomplish if it is a benefit or even just benign product or activity, but to be tempered by the acknowledged dangers being picketted off with regulations that demand public and employee safety, also for the community and world environment protection. No one has the right to try to make a buck off a product that hurts people in the current method of making it, or of it's affects hiding toxic potentials, something like the fabric protector spray that was finally removed frrom production, for the fumes contained things that could eat holes into your lungs or brain and deform fetuses and stuff....a very popular product, with benefit to those who want their fabrics protected, but hiding deadliness for some at some later time. It is sad that the employees lost their jobs when that plant had to cut the line out and their plans cut, their income and needs cut out. This "recession" couldn't even be acknowledged by the former administration, and they are actually trying to blame it on the successive and current administration, while the bankruptcies have been rolling over lives, plans, needs and hardearned properties for 20 years, with plants closing and going overseas, dumping lives out the door while those banks and the Fed, and all those in Representation of the people knew full well there was malfeasance in the regulatory agencies practices and that the wealth of the nation had been plundered and diverted into mazes of legaleze out the back door into investors slippery ledgers, but its all gone now, and the same "folks" who were supposed to be guarding that chickenhouse the first time, are reappointed to those management, decisionmaking posts again, to make sure not one thing is changed that can affect the bankers and corporations, like utilities, from being free to enterprise our paychecks, to ensure the continued indebtedness of Americans. I read thru the "solar charity" website and found not one helper for us, only faroff nations and places we cannot actually go to see how responsibly the funds are used to "free" Africans and Malawians and S. Americans from poverty caused by trying to keep their cell phones charged and having to buy kerosene to cook or light their hut. I get that concept, sort of, but damn, man, can we not get the same break here? If it is recognized that the price of electricity and other power is too much for people to bear, and that current battery technology is suspiciously inefficient, but it produces streams of money for producers of batteries without any real effort to install solar collection on toys, phones, electric poles. My main conviction is that construction and design industry should be given mandated installation of solar collection equipment on every rooftop or suitable sight on every municipal, government, commercial and residential structure built or before a resale. period. That is the only way to be serious about destroying dependency on that boogeyman 'foreign oil", by the real commitment to alternatives such as hydropower units in every moving water being utilized for local power production, and wind turbines wherever any breeze was known to have blown at some time. The idea that wind turbines had to be 440 ft hi is nonsensical, and it would be my focus on the water below those turbines to also be outfitted with hydropower generators, for the waters never cease to flow in and out, with some places more active than others but they do not stall out like wind can, the tides are fairly constant. It was announced that the experimental hydro units in the Manhattan rivers was blowing off all the fears and oppositions about safety for fish, watercraft, etc, and fish-finder studies at each generator showed that the fish swam around these without fail, like bats in the dark flying around branches. Why doesn't every river have hydro units producing power for nearby residences, making commercial sale of iindividual units for businesses nearby, so that initial expenses are back into the black, free to be a benefit to the people, to our country.

If we could again commit to telling the truth and not bowing to the fraud, the graft, the fears of losing something to a tyranny that has you by the paycheck and in your taxes and in your debt, your home, your car, even our phones are on stupid service plans, the tv tied monthly to huge bills or no programs, and we call ourselves "free". We had a shot, it was actually buzzing through the corporate controlled cable fakenews shows; that the people might topple these parasitic institutions over them that did not deserve what they were taking from them, that the deal had to be made more just for "all". We saw that women and blacks deserved a fair deal and changes were made from the top down to change things to accomplish that. We see a place with a tragedy, a huge terrible disaster, and we run to help with all we can muster to help them, yet here at home, we allow things to creep over all of those who cannot fathom that mortgage or loan fine print, nor the bank fees or the medical bills charges just looking like only the wealthy should have been going for medical care.......we look for someone to fix this, but unfortunately, someone is going to have to be "us', and it is not foreseen what it will take to create the impetus for such a revolution to our love of being on the sidelines.

I just thank you for hearing me, and hope you will consider that the wind project, ill-planned or not, was a first for people. England has an island somewhere off of some continent, Eon or something like that, which is solely electrified with solar and hydroturbine. I don't know what sort of payment islanders make for up.keep and their residential attachments to the "grid", a building of batteries and outlets, but they have proven that even with older equipment, electrification is possible without nuclear waste improbabilities and dangers, without fortunes in oil importation that also enrich our familiar oil names with record profit highs that somehow they announce without grief for the people's money they took at the pump and at the home heating barrel, which impoverishes us, we Americans, without any recourse. We have the right to demand real alternative energy production locally as a benefit and a profit to each household and to commerce. This cannot be done without regulatory guidance, mission, clerical management and technical production, and the commission of energy producing equipment suitable for each locale, such as Manhattan did with its waters. They may well have added solar on the area rooftops, for the area is paved with highrise and multistoried structures where solar or wind could be producing and adding in to available traditional powerlines already installed.

Can you see your neighborhood hooked up to an alternative? If a small village and great cities can arrange and manage individual mail delivery, electric or phone providence, water, gas, property taxes; then they can oversee the local power alternatives, like minigrids, and fair division of cost for power consumption should be an income-scaled deal, instead of halfway, as we see govt subsidence for certain people of diminished capacity or income, why is it only right for some to scale costs for housing, taxes, etc this way, but not vital utilities?

Dr Moose, do you remember during the first tremors for the auto industry; the talk then was that those divisions without expected work could be reconfigured to produce alternative energy technology and machinery right in the assembly and production lines, and those areas devastated by hurricanes, the Mississipi floodings, these would be the first recipients of this equipment, to get their renovations right ,with new power production plans. Those homes and businesses were being renovated and rebuilt with energy efficient materials and utilities and can you see how every other citizen should have the same blessings for their own home, their neighborhood and community, so that they are not being herded into poverty for their old age, unprotected when feeble and having no reasonable income coming in, only bills at the same rates that the millionaires have down the road. Most millionaires do not show regard for their poor neighbors, which is the whole rationale for subdivisions; to ensure surroundings of peers and like incomes and property values. No tawdry trailers or rundown properties welcome. The halls of congress and the pentagon are similar in that they have become militant in their dealings with only certain "people", certain business entities, such that there are, was it 3, 30 or 300 lobbiests for every representative. We never saw any accounting or repayment or criminal charges for any of the crimes committed in Afgan or Iraq with our money going to crony parammilitary companies having some sort of hold over whoever makes the decisions and is supposed to oversees the satisfying of the deal for services rendered, for our sake. Not one real accounting or charge. There is almost a subwar below the war, and that one is a war for our money and to build up the empire that Iraq offers the takers. We secured the oil fields and said to hell with the museums and palaces contents. No one cared where Iraq's troops went after we got into Bagdad as long as they got out of the Iraq uniform. We all know what went on with the big brass looking the other way, and it fires me up when that happens because it always means someone with less power than them is getting jacked up some way.

Speaking for those who've been jacked up a few times, it doesn't have to happen, it shouldn't happen, and names don't scare me. Only partisans scare me, because of the warping of thinking that partisanship creates and the usurping of the nation's authority as their own, I just want reasonable people to desire justice for all, then we will have liberty. It is not freedom, to be free to suffer, to be shamed and having everything taken away, to be ill until you die, to eat the crap that you can afford and not what your condition needs, This is the near future for the boomers entering retirement now and for the next 15 yrs to be a public burden even longer than that. It only got real for high rollers when their investments and 401K's tanked now, their property overvaluation came down below what they had leveraged out of it for those bogus failed investments....now what, they say, but not for the 'others" of lesser incomes who have been getting tricked for the last 25 yrs with falling incomes and lost jobs, even entire communities failing with lost industries or environmental tragedy. Now its real and it should be logical to expect that a real change to the setup that has been impoverishing and enslaving Americans can now be changed so that parasitical corporations be reduced, recycled, reused in some way beneficial to the people of the community, not to a few investors some where else.

I write to my senator, I write to charity and missions folk; people who are physically and vocationally able to voice and work in changes on the ground. I can hardly walk, need another hip replaced and more spinal surgeries that no one in NC does and my insurance doesn't cover and we already cashed out on a refi to the max to get the last spinal laser surgery and months of physical therapy so I could actually turn myself over and get out of the bed, and move about with crutches, canes and walkers for more than 2 minutes at a time before the spinal cord being crushed would drive me to the ground, my legs useless, the pain unbearable, years of this and I was about to die with heart attacks, organs failing, but decided not to die, that I was Mari, I had angels and God on my side, I had more life in spite of my family seeming to be oblivious to the fatality in the dark bedroom at the back of the house month after month, year after year. I can sit upright now, walker myself around the house, just can't get my hands free of canes or walkers to carry, to move things, to do anything unless I'm in zero grav position in the bed to relieve the spine. Drugs are a joke for this pain, and doctors and "folks" would rather see someone writhe and moan unceasingly in pain rather than bear any drug addiction. I will walk in my woods again, I will pull back my bow again and seek my meat in the wild. I may not be able to drag anything out again, or carry my own stand, but I will hunt, I will adapt to limitations and changes so that I can do what I am supposed to do as a blessing to my life. This is my philosophy and vision for my nation: we can adapt to new technology and limitations and changes and moral supervisions over our industries and utilities and government needs the watchdogs so our chickens don't get et.

I am trying now to write legislation for the enactment of construction mandates for alternative energy design and installation for all new and renovated municipal, governmental, commercial and residential structures, with oversight for the most efficient local planning and commissioning of power distribution and consumption.

I don't know of any other such legislation yet, and I am now compiling known arguments against such a radical overhaul of construction models for electrification of structures, so that I will be ready, and so that I can realistically be prepared for modifications to this proposal. If you can think of anything pro or con you would like to kindly offer me, I'd be grateful for your time and thoughts.

thanks, mari

I fear I have made an error in my calculations and all of my numbers are off by a factor of ten. Thus the amount of land area required for photo-voltaic power would be 32,000 square kilometers rather than 320,000. I apologize for the error.

Dr. Moose

Do you know anything about the parallel development in photovoltaic cells compaction, much like that of the magnetic tape compaction revolution over the last 30 yrs, from vinyl to 8 track, eventually to cd, dvd, and mp3, etc? The photovoltaic cells, instead of being a vertical cylindrical shape would actually be a movable crystallization, or crystallization that light energy could track down into as the sun's rays changed slant on the collector, yielding more activity per horizontal measure. I thought there was the presence of a fluidic content to the cells, also. thanks mari

He also owns an estate at Cape Cod, and is a yachting enthusiast.

I suspect that has more to do with his opposition than anything to do with coal, oil or gas.

The local estate owners are a very wealthy and powerful bunch and it would make more sense if that was their motivation.

If oil & gas interests are the only reason, why aren't they fighting wind farms in Texas, where they have a bigger vested interest than Cape Cod?

Just finished my 8th trip through the Altamont wind farm corridor, (Behind Livermore Ca.,) and except for one day, all of the turbines have been standing still---Zero, Nada etc. The one day they were turning, it was marginal at best, with only 50% of them turning. How do you expect the base grid to be able to accept this type of load input? How is it regulated? And, if it is blowing, what is done with the energy if not needed? I would say combine with hydro, and , as mentioned before, use the power to pump water up hill, and store it---BUT, that requires dams and more turbines. Maybe get them to fire up huge gyros or flywheels, with magnetic bearings, and slowly bleed off the power--Now that would require some major engineering.. All of this stuff is "Therotically practical", but if we are to do something NOW, it requires something that can be built and WORK, now. Nuclear works, is compliant with the Green team agenda, and would buy a lot of time until we can move onto the next great idea. My 2 cents..

C-Mac-

Unfortunately, the proponents of wind energy generally do not promote tours of existing wind farms...Wonder why that is? Are they afraid the truth might come out?

They probably don't want you stepping over the aviary carcasses (one of the reasons mentioned to block more wind farms)--Many of the advocates (politically, that is), lobby for all these "new ideas", without any engineering info , and then , lo and behold, when asked to put it into THEIR neighborhoods, find ways to block it--(Wind is too noisy, kills birds, is ugly etc.) They never come up with engineering reasons on why this may not be feasible in the first place--It is always emotional, or feel goodism--- I am an ENVIRONMENTALIST---I do not pollute personally, or litter, I engineer my property so that all of my rain runoff stays on site and perks, I use solar hot water, I keep my cars in good running condition, I recycle all that I am able to. That is just being a good citizen. I do not like stepping in my own "poop". (or my neighbors either). But these are practical solutions that make sense, and are doable by everyone. Large scale solutions , that affect us all, and require either Local , State, or Federal Government engineering and funding had better be built on sound, practical data, not, political rhetoric, based on appeasing a voting base, kissing babies, and photo-ops. My 3 cents.