More Magical Thinking: President Biden’s Offshore Wind Fantasy

excalibur

Diamond Member
Mar 19, 2015
18,122
34,316
2,290
The insanity, at our expense, is mindboggling.

And the millions of gullible fools that drink this crap up.



Last March, President Joe Biden announced a goal of building 30,000 megawatts (MW) of offshore wind generation by 2030. Doing so will “strengthen the domestic supply chain and create good-paying union jobs,” according to the White House. It’s all part of the president’s executive order to “build a new energy economy that will create millions of new jobs.”

Except the executive order won’t accomplish this, not least because it rests on an assumption that endless green energy subsidies will produce boundless economic growth.

As I discuss in a new Manhattan Institute report, building 30,000 MW of offshore wind by 2030 is not going to happen. The goal is infeasible. And, even if it were achievable, offshore wind’s dismal economics make it a goal to be avoided. If common sense ruled the day — hey, we can all dream — then offshore wind would be torpedoed and allowed to sink into the abyss.

But green energy policies have nothing to do with common sense. They are all about the politically well-connected draining money from U.S. taxpayers and indulging the fantasies of climate catastrophists who believe the end is nigh.

There is only one offshore wind facility operating in the U.S. today — the 5-turbine, 30 MW Block Island Wind Farm, located off the coast of Rhode Island. The project took two years to build and cost about $400 million, or over $13 million per MW. By comparison, a new gas-fired combined-cycle generator has a capital cost of around $1 million per MW and can produce electricity when needed, not just when the wind blows.

Block Island is the poster child for the types of technological issues that are almost certain to affect future U.S. offshore wind development. Since it began producing electricity in December 2016, it has been plagued by operational issues, In 2017, it’s two undersea cables became uncovered because of tidal action. After almost five years, the longer cable to the mainland has still not been reburied. In June 2011, four of the five turbines were shut down for “routine maintenance” because of potential stress fractures in their towers.

While the executive order mentions improved supply chains, they are one of the things that will sink the 30,000 MW goal. As my report details, the rush to develop offshore wind in the U.S. will run headlong into the reality of scarce and increasingly costly resources. Raw materials, including rare earths and steel, are in short supply. The same is true for the magnets wind turbines require: there is only one manufacturer of these magnets in the U.S.

Moreover, improved supply chains will not change the decade or more needed to go from planning to construction, nor address the growing environmental concerns over massive offshore wind development. Vineyard Wind, for example, which will be built off the Martha’s Vineyard, is facing numerous lawsuits over its potential adverse impacts on endangered whales and commercial fishing interests. Those lawsuits are likely to delay the project for several years, if not longer. And more lawsuits are forthcoming.

...


 
The insanity, at our expense, is mindboggling.

And the millions of gullible fools that drink this crap up.


Last March, President Joe Biden announced a goal of building 30,000 megawatts (MW) of offshore wind generation by 2030. Doing so will “strengthen the domestic supply chain and create good-paying union jobs,” according to the White House. It’s all part of the president’s executive order to “build a new energy economy that will create millions of new jobs.”
Except the executive order won’t accomplish this, not least because it rests on an assumption that endless green energy subsidies will produce boundless economic growth.
As I discuss in a new Manhattan Institute report, building 30,000 MW of offshore wind by 2030 is not going to happen. The goal is infeasible. And, even if it were achievable, offshore wind’s dismal economics make it a goal to be avoided. If common sense ruled the day — hey, we can all dream — then offshore wind would be torpedoed and allowed to sink into the abyss.
But green energy policies have nothing to do with common sense. They are all about the politically well-connected draining money from U.S. taxpayers and indulging the fantasies of climate catastrophists who believe the end is nigh.
There is only one offshore wind facility operating in the U.S. today — the 5-turbine, 30 MW Block Island Wind Farm, located off the coast of Rhode Island. The project took two years to build and cost about $400 million, or over $13 million per MW. By comparison, a new gas-fired combined-cycle generator has a capital cost of around $1 million per MW and can produce electricity when needed, not just when the wind blows.
Block Island is the poster child for the types of technological issues that are almost certain to affect future U.S. offshore wind development. Since it began producing electricity in December 2016, it has been plagued by operational issues, In 2017, it’s two undersea cables became uncovered because of tidal action. After almost five years, the longer cable to the mainland has still not been reburied. In June 2011, four of the five turbines were shut down for “routine maintenance” because of potential stress fractures in their towers.
While the executive order mentions improved supply chains, they are one of the things that will sink the 30,000 MW goal. As my report details, the rush to develop offshore wind in the U.S. will run headlong into the reality of scarce and increasingly costly resources. Raw materials, including rare earths and steel, are in short supply. The same is true for the magnets wind turbines require: there is only one manufacturer of these magnets in the U.S.
Moreover, improved supply chains will not change the decade or more needed to go from planning to construction, nor address the growing environmental concerns over massive offshore wind development. Vineyard Wind, for example, which will be built off the Martha’s Vineyard, is facing numerous lawsuits over its potential adverse impacts on endangered whales and commercial fishing interests. Those lawsuits are likely to delay the project for several years, if not longer. And more lawsuits are forthcoming.
...


^ Racist against wind.
 
1644033082674.png


I think they'd be great right off the coast of Boston with Neil Young leading the charge by moving there and campaigning for this to happen.

*****CHUCKLE*****



:)
 
Last edited:
The insanity, at our expense, is mindboggling.

And the millions of gullible fools that drink this crap up.


Last March, President Joe Biden announced a goal of building 30,000 megawatts (MW) of offshore wind generation by 2030. Doing so will “strengthen the domestic supply chain and create good-paying union jobs,” according to the White House. It’s all part of the president’s executive order to “build a new energy economy that will create millions of new jobs.”
Except the executive order won’t accomplish this, not least because it rests on an assumption that endless green energy subsidies will produce boundless economic growth.
As I discuss in a new Manhattan Institute report, building 30,000 MW of offshore wind by 2030 is not going to happen. The goal is infeasible. And, even if it were achievable, offshore wind’s dismal economics make it a goal to be avoided. If common sense ruled the day — hey, we can all dream — then offshore wind would be torpedoed and allowed to sink into the abyss.
But green energy policies have nothing to do with common sense. They are all about the politically well-connected draining money from U.S. taxpayers and indulging the fantasies of climate catastrophists who believe the end is nigh.
There is only one offshore wind facility operating in the U.S. today — the 5-turbine, 30 MW Block Island Wind Farm, located off the coast of Rhode Island. The project took two years to build and cost about $400 million, or over $13 million per MW. By comparison, a new gas-fired combined-cycle generator has a capital cost of around $1 million per MW and can produce electricity when needed, not just when the wind blows.
Block Island is the poster child for the types of technological issues that are almost certain to affect future U.S. offshore wind development. Since it began producing electricity in December 2016, it has been plagued by operational issues, In 2017, it’s two undersea cables became uncovered because of tidal action. After almost five years, the longer cable to the mainland has still not been reburied. In June 2011, four of the five turbines were shut down for “routine maintenance” because of potential stress fractures in their towers.
While the executive order mentions improved supply chains, they are one of the things that will sink the 30,000 MW goal. As my report details, the rush to develop offshore wind in the U.S. will run headlong into the reality of scarce and increasingly costly resources. Raw materials, including rare earths and steel, are in short supply. The same is true for the magnets wind turbines require: there is only one manufacturer of these magnets in the U.S.
Moreover, improved supply chains will not change the decade or more needed to go from planning to construction, nor address the growing environmental concerns over massive offshore wind development. Vineyard Wind, for example, which will be built off the Martha’s Vineyard, is facing numerous lawsuits over its potential adverse impacts on endangered whales and commercial fishing interests. Those lawsuits are likely to delay the project for several years, if not longer. And more lawsuits are forthcoming.
...


It is highly ambitious. TVA output is in the 33,000 Megawatt range, said to be 60% carbon neutral and that is using:
  • 5 fossil plants (25 active units)
  • 3 nuclear plants (7 units)
  • 29 hydro plants (109 units)
  • 1 pumped storage hydroelectric plant (4 units)
  • 9 natural gas combustion turbine gas plants (87 units)
  • 8 natural gas combined cycle gas plants (14 power blocks, 35 units [21 gas turbines, 14 steam turbines])
  • 1 diesel generator site (5 units)
  • 14 solar energy sites
 
The insanity, at our expense, is mindboggling.

And the millions of gullible fools that drink this crap up.


Last March, President Joe Biden announced a goal of building 30,000 megawatts (MW) of offshore wind generation by 2030. Doing so will “strengthen the domestic supply chain and create good-paying union jobs,” according to the White House. It’s all part of the president’s executive order to “build a new energy economy that will create millions of new jobs.”
Except the executive order won’t accomplish this, not least because it rests on an assumption that endless green energy subsidies will produce boundless economic growth.
As I discuss in a new Manhattan Institute report, building 30,000 MW of offshore wind by 2030 is not going to happen. The goal is infeasible. And, even if it were achievable, offshore wind’s dismal economics make it a goal to be avoided. If common sense ruled the day — hey, we can all dream — then offshore wind would be torpedoed and allowed to sink into the abyss.
But green energy policies have nothing to do with common sense. They are all about the politically well-connected draining money from U.S. taxpayers and indulging the fantasies of climate catastrophists who believe the end is nigh.
There is only one offshore wind facility operating in the U.S. today — the 5-turbine, 30 MW Block Island Wind Farm, located off the coast of Rhode Island. The project took two years to build and cost about $400 million, or over $13 million per MW. By comparison, a new gas-fired combined-cycle generator has a capital cost of around $1 million per MW and can produce electricity when needed, not just when the wind blows.
Block Island is the poster child for the types of technological issues that are almost certain to affect future U.S. offshore wind development. Since it began producing electricity in December 2016, it has been plagued by operational issues, In 2017, it’s two undersea cables became uncovered because of tidal action. After almost five years, the longer cable to the mainland has still not been reburied. In June 2011, four of the five turbines were shut down for “routine maintenance” because of potential stress fractures in their towers.
While the executive order mentions improved supply chains, they are one of the things that will sink the 30,000 MW goal. As my report details, the rush to develop offshore wind in the U.S. will run headlong into the reality of scarce and increasingly costly resources. Raw materials, including rare earths and steel, are in short supply. The same is true for the magnets wind turbines require: there is only one manufacturer of these magnets in the U.S.
Moreover, improved supply chains will not change the decade or more needed to go from planning to construction, nor address the growing environmental concerns over massive offshore wind development. Vineyard Wind, for example, which will be built off the Martha’s Vineyard, is facing numerous lawsuits over its potential adverse impacts on endangered whales and commercial fishing interests. Those lawsuits are likely to delay the project for several years, if not longer. And more lawsuits are forthcoming.
...


Perhaps they should be erected in and around Martha's Vineyard. I'm told there's a lot of wind there.
Even on land they cannot be counted on when you need them most.
Missouri's largest wind farm is shut off at night to protect bats – is this overkill?

Yep, at night when you need to turn the lights on or cook supper, or maybe charge your short range car for the next day, energy producers have to turn off their wind turbines to protect flying creatures or the greenies will cry. And when its 90 degrees on a hot August night, forget about cooling your home, or even just running a fan in your bedroom so you can sleep.
 
It wasn't that long ago that Sen. Ted Kennedy stopped a sea line wind farm so it wouldn't ruin his view.

Ted Kennedy is deceased however, now. Other libs like B. Hussein O might be friendlier toward a massive wind farm close to his home.
 

Forum List

Back
Top