From the article:
"We must reduce carbon production generated by transportation — it is five times more than the carbon produced by electric production. Some predict that in 25 years we’ll all be driving electric cars."
He also goes on to write:
"Maine has the highest per capita consumption of petroleum in New England and our economy is very consumptive. We must encourage low-carbon energy sources — not natural gas. Yes, bring on the wood, wind, water and sunshine".
Read Smith's piece here:
So George, if transportation is the "culprit" (notice that's in quotes) and transportation uses petroleum -- do you honestly see wind powering electric cars, presumably eliminating gasoline? Do you really think that if we went to all electric cars we'd be relying on such an expensive and bogus electricity source as wind?
But we're glad to see you finally acknowledging the reality that electricity production in Maine is a non-factor in terms of CO2 emissions, something we reported on years ago at this website:
5/27/14 - "Maine Environmental Groups Ignore CO2"
1/20/15 - EPA's Bad News for Maine Wind Industry: Maine's CO2 Emissions from Electricity Production Less Than 1/3 the National Average
12/24/16 - NEW from the EIA: Electricity a Virtual Non-Factor in Maine's CO2 Emissions
Thank you. If all vehicle were electric, we'd have to be using an inexpensive electricity source I'd think. I hear stuff like "charge your electric car at night when electric rates are lower". But if everyone did this, the supply & demand would make the once "cheap" rates in the middle of the night skyrocket, right? And also, wind (especially with the transmission and other real costs factored in) would hardly provide low cost electricity.
Willem, based on what you have written, would then there not be some energy loss simply by charging the batteries of electric cars? If so, is this ever discussed in the utopian rants of the green energy crowd who think we'll all be driving electric vehicles powered by 100% renewable energy?
Thank you Willem Post. So, does that 20%round trip loss translate to a 10% loss of direct feed into the grid from wind turbines that are placed twenty, thirty miles away from the transmission lines?
Smith IS the pits.
Interestingly, George testified against open pit mining in Maine while holding a hand carved brook trout and concluded his testimony with these words:
"Tourism is our biggest economic driver, and I don’t have to tell you that no one comes to Maine to see a mine. But mines could ruin the things that do bring them here – including this beautiful fish.
All I can say is, please, do no harm."
His testimony was excellent. It's too bad he doesn't see the fragmentation and industrialization of Maine's mountains to produce tax write offs for corporations and carbon credits for southern New England in the same light as he does open pit mining.
I've been saying this for years but now I will reiterate my points. The subsidies,tax credits etc only enrich the developers. Don't expect a corporation to take a moral position as it it is always in their interest to maximize profit. That is what they are suppose to do. The "all in cost " of wind development would shock any investor who had to risk his own personal capital. Construction of components,transportation,destruction of mountains and actual construction does not provide a profit margin but it is not necessary since the project receives .022 KWH guaranteed from ratepayers.
Any entrepreneur would say no,no, no unless he was being bailed out by Federal , State and local taxpayers and by all the subsidies, and tax credits.. What a scam!!!!!!!!!!!
© 2023 Created by Webmaster. Powered by
You need to be a member of Citizens' Task Force on Wind Power - Maine to add comments!
Join Citizens' Task Force on Wind Power - Maine