|
NE Iowa | I get a kick out of the argument 'yeah, but coal or gas powered plants have those expenses, too'. Without some values, that argument is crap. It's like saying the dude running 56mph in a 55mph is just as much as a danger to himself and others as the dude running 115mph. They're both speeding, so they're both bad, right?
Really need to understand the various expenses, useful lives, energy output, etc associated with the various ways to generate power and then decide how they all stack up.
20 yrs ago, I lived in Co and was pretty good friends with a 'seasoned' electrical engineer who was in charge of a the electrical 'grid' design for a wind farm somewhere out there. He was disgusted at the whole project - it was doubtful that it would ever be in the black the govt money just made it less of a money pit. What is the situation with other power plants (coal, nat gas, nuclear, solar, hydro, etc) - does the govt aid make them profitable? I don't know.
I can understand govt money getting involved to help an industry get going that may have benefits in the future that are great enough for that industry to be self sustaniing, but it sure doesn't seem that wind energy has gotten there, yet. | |
|
Green electricity maybe not so Green
