Trump in Rapid City on the ludicrous green degradation of the U.S. military

Comment

Comment by Willem Post on September 10, 2023 at 5:43pm

The US needs expensive offshore wind like another hole in the head, because it has low-cost, abundant DOMESTIC fossil fuel, hydro and nuclear

Europe needs expensive offshore wind (and solar), because it does not have enough fossil, refused to frack for gas, closed down nuclear plants and has no significant hydro

Europe wants to hamstring the U.S. with expensive electricity so it will be less competitive with Europe on world markets

The Biden folks are totally blind, do not see the big picture, because they are dogmatic and biased, and love open borders that end up ruining Democrat run cities, a nice come-uppance, and blindly throw money into the corrupt Kiev black hole.

All that happened, because they stole the 2020 Election from Trump

The only reason they lost in 2016, is because they underestimated Trump, overestimated Hillary, and as a result did not cheat enough

Comment by Willem Post on September 10, 2023 at 5:36pm

US Offshore Wind Systems Benefitting Big Wind Conglomerates in Europe

 

Almost the entire physical supply and installation of the 30,000 MW of offshore wind systems would be provided by EU companies, because they have the required expertise and the domestic onshore facilities and seagoing facilities, due to building at least 25,014 MW (end 2020) of offshore systems, starting in 1991. See URL

https://windeurope.org/about-wind/history/

 

Those companies would hire qualified US labor, as needed. 
Those companies would build US facilities, as needed. 
Those companies would not be interested in training a potential competitor.

 

The offshore wind turbine industry is trending towards wind turbines with capacities of 8 to 12 MW.

European experience indicates, the larger-capacity wind turbines require more maintenance/kWh, and have more downtime/kWh.

 

Currently, EU companies have capacity to install 8 to 10 MW offshore wind turbines, at a rate of about 1,500 MW/y

Adding 30,000 MW of very expensive offshore wind systems, would be of primary benefit to Europe which would:

 

1) Make financing, designing, building, assembling, operating and maintaining, replacing, almost all of the wind turbine systems

2) Purposely saddle the US, a trade competitor, with much higher energy costs, than at present

3) Continue to benefit from the significant US annual expenditures for defending Europe.

 

US Offshore Wind System Experience

 

US infrastructure for large wind turbines is practically non-existent; only GE is active in that space. It would take years to create US sites for producing offshore wind turbines, and build the sea-going ships and specialized cranes to transport, assemble, and service the wind turbines.

 

Duplicating the EU onshore and seagoing facilities in the US, PLUS implementing 30,000 MW of offshore wind systems in less than 7 years, 2023 to 2030, at a rate of 30,000/7 = 4,286 MW/y, would be physically impossible.

  

In the real world, any independent energy systems analyst would deem Biden’s offshore wind scheme a total fantasy.

https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/high-costs-of-wind-sol...

 

Additional URLs for information

 

https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/wind-and-solar-provide...

https://www.boem.gov/sites/default/files/renewable-energy-program/W...

 

The EU vs the US

 

The US, with a low-cost, self-sufficient, energy sector would attract European, Korean, Japanese, etc., energy-intensive, heavy-industry and industrial product production to the US.

 

Europe is interested to make sure the US has a high-cost electrical sector, with lots of high-priced wind and solar and batteries, to handicap the US, and to enhance its competitiveness vs the US. The UN is helping out by urging the US to expensively reduce its CO2 by 50% by 2030, which is not possible. See URL.

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2021/04/21/the-latest-co2-fantasy/

 

- Europe desperately needs more low-cost gas from Russia to remain competitive on world markets

- Europe has to build out wind and solar to limit energy imports from unstable countries; the US does not need to.

 

The US is falling into the EU very expensive, debilitating energy trap.

 

BTW, Europe must have wind and solar, because it imports huge quantities of energy (mostly from unfriendly countries), whereas the US is nearly energy independent

https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/the-plot-is-thickening...

Comment by Willem Post on September 10, 2023 at 3:45pm

The European Big Wind industry, drowning in RED INK, is finally telling the UK idiot bureaucrats, ENOUGH IS ENOUGH

Paris is “off course”, because it was, and still is, built on a lie;
many NATURAL forces cause the observed global temperature changes, already for 4 billion years

The increase in interest rates, long overdue, due to excessive printing of money, plus increased inflation, and increased energy costs, and increased materials cost, and increased skilled labor costs, and increased supply chain bottlenecks (lack of specialized ships) have combined to increase the capital cost per MW of installed wind/solar/battery capacity by about 70%, according to Bloomberg.

People are finally beginning to realize, the costs of Paris are astronomical, and even the richest countries on the planet cannot afford it going forward.

This gave rise to BRISC+6, soon BRISC+12, including two nuclear superpowers, and two oil superpowers, which will represent about 60% of the world population, and will control the majority of the world’s resources.

Oil is at $95/barrel, as decided by Russia and SaudiArabia .

The US Strategic Oil Reserve is empty, due to the flawless “political executive planning” of the illegitimate/grifting/grafting, Biden in-the-basement
 

BRISC does no longer want its resources used for the West to play world domination and climate fantasy games

It is curtains for the US/EU, Paris, and the arbitrary imposing of its self-serving, rules-based, bull manure

No Offshore Wind bids for the 5th Auction in the UK in 2023, because UK bureaucrats, ignoring market conditions, offered subsidies that are at least 40% TOO LOW, per Vattenfall.

Read these two articles to get up to speed

BATTERY SYSTEM CAPITAL COSTS, OPERATING COSTS, ENERGY LOSSES, AND AGING
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/battery-system-capital...

US/UK 56,000 MW OF OFFSHORE WIND BY 2030; AN EXPENSIVE FANTASY   
https://www.windtaskforce.org/profiles/blogs/biden-30-000-mw-of-off...