Jump to content

the unstoppable transition towards a 100% clean energy economy


Recommended Posts

The unstoppable transition towards a 100% clean energy economy is moving faster than many expected.

 

 

The Iowa Utilities Board approved the nation's largest wind energy project, which will power 800,000 homes once completed. Macksburg Wind ProjectMidAmerican Energy The 2,000-megawatt Wind XI project should be completed by the end of 2019. "Wind energy helps us keep prices stable and more affordable for customers, provides jobs and economic benefits for communities and the state, and contributes to a cleaner environment for everyone," said Bill Fehrman, the CEO of the utility behind the project. Bruce Nilles, senior director for Sierra Club's Beyond Coal campaign, agrees. Nilles said in a statement: "This is an amazing example of how the unstoppable transition towards a 100% clean energy economy.

 

 

https://www.yahoo.com/news/m/3ad039b7-a5a4-395c-96ff-8587ee1c4b6f/ss_%26quot%3Bthis-is-an-amazing.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How much will energy prices go up, as a result of this plan?

And more and more countries are moving away from wind power, because of the lack of power at the times when it is needed most, in the early morning when people are getting ready for work, and the evening when they are cooking, and running the dishwashers and air conditioners.

 

 

But if you want to see the real reason behind this move, all you have to do is follow the money:

 

 

This also represents a huge leap forward for one of Warren Buffett's three utilities and is a model for how his other two can quickly follow suit, particularly Pacificorp, which operates the largest coal fleet in the West. We still have tremendous work to ensure that this transition keeps moving full speed ahead, but one thing is certain: with announcements like the one today, we aren't ever going back to dirty fossil fuels."

Warren Buffett is profiting from this. What a surprise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The unstoppable transition towards a 100% clean energy economy is moving faster than many expected.

 

 

The Iowa Utilities Board approved the nation's largest wind energy project, which will power 800,000 homes once completed. Macksburg Wind ProjectMidAmerican Energy The 2,000-megawatt Wind XI project should be completed by the end of 2019. "Wind energy helps us keep prices stable and more affordable for customers, provides jobs and economic benefits for communities and the state, and contributes to a cleaner environment for everyone," said Bill Fehrman, the CEO of the utility behind the project. Bruce Nilles, senior director for Sierra Club's Beyond Coal campaign, agrees. Nilles said in a statement: "This is an amazing example of how the unstoppable transition towards a 100% clean energy economy.

 

 

https://www.yahoo.com/news/m/3ad039b7-a5a4-395c-96ff-8587ee1c4b6f/ss_%26quot%3Bthis-is-an-amazing.html

You are really just a halfwit intellectually speaking and brain dead(ignoring your instincts) as a genetic displacement. Here is a suggestion, when your body looks with 2 eyes, ever think one projects and the other one receives reflection and the brain processes the difference? Same with ears and nostrils. Separates breathing and smelling are done simultaneously but the synapse of responses sets a small delay of body reaction. That half second reflex response.

 

But that half second never leaves the moment as it is a duration or cycle within simultaneous existence now. I.e. perception of things linearly not as an exponential total sum of self contained kinetic inverting connected actions and reactions of the same content specifically spaced apart in "plain sight" "plain sound", "plain breathing" "plain smells" common experiences, shared occupation of the same time spaced apart now.

 

natural energy is 100% efficient, Why? How? Self evident by how the universe works in plain sight of everything categorized as what, where, when, who existed and is existing now.

 

that cannot be duplicated because that is all there is duplicating contracting genetic results during the transfer inverting content between inorganic and organic compositions of the same universal position here all the time here is now for each lifetime present as added kinetically and no potential differences of opinions suggesting otherwise from one species alone.

 

Intellect has declared war against natural balance and I am not going to battle something that keeps me, me even though the entire population around me says now cannot be eternity and I don't stand a snowballs chance in hell of humanity's governance over genetic continuation taking place now..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

if this country ever goes to clean energy it will be ONLY because clean

energy is cheaper to produce than oil or gas or coal.

 

The big issues are whether ass hole, oil billionaires get oil subsidies and

polluters get a free pass to pollute and wreck the environment or not.

 

NO ONE is identifying the real cause of all of the problems on liferaft EARTH,

and that is overpopulation which causes wars, famines, pollution, income inequality,

and wrecking of the environment and our US standard of living.

 

And it seems that the worst possible subhumans are the ones overpopulating

the planet, the morons and the poor bringing into existence more morons and more poor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

sole...don't look now, but you're getting run over by Clean Energy. The People are Demanding it

Not to mention the Pentagon

I am looking and all I see is your mentality imploding by choice or extinction, your choice by your reactions from now on. Beware ignoring self containment, it is self evident and everything you do comes back with a vengeance your intellect never measured accurately throughout history in the making here of directing social outcomes for all incoming ancestors, just so your one of a mind group can mentally escape the self evident.

 

No mental projection of a caricature being god, allah, buddha, Mother Earth, Father time. Just instinctive honesty to being a genetic one of a kind your mind pretends cannot happen exactly as happening all the time now is presently the center of all things coming and going gone and forgotten and arrive nest.

 

Now is the space 100% energy sustains everything universally spaced apart currently, kinetically. What a fucking idiot you became believing anything is possible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This would be possible...if they could figure out a way to generate energy from all the hippies marijuana smoke.

Idiot thinks only " hippies" smoke marijuana.

sole...don't look now, but you're getting run over by Clean Energy. The People are Demanding it

 

 

 

Not to mention the Pentagon

The right will continue to fellate the oil producers even when their own families health is involved.

Not only do they advocate party over country, also party and oil companies over family.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

sole...don't look now, but you're getting run over by Clean Energy. The People are Demanding it

 

 

 

Not to mention the Pentagon

When are we going to see the wind or ocean tide generators that were deemed to be perfect off the coast off of Cape Cod? Not in my backyard say's Teddy!

 

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2006/mar/2/20060302-124537-9804r/

 

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/01/12/wind-energy-dead-in-the-water-off-cape-cod/

 

http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/story?id=97849

 

None of the libs care if a wind farm blights the beautiful views in the countryside because they never leave the cities. They don't care if they kill birds in their migritory pattern. They don't care that if a bat flies too close at night, the pressure change when the blade goes by, blows up their lungs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If only bullshit could be converted into energy; liberals could power the galaxy.

When nothing from something is exposed for what it never was, it never used any energy of its own ever. black hole of intellectual deception cradle to grave for 300 generations pretending now wasn't Eternity.

 

when calculated time becomes worthless as governance, only thing changed was intellectual corruption moving genetic results into false impressions of everything self contained to the moment here. History becomes just inaccurate information and psychological class warfare doesn't work again.

 

Life goes on without ruling elites turning ancestors into strawmen and women being exception to natural balancing.. that damned simple.

 

It was the original intent of those composing America's Declaration of Independence and Preamble and Constitution. that is why humanity has been trying to redefine its intent since written and humanity's corrupted intellect won again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The right will continue to fellate the oil producers even when their own families health is involved.

Not only do they advocate party over country, also party and oil companies over family.

....speak of the devil....

 

When are we going to see the wind or ocean tide generators that were deemed to be perfect off the coast off of Cape Cod? Not in my backyard say's Teddy!

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2006/mar/2/20060302-124537-9804r/

Ten year old old bullshit biased article from the Moonie owned rag.

 

 

Batshit crazy rightwingnut article from Breitbart.

 

 

None of the libs care if a wind farm blights the beautiful views in the countryside because they never leave the cities. They don't care if they kill birds in their migritory pattern. They don't care that if a bat flies too close at night, the pressure change when the blade goes by, blows up their lungs.

In the real world....

 

Building and maintaining offshore wind technology is expensive compared with onshore wind projects because of challenges such as transporting equipment and workers to the sites, securing turbines to the seafloor, and operating in fewer periods of fair weather. The harsher offshore environment not only makes it difficult and more costly to perform maintenance, but it also increases the frequency that these activities have to take place.

 

 

Another outdated 10 year old article the fossil fuel energy stooges cling to....

 

Which actually says....

 

The proposed project at Cape Cod by Cape Wind Associates would entail anchoring turbines in a 28-square- mile grid pattern on a five-mile-long stretch of offshore shallow waters known as Horseshoe Shoals. Each carbon-steel turbine would rise about 40 stories above the water line taller than the Statue of Liberty.

 

But Cape Cod is a region famous for its pastoral ocean views. Once built, the wind-power plant would be faintly visible on the skyline of this tourist-dependent community, particularly during clear days. "We wouldn't build a wind farm in the middle of Yosemite,"" Robert Kennedy Jr., son of the late Sen. Robert F. Kennedy, has argued. "People want to look out and see the same sight the Pilgrims saw."

 

Isaac Rosen, executive director of the Alliance to Protect Nantucket Sound, says the community's opposition to the plant is based on much more than spoiled views.

 

Among the critics are members of the fishing community, who fear the poles of the turbines, which would be sunk about 80 feet into the seabed, could disrupt the feeding and nursing grounds of valuable fish, including striped bass and summer flounder.

 

The National Air Traffic Controllers Association cites the heavy traffic of commercial and private planes in the region and suggests the turbines would present a hazard.

 

"Placing 170 of these wind-driven turbines in this area, in our opinion, is a disaster waiting to happen," wrote Mike Suriano, a NATCA Facility Representative, in a letter to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

 

Previous wind-power projects have shown that the plants can become virtual killing fields for migrating birds. At a massive 7,000-turbine power plant in California's Altamont Pass, 182 birds were killed over a two-year period ending in 1992. Since those studies, researchers have learned that a lattice structure used at the Altamont plant increased the risk of bird deaths since birds used the structures to nest and then were caught in the blades. Turbines are now designed to have clean blades, free of lattices. Engineers have also made the blades of turbines longer so they can rotate more slowly and stil generate the same amount of power. This makes them more visible to birds and more avoidable.

 

The Massachusetts chapter of the Audubon Society has expressed concern about migrant bird populations on Cape Cod, particularly the Roseate tern -- an endangered, wave-skimming seabird that populates the area.

 

In the present....off Rhode Island....

 

THE US IS FINALLY GETTING ITS FIRST OFFSHORE WIND FARM

Wired

Brendan Cole

07.28.16

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cape Cod is one of the most beautiful places in America...I wouldn't want wind farms there either obstructing views

another intellectually corrupted ideas where we demand and you people supply or else we won't show you how to keep denying the self evident anymore..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How much will energy prices go up, as a result of this plan?

And more and more countries are moving away from wind power, because of the lack of power at the times when it is needed most, in the early morning when people are getting ready for work, and the evening when they are cooking, and running the dishwashers and air conditioners.

....and that's how it looks from three feet up the colon of a deranged, reality-denying stooge for the fossil fuel industry....

 

In the real world....

 

Wind power had yet another record-breaking year. After passing the 50 GW mark for the first time in a single year in 2014, we reached yet another milestone in 2015 as annual installations topped 63 GW, a 22% increase. By the end of last year, there were about 433 GW of wind power spinning around the globe, a cumulative 17% increase; and wind power supplied more new power generation than any other technology in 2015, according to the IEA.

 

China led the way, as usual, with a record 30 8 GW of new installed capacity, breaking the previous record it had set (in 2014) for installations in a single year. China now has more than 145 GW of wind power installed, more than in all of the European Union; and last year it was the first country ever to invest more than USD 100 billion in renewables in a single year.

 

Elsewhere in Asia, India is the main story, which has now surpassed Spain to move into 4th place in the global cumulative installations ranking, and had the fifth largest market last year. Pakistan, the Philippines, Viet Nam, Thailand, Mongolia and now Indonesia are all ripe for market growth.

 

Europe had a surprisingly good year, led by Germanys record-setting 6 GW of installations, bolstered by more than 2 GW of offshore wind; and the US market had a remarkable 4th quarter, ending the year with an 8 6 GW market, much higher than most had expected.

 

Brazil, Canada, Mexico and South Africa also had strong years, and we saw the first commercial wind farms in Jordan, Guatemala and Serbia Perhaps the most en- couraging sign of all is the continued proliferation of new markets across Africa, Asia and Latin America, spurred by the need for competitive, clean, and indigenous energy sources to fuel development.

 

Looking ahead, we see a period of steady growth Asia will continue to lead, and Europe will move steadily towards its 2020 targets, although there may be some bumps in the road In North America, both Canada and the US seems poised for another round of growth, and as Mexicos energy reform gets bedded down we should be looking at a period of rapid development in that newly liberalized market.

 

In Latin America, Brazil will continue to lead, although Chile, Peru, Uruguay and now Argentina will make a contribution. In Africa and the Middle East, besides market leader South Africa, both Morocco and Egypt seem poised for solid growth in the next five years, and smaller markets in Kenya, Ethiopia and elsewhere are moving All told, wind capacity should nearly double in the next five years.

(source - Global Wind Energy Council

***

 

TOTAL WIND CAPACITY PROJECTED IN 2050 - 404.25 GW ACROSS 48 STATES

U.S. Department of Energy - Energy.gov

Link to comment
Share on other sites

100% clean energy economy is when everybody is on a generator/bicycle all day.

 

Then we still couldn't run one furnace to make the steel that makes our world work.

 

Wind power dries my laundry which adds water into the air which makes storms longer and floods people out of the homes that were built on bottom land.

 

My bad.

 

kj

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Idiot thinks only " hippies" smoke marijuana.

power ranger...thank you for not shunning me BUT I smoke weed and I am far from a hippy.

 

For three years, Barack Obama worked with the people of Chicago’s South Side. He helped find ways to bring jobs, stability, money and power to those who felt most oppressed.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

....speak of the devil....

 

Ten year old old bullshit biased article from the Moonie owned rag.

 

 

Batshit crazy rightwingnut article from Breitbart.

 

 

In the real world....

 

Building and maintaining offshore wind technology is expensive compared with onshore wind projects because of challenges such as transporting equipment and workers to the sites, securing turbines to the seafloor, and operating in fewer periods of fair weather. The harsher offshore environment not only makes it difficult and more costly to perform maintenance, but it also increases the frequency that these activities have to take place.

 

 

Another outdated 10 year old article the fossil fuel energy stooges cling to....

 

Which actually says....

 

The proposed project at Cape Cod by Cape Wind Associates would entail anchoring turbines in a 28-square- mile grid pattern on a five-mile-long stretch of offshore shallow waters known as Horseshoe Shoals. Each carbon-steel turbine would rise about 40 stories above the water line taller than the Statue of Liberty.

 

But Cape Cod is a region famous for its pastoral ocean views. Once built, the wind-power plant would be faintly visible on the skyline of this tourist-dependent community, particularly during clear days. "We wouldn't build a wind farm in the middle of Yosemite,"" Robert Kennedy Jr., son of the late Sen. Robert F. Kennedy, has argued. "People want to look out and see the same sight the Pilgrims saw."

 

Isaac Rosen, executive director of the Alliance to Protect Nantucket Sound, says the community's opposition to the plant is based on much more than spoiled views.

 

Among the critics are members of the fishing community, who fear the poles of the turbines, which would be sunk about 80 feet into the seabed, could disrupt the feeding and nursing grounds of valuable fish, including striped bass and summer flounder.

 

The National Air Traffic Controllers Association cites the heavy traffic of commercial and private planes in the region and suggests the turbines would present a hazard.

 

"Placing 170 of these wind-driven turbines in this area, in our opinion, is a disaster waiting to happen," wrote Mike Suriano, a NATCA Facility Representative, in a letter to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

 

Previous wind-power projects have shown that the plants can become virtual killing fields for migrating birds. At a massive 7,000-turbine power plant in California's Altamont Pass, 182 birds were killed over a two-year period ending in 1992. Since those studies, researchers have learned that a lattice structure used at the Altamont plant increased the risk of bird deaths since birds used the structures to nest and then were caught in the blades. Turbines are now designed to have clean blades, free of lattices. Engineers have also made the blades of turbines longer so they can rotate more slowly and stil generate the same amount of power. This makes them more visible to birds and more avoidable.

 

The Massachusetts chapter of the Audubon Society has expressed concern about migrant bird populations on Cape Cod, particularly the Roseate tern -- an endangered, wave-skimming seabird that populates the area.

 

 

In the present....off Rhode Island....

 

THE US IS FINALLY GETTING ITS FIRST OFFSHORE WIND FARM

Wired

Brendan Cole

07.28.16

You missed the point entirely. I also just pulled the first four of dozens of links when I Googled it. The point is the RICH and POWERFUL Libs blocked the program four TEN years (like you pointed out), because they didn't like the view. Thanks for helping me make my point.

Cape Cod is one of the most beautiful places in America...I wouldn't want wind farms there either obstructing views

Too bad. In the name of clean energy, screw the view. I personally think the rolling hills and valleys of rural Wisconsin are some of the most beautiful views in the country, but you Libs could care less about that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You missed the point entirely.

Nope! The only "point" you've got is the one on top of your head, jerkykrazyfailure.

 

 

 

I also just pulled the first four of dozens of links when I Googled it. The point is the RICH and POWERFUL Libs blocked the program four TEN years (like you pointed out), because they didn't like the view. Thanks for helping me make my point.

Pathetic rightwingnut propaganda meme that has nothing to do with the overall "transition to a clean energy economy.....the actual topic of this thread.

 

ONE offshore wind energy project sited pretty close to land got opposed by local residents on Cape Cod for for some fairly understandable reasons that were discussed in the article I just posted.

 

Meanwhile, many other offshore wind energy projects are going forward and one has already been built off Rhode Island.

 

Americas First Offshore Wind Farm May Power Up a New Industry

A just-completed project off the coast of Rhode Island, though relatively tiny, is at the forefront of a sea-based transition to renewable energy.

The New York Times

By JUSTIN GILLIS

AUG. 22, 2016

BLOCK ISLAND, R.I. The towering machines stand a few miles from shore, in a precise line across the seafloor, as rigid in the ocean breeze as sailors reporting for duty.

 

The blades are locked in place for now, but sometime in October, they will be turned loose to capture the power of the wind. And then, after weeks of testing and fine-tuning, Americas first offshore wind farm will begin pumping power into the New England electric grid.

 

By global standards, the Block Island Wind Farm is a tiny project, just five turbines capable of powering about 17,000 homes. Yet many people are hoping its completion, with the final blade bolted into place at the end of last week, will mark the start of a new American industry, one that could eventually make a huge contribution to reducing the nations climate-changing pollution.

 

The idea of building turbines offshore, where strong, steady wind could, in theory, generate large amounts of power, has long been seen as a vital step toward a future based on renewable energy. Yet even as European nations installed thousands of the machines, American proposals ran into roadblocks, including high costs, murky rules about the use of the seafloor, and stiff opposition from people who did not want their ocean views marred by machinery.

 

"People have been talking about offshore wind for decades in the United States, and Ive seen the reaction -- eyes roll," Jeffrey Grybowski said last week in an interview on Block Island. "The attitude was, 'It's not going to happen; you guys cant do it.'"

 

Mr. Grybowski and the company he runs, Deepwater Wind of Providence, R.I., have now done it. They had a lot of help from the political leadership of Rhode Island, which has seized the lead in this nascent industry, ahead of bigger states like New York and Massachusetts.

 

Now, offshore wind may be on the verge of rapid growth in the United States.

 

Using a law passed by a Republican-led Congress in 2005 and signed by President George W. Bush, the Obama administration has been clarifying the ground rules and leasing out large patches of the ocean floor for wind-power development. Nearly two dozen projects are on the drawing board, with some potentially including scores of turbines.

 

Equally important, state governments in recent months have been making big, new commitments to renewable power, driven by a rising sense of urgency about climate change.

 

Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo of New York set a goal of getting 50 percent of the states power from renewable sources by 2030, and the state will probably need large offshore wind farms to help achieve that. In Massachusetts, a Republican governor, Charlie Baker, just signed a bipartisan bill ordering the states utilities to develop contracts with offshore wind farms for an immense amount of power, 50 times the expected output of the Block Island Wind Farm.

 

Other states are looking at wind power, too, and studies by the Department of Energy suggest that many thousands of these turbines may eventually ring the United States coastline.

 

If that sounds ambitious, consider that the country has installed some 50,000 wind turbines on land over the past two decades. They now supply roughly 5 percent of the nations electric power, a figure that reaches double digits in particularly windy states like Kansas and Iowa.

 

The turbines are easier and cheaper to build on land. But the wind is also weaker on land, and the power the machines produce there is intermittent. The stronger breezes in the ocean can produce steadier power, potentially helping to balance out intermittent renewable sources like solar panels and onshore turbines.

 

The technology has been proved in Europe, where offshore wind farms as large as 300 turbines are being developed, with each turbine costing up to $30 million to build, install and connect to the power grid.

 

But the first major proposal in the United States, an immense project off Cape Cod that was to be called Cape Wind, was too big -- 130 turbines -- and too close to shore, many experts now believe. It drew ferocious opposition from oceanfront homeowners, gradually lost political support in Massachusetts and appears unlikely to go forward.

 

The companies now trying to start an offshore wind industry are determined not to repeat the mistakes that plagued Cape Wind. That is one reason Deepwater Wind decided to start with a small project.

 

The focus is still on the Northeast. That region has dense cities with strong electrical demand, high power prices, opposition to new power plants on land and some of the worlds stiffest ocean breezes off the coast. And the water remains relatively shallow many miles from shore, so wind farms could be installed far enough away that most of them would not be visible from the beaches.

 

With Northeastern states committing to the idea, the big question is: How much would it cost to get thousands of offshore turbines up and running?

 

When the first offshore projects were built two decades ago, European nations had to promise the developers extremely high prices for the electricity generated by their turbines, sometimes three or four times the wholesale power price, to get a new industry going.

 

Since then, offshore wind turbines have become a big business in Europe, worth billions, and the companies installing them have been able to create economies of scale. Recently, European nations have scrapped their old subsidy methods and have used competitive bidding to drive down the cost of the projects.

 

In some ways, the United States benefited by waiting for the industry to mature, as it can now take advantage of those falling costs. Installation is still pricier here than in Europe, and may be for a while, because few American companies have invested in the boats and other gear necessary to do the work.

 

The Block Island turbines were built overseas by a division of General Electric and were installed by a ship from Norway, brought over at a cost of millions of dollars, with help from an American vessel.

 

23WINDFARM5-superJumbo.jpg

The projects wind turbines, about three miles away, can be seen from shore on Block Island, but island residents have been largely supportive. Credit - Kayana Szymczak for The New York Times

 

Yet if states go forward with their plans, experts say the costs are likely to fall sharply as domestic industry scales up to meet the demand. On the Block Island project, a company in Houma, La., won the contract to build the metal foundations in the water, and other Gulf Coast businesses that have long built offshore oil structures see wind power in the Northeast as a potential new market.

 

For now, the construction of the first wind farm off an American coast sends a simple message to governments, investors and citizens: It can be done.

 

"Spectacular!" Mr. Grybowski said from the deck of a boat last week as he watched the final stages of construction.

 

The Block Island project was a marriage of Rhode Island political will and New York financial expertise. Initial financing for the $300 million project came from the D. E. Shaw Group, a big investment firm based in Manhattan.

 

D. E. Shaws head of United States private equity investment, Bryan Martin, had invested huge sums over the years on the firms behalf in onshore wind farms, convinced that renewable energy was poised to displace fossil fuels. He saw offshore wind power as the next step and has been pushing the Block Island wind farm and other Deepwater Wind projects forward for more than a decade.

 

The turbines are about three miles off Block Island and can be seen easily from land. That drew some opposition, and could have been fatal.

 

But Block Island is a rustic vacation spot where residents turned out to be largely supportive of the project. Not only does it help the environment, but it will connect their power grid to the mainland for the first time, giving them a more reliable supply.

 

Competitors are moving to challenge Deepwater Wind for the coming wave of offshore contracts, but the company hopes to hold its lead and win the next project, a proposed wind farm 36 miles off Montauk, N.Y., meant to supply the power-hungry South Fork of Long Island.

 

"I do believe that starting small has made sense," said Mr. Martin, who is also Deepwater Winds chairman. "I would say that the next projects are going to be substantially bigger."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nope! The only "point" you've got is the one on top of your head, jerkykrazyfailure.

 

 

 

 

Pathetic rightwingnut propaganda meme that has nothing to do with the overall "transition to a clean energy economy.....the actual topic of this thread.

 

ONE offshore wind energy project sited pretty close to land got opposed by local residents on Cape Cod for for some fairly understandable reasons that were discussed in the article I just posted.

 

Meanwhile, many other offshore wind energy projects are going forward and one has already been built off Rhode Island.

 

Americas First Offshore Wind Farm May Power Up a New Industry

A just-completed project off the coast of Rhode Island, though relatively tiny, is at the forefront of a sea-based transition to renewable energy.

The New York Times

By JUSTIN GILLIS

AUG. 22, 2016

BLOCK ISLAND, R.I. The towering machines stand a few miles from shore, in a precise line across the seafloor, as rigid in the ocean breeze as sailors reporting for duty.

 

The blades are locked in place for now, but sometime in October, they will be turned loose to capture the power of the wind. And then, after weeks of testing and fine-tuning, Americas first offshore wind farm will begin pumping power into the New England electric grid.

 

By global standards, the Block Island Wind Farm is a tiny project, just five turbines capable of powering about 17,000 homes. Yet many people are hoping its completion, with the final blade bolted into place at the end of last week, will mark the start of a new American industry, one that could eventually make a huge contribution to reducing the nations climate-changing pollution.

 

The idea of building turbines offshore, where strong, steady wind could, in theory, generate large amounts of power, has long been seen as a vital step toward a future based on renewable energy. Yet even as European nations installed thousands of the machines, American proposals ran into roadblocks, including high costs, murky rules about the use of the seafloor, and stiff opposition from people who did not want their ocean views marred by machinery.

 

"People have been talking about offshore wind for decades in the United States, and Ive seen the reaction -- eyes roll," Jeffrey Grybowski said last week in an interview on Block Island. "The attitude was, 'It's not going to happen; you guys cant do it.'"

 

Mr. Grybowski and the company he runs, Deepwater Wind of Providence, R.I., have now done it. They had a lot of help from the political leadership of Rhode Island, which has seized the lead in this nascent industry, ahead of bigger states like New York and Massachusetts.

 

Now, offshore wind may be on the verge of rapid growth in the United States.

 

Using a law passed by a Republican-led Congress in 2005 and signed by President George W. Bush, the Obama administration has been clarifying the ground rules and leasing out large patches of the ocean floor for wind-power development. Nearly two dozen projects are on the drawing board, with some potentially including scores of turbines.

 

Equally important, state governments in recent months have been making big, new commitments to renewable power, driven by a rising sense of urgency about climate change.

 

Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo of New York set a goal of getting 50 percent of the states power from renewable sources by 2030, and the state will probably need large offshore wind farms to help achieve that. In Massachusetts, a Republican governor, Charlie Baker, just signed a bipartisan bill ordering the states utilities to develop contracts with offshore wind farms for an immense amount of power, 50 times the expected output of the Block Island Wind Farm.

 

Other states are looking at wind power, too, and studies by the Department of Energy suggest that many thousands of these turbines may eventually ring the United States coastline.

 

If that sounds ambitious, consider that the country has installed some 50,000 wind turbines on land over the past two decades. They now supply roughly 5 percent of the nations electric power, a figure that reaches double digits in particularly windy states like Kansas and Iowa.

 

The turbines are easier and cheaper to build on land. But the wind is also weaker on land, and the power the machines produce there is intermittent. The stronger breezes in the ocean can produce steadier power, potentially helping to balance out intermittent renewable sources like solar panels and onshore turbines.

 

The technology has been proved in Europe, where offshore wind farms as large as 300 turbines are being developed, with each turbine costing up to $30 million to build, install and connect to the power grid.

 

But the first major proposal in the United States, an immense project off Cape Cod that was to be called Cape Wind, was too big -- 130 turbines -- and too close to shore, many experts now believe. It drew ferocious opposition from oceanfront homeowners, gradually lost political support in Massachusetts and appears unlikely to go forward.

 

The companies now trying to start an offshore wind industry are determined not to repeat the mistakes that plagued Cape Wind. That is one reason Deepwater Wind decided to start with a small project.

 

The focus is still on the Northeast. That region has dense cities with strong electrical demand, high power prices, opposition to new power plants on land and some of the worlds stiffest ocean breezes off the coast. And the water remains relatively shallow many miles from shore, so wind farms could be installed far enough away that most of them would not be visible from the beaches.

 

With Northeastern states committing to the idea, the big question is: How much would it cost to get thousands of offshore turbines up and running?

 

When the first offshore projects were built two decades ago, European nations had to promise the developers extremely high prices for the electricity generated by their turbines, sometimes three or four times the wholesale power price, to get a new industry going.

 

Since then, offshore wind turbines have become a big business in Europe, worth billions, and the companies installing them have been able to create economies of scale. Recently, European nations have scrapped their old subsidy methods and have used competitive bidding to drive down the cost of the projects.

 

In some ways, the United States benefited by waiting for the industry to mature, as it can now take advantage of those falling costs. Installation is still pricier here than in Europe, and may be for a while, because few American companies have invested in the boats and other gear necessary to do the work.

 

The Block Island turbines were built overseas by a division of General Electric and were installed by a ship from Norway, brought over at a cost of millions of dollars, with help from an American vessel.

 

23WINDFARM5-superJumbo.jpg

The projects wind turbines, about three miles away, can be seen from shore on Block Island, but island residents have been largely supportive. Credit - Kayana Szymczak for The New York Times

 

Yet if states go forward with their plans, experts say the costs are likely to fall sharply as domestic industry scales up to meet the demand. On the Block Island project, a company in Houma, La., won the contract to build the metal foundations in the water, and other Gulf Coast businesses that have long built offshore oil structures see wind power in the Northeast as a potential new market.

 

For now, the construction of the first wind farm off an American coast sends a simple message to governments, investors and citizens: It can be done.

 

"Spectacular!" Mr. Grybowski said from the deck of a boat last week as he watched the final stages of construction.

 

The Block Island project was a marriage of Rhode Island political will and New York financial expertise. Initial financing for the $300 million project came from the D. E. Shaw Group, a big investment firm based in Manhattan.

 

D. E. Shaws head of United States private equity investment, Bryan Martin, had invested huge sums over the years on the firms behalf in onshore wind farms, convinced that renewable energy was poised to displace fossil fuels. He saw offshore wind power as the next step and has been pushing the Block Island wind farm and other Deepwater Wind projects forward for more than a decade.

 

The turbines are about three miles off Block Island and can be seen easily from land. That drew some opposition, and could have been fatal.

 

But Block Island is a rustic vacation spot where residents turned out to be largely supportive of the project. Not only does it help the environment, but it will connect their power grid to the mainland for the first time, giving them a more reliable supply.

 

Competitors are moving to challenge Deepwater Wind for the coming wave of offshore contracts, but the company hopes to hold its lead and win the next project, a proposed wind farm 36 miles off Montauk, N.Y., meant to supply the power-hungry South Fork of Long Island.

 

"I do believe that starting small has made sense," said Mr. Martin, who is also Deepwater Winds chairman. "I would say that the next projects are going to be substantially bigger."

Coming from the guy that post links from dailykoz, hufferpost, and a lot of other far left nutjob news outlets. When are you gonna grow up? You make a fool out of yourself and start calling me names. When do you graduate Jr. High?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nope! The only "point" you've got is the one on top of your head, jerkykrazyfailure.

 

 

 

 

Pathetic rightwingnut propaganda meme that has nothing to do with the overall "transition to a clean energy economy.....the actual topic of this thread.

 

ONE offshore wind energy project sited pretty close to land got opposed by local residents on Cape Cod for for some fairly understandable reasons that were discussed in the article I just posted.

 

Meanwhile, many other offshore wind energy projects are going forward and one has already been built off Rhode Island.

 

Americas First Offshore Wind Farm May Power Up a New Industry

A just-completed project off the coast of Rhode Island, though relatively tiny, is at the forefront of a sea-based transition to renewable energy.

The New York Times

By JUSTIN GILLIS

AUG. 22, 2016

BLOCK ISLAND, R.I. The towering machines stand a few miles from shore, in a precise line across the seafloor, as rigid in the ocean breeze as sailors reporting for duty.

 

The blades are locked in place for now, but sometime in October, they will be turned loose to capture the power of the wind. And then, after weeks of testing and fine-tuning, Americas first offshore wind farm will begin pumping power into the New England electric grid.

 

By global standards, the Block Island Wind Farm is a tiny project, just five turbines capable of powering about 17,000 homes. Yet many people are hoping its completion, with the final blade bolted into place at the end of last week, will mark the start of a new American industry, one that could eventually make a huge contribution to reducing the nations climate-changing pollution.

 

The idea of building turbines offshore, where strong, steady wind could, in theory, generate large amounts of power, has long been seen as a vital step toward a future based on renewable energy. Yet even as European nations installed thousands of the machines, American proposals ran into roadblocks, including high costs, murky rules about the use of the seafloor, and stiff opposition from people who did not want their ocean views marred by machinery.

 

"People have been talking about offshore wind for decades in the United States, and Ive seen the reaction -- eyes roll," Jeffrey Grybowski said last week in an interview on Block Island. "The attitude was, 'It's not going to happen; you guys cant do it.'"

 

Mr. Grybowski and the company he runs, Deepwater Wind of Providence, R.I., have now done it. They had a lot of help from the political leadership of Rhode Island, which has seized the lead in this nascent industry, ahead of bigger states like New York and Massachusetts.

 

Now, offshore wind may be on the verge of rapid growth in the United States.

 

Using a law passed by a Republican-led Congress in 2005 and signed by President George W. Bush, the Obama administration has been clarifying the ground rules and leasing out large patches of the ocean floor for wind-power development. Nearly two dozen projects are on the drawing board, with some potentially including scores of turbines.

 

Equally important, state governments in recent months have been making big, new commitments to renewable power, driven by a rising sense of urgency about climate change.

 

Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo of New York set a goal of getting 50 percent of the states power from renewable sources by 2030, and the state will probably need large offshore wind farms to help achieve that. In Massachusetts, a Republican governor, Charlie Baker, just signed a bipartisan bill ordering the states utilities to develop contracts with offshore wind farms for an immense amount of power, 50 times the expected output of the Block Island Wind Farm.

 

Other states are looking at wind power, too, and studies by the Department of Energy suggest that many thousands of these turbines may eventually ring the United States coastline.

 

If that sounds ambitious, consider that the country has installed some 50,000 wind turbines on land over the past two decades. They now supply roughly 5 percent of the nations electric power, a figure that reaches double digits in particularly windy states like Kansas and Iowa.

 

The turbines are easier and cheaper to build on land. But the wind is also weaker on land, and the power the machines produce there is intermittent. The stronger breezes in the ocean can produce steadier power, potentially helping to balance out intermittent renewable sources like solar panels and onshore turbines.

 

The technology has been proved in Europe, where offshore wind farms as large as 300 turbines are being developed, with each turbine costing up to $30 million to build, install and connect to the power grid.

 

But the first major proposal in the United States, an immense project off Cape Cod that was to be called Cape Wind, was too big -- 130 turbines -- and too close to shore, many experts now believe. It drew ferocious opposition from oceanfront homeowners, gradually lost political support in Massachusetts and appears unlikely to go forward.

 

The companies now trying to start an offshore wind industry are determined not to repeat the mistakes that plagued Cape Wind. That is one reason Deepwater Wind decided to start with a small project.

 

The focus is still on the Northeast. That region has dense cities with strong electrical demand, high power prices, opposition to new power plants on land and some of the worlds stiffest ocean breezes off the coast. And the water remains relatively shallow many miles from shore, so wind farms could be installed far enough away that most of them would not be visible from the beaches.

 

With Northeastern states committing to the idea, the big question is: How much would it cost to get thousands of offshore turbines up and running?

 

When the first offshore projects were built two decades ago, European nations had to promise the developers extremely high prices for the electricity generated by their turbines, sometimes three or four times the wholesale power price, to get a new industry going.

 

Since then, offshore wind turbines have become a big business in Europe, worth billions, and the companies installing them have been able to create economies of scale. Recently, European nations have scrapped their old subsidy methods and have used competitive bidding to drive down the cost of the projects.

 

In some ways, the United States benefited by waiting for the industry to mature, as it can now take advantage of those falling costs. Installation is still pricier here than in Europe, and may be for a while, because few American companies have invested in the boats and other gear necessary to do the work.

 

The Block Island turbines were built overseas by a division of General Electric and were installed by a ship from Norway, brought over at a cost of millions of dollars, with help from an American vessel.

 

23WINDFARM5-superJumbo.jpg

The projects wind turbines, about three miles away, can be seen from shore on Block Island, but island residents have been largely supportive. Credit - Kayana Szymczak for The New York Times

 

Yet if states go forward with their plans, experts say the costs are likely to fall sharply as domestic industry scales up to meet the demand. On the Block Island project, a company in Houma, La., won the contract to build the metal foundations in the water, and other Gulf Coast businesses that have long built offshore oil structures see wind power in the Northeast as a potential new market.

 

For now, the construction of the first wind farm off an American coast sends a simple message to governments, investors and citizens: It can be done.

 

"Spectacular!" Mr. Grybowski said from the deck of a boat last week as he watched the final stages of construction.

 

The Block Island project was a marriage of Rhode Island political will and New York financial expertise. Initial financing for the $300 million project came from the D. E. Shaw Group, a big investment firm based in Manhattan.

 

D. E. Shaws head of United States private equity investment, Bryan Martin, had invested huge sums over the years on the firms behalf in onshore wind farms, convinced that renewable energy was poised to displace fossil fuels. He saw offshore wind power as the next step and has been pushing the Block Island wind farm and other Deepwater Wind projects forward for more than a decade.

 

The turbines are about three miles off Block Island and can be seen easily from land. That drew some opposition, and could have been fatal.

 

But Block Island is a rustic vacation spot where residents turned out to be largely supportive of the project. Not only does it help the environment, but it will connect their power grid to the mainland for the first time, giving them a more reliable supply.

 

Competitors are moving to challenge Deepwater Wind for the coming wave of offshore contracts, but the company hopes to hold its lead and win the next project, a proposed wind farm 36 miles off Montauk, N.Y., meant to supply the power-hungry South Fork of Long Island.

 

"I do believe that starting small has made sense," said Mr. Martin, who is also Deepwater Winds chairman. "I would say that the next projects are going to be substantially bigger."

All those valid reasons that were mentioned in the article, are the same fcking reasons that other communities (like some here in WI) tried to use, but were shot down because we don't have Ultra Rich and Powerful friends and corrupt politicians like you do on the East coast.

 

They put up a wind farm right in the path of a major migratory flyway for birds and bats, right next to one of the largest fresh water marshes in the US. You know, the places where geese and ducks like to land. That's right, you never get out of the basement of your parents home in the big city, so you wouldn't know dick about wildlife.

 

And now instead of a beautiful starlit evening, it looks like a giant flock of monster sized red firefly's. Go peddle your BS somewhere else.

 

And when the projects get bigger, it means they will pack as many turbines in a area as they can. When you find a spot that works, you utilize it to it's fullest. So imagine that same picture (the one with only two turbines), but with 5-6, and spread as fare down the coast as they can and as far out as they can. They shot down the original plan of 130, but that's the plan. It only got approved because they cut way back, but once in they will expand. If they shot down 130, what will happen when they put in 500?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Coming from the guy that post links from dailykoz, hufferpost, and a lot of other far left nutjob news outlets. When are you gonna grow up? You make a fool out of yourself and start calling me names. When do you graduate Jr. High?

Good example of what kind off ridiculous bullshit rightwingnuts bleat when their demented reality-challenged drivel gets debunked with an article in The New York Times.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good example of what kind off ridiculous bullshit rightwingnuts bleat when their demented reality-challenged drivel gets debunked with an article in The New York Times.

nothing in that article debunks my claims. It only reinforces it you idjiot! All of the original projects were shot down. It took them tens years to come up with a dwarf sized project to slip it in. That project won't create enough power to do squat. When they make the projects as big as they need to, they will be shot down again. Grow up little one!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...