Slashdot Mirror
R.I.P., Cape Wind (bostonglobe.com)
schwit1 quotes the Boston Globe: What a long, slow death it has been for Massachusetts's first proposed offshore wind farm. But now, its proponents are finally pulling the plug. While others in the energy industry considered the Cape Wind project dead, developer Jim Gordon didn't quit after losing power contracts he needed for financing in early 2015, or after state regulators yanked permission for a power line connection last year.
Another big blow came later in 2016 when Cape Wind foes worked their magic on Beacon Hill. They successfully lobbied lawmakers to prevent Cape Wind from benefitting from a major energy bill, one that requires utilities to buy large amounts of offshore wind. This was exactly the kind of legislation Gordon needed. But he wasn't being allowed at the party...
We're embarking on a new era. Wind turbines are on their way for deeper waters, south of Martha's Vineyard. They won't be Gordon's. But at least he can take some credit, in his defeat, for being a pioneer.
Another big blow came later in 2016 when Cape Wind foes worked their magic on Beacon Hill. They successfully lobbied lawmakers to prevent Cape Wind from benefitting from a major energy bill, one that requires utilities to buy large amounts of offshore wind. This was exactly the kind of legislation Gordon needed. But he wasn't being allowed at the party...
We're embarking on a new era. Wind turbines are on their way for deeper waters, south of Martha's Vineyard. They won't be Gordon's. But at least he can take some credit, in his defeat, for being a pioneer.
Fine. Let's give them a coal-fired plant as an alternative.
...that Jim Gordon was a wind power pioneer in addition to being the commissioner of the Gotham PD
Get government out of the business of allocating resources; there needs to be a Separation of Business and Government.
This whole debacle results from a lack of well defined ownership over resources; the right thing to do is start the market off by bidding away property rights to "private" individuals (or their organizations), and then let the market handle where and how those resources should be managed.
The summary ignores the fact that the anti-wind forces were the super wealthy Dems in Martha's Vineyard who didn't want their views altered.
They're all in favor of renewables as long as someone else (you) has to deal with the negatives while they get all the benefits.
Imagine my surprise that they don't want this whirly stuff in their backyard. You know the Kennedys fought this hard, until the lion of the Senate died..
insisted that a full-time GNNA the party in street about half of thE OS. Now BSDI is see. The number significantly obligated to care under the GPL. do, and with any
This is the lesson one can walk away with from this whole story.
Seems a pretty corrupt place.
I think wind turbines are beautiful machines.Highly engineered and efficient devices that (mostly) silently turn 24/7 generating power and displacing carbon producing sources contributing to human flourishing. They are a statement that says intelligent creatures live here.
The problem is, you're giving the people the coal fired plant, when it was the politicians that screwed the people in the first place.
It's heartbreaking to watch the deep corruption in politics hold society back while doing direct harm to the citizens with their "wars" on informed personal and consensual choice and their blatant corporate fluffing.
But as long as the voters remain largely poorly educated and gullible, it's going to continue to be corrupt politicians all the way down. Sadly, the people are unable to make the connection between their voting habits and their problems. Not unwilling; unable.
And guess who controls the people's education?
Right.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
Someone who finds a new way to make money and gets to watch others do just that.
I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
Besides how it would look visually which for some people was big issue, another large problem was the fact that maintenance would have been very costly and difficult, and the cost of energy even though cheaper to produce was announced that everyone would be charged more for energy than what they currently are. These are the key reasons why so many in the area have been against this project.
The reoccurring cause is the whole NIMBY, because the rich didn't want their view ruined. You all do understand this isn't the view from shore they are complaining about being ruined. In nearly all the cases the wind turbines wouldn't be visible from land.
The view they are talking about being ruined is the view from their fishing boats, sail boats, and yachts 20 miles off shore.
I regularly poo poo on all things tree huggerish, but as an engineer I love wind turbines. There is enough potential wind power just off shore in the US to install 4 times the current power requirements.
Throw in Geo, Solar, and a bunch of base loading produced by coal/natural gas, nuclear, and if Elon can get them to work battery's, and basically we have enough power capacity to fulfill demand for the next several hundred years for all sectors of the economy including transportation, without ever having to import another drop of oil from overseas again.
Cunt Trump lies and has said we will not let North Korea have nukes. North Korea has nukes. Cunt Trump is a liar.
Here's how you deal with an errant business: You do business with a competitor, even if there are drawbacks; or, you band together wither other people who have an entrepreneurial spirit to start an alternative.
Evolution by variation (supplier competition) and selection (consumer choice).
We don't need no stinkin' Dear Leader; we don't need no stinkin' Intelligent Designer—in fact, no such thing exists.
"Windmills for thee, but not for me."
After all, we Kennedys are big liberal leftists. We don't have to drink our own medicine, it's enough to force others, the little people, to drink it for us.
The above is 100% verifiably true.
The problem is that -this- project isn't cost effective. The electricity purchase deal was going to substantially raise the cost of electricity for everyone in the service area. While on-shore wind power is one of the most cost-effective sources, off-shore wind power is one of the most expensive!
The hope of sufficiently developing off-shore wind is that prices will come down like with on-shore wind. However, to what extent is unknown, particularly with the size of capital investments resulting in fewer players in the market.
Reference for cost of electricity by energy source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cost_of_electricity_by_source#United_States
Block Island Wind Farm: 24.4/kWh
Cape Wind: 18.7/kWh
Keep in mind, these are wholesale rates, which exclude the costs+profits of local utilities.
So, the only way this would really work is if everyone were required by law to use the product of this company?
Hey, I bet I could make a lot of money making baseball base markers, if everyone in the country were required by law to buy three of them every year!
Slightly more seriously, I don't consider something a good investment if it requires a law making everyone an involuntary customer...
"I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
You know, the rich Democrats who had this project shot down repeatedly really care about global warming. I mean, you wouldn't want these ugly towers to ruin their views while they're on their yacht or flying their private plane. It's understandable.
Do you have ESP?
That murdering drunkard couldn't even see the turbines from his property, he just didn't want them out there he wanted to sail his yacht.
I think they are impressive also.
But from the last great push to do wind farms a few daces ago, there are a lot of fields of rusting hulks (like in CA or the souther tip of Hawaii) - the new ones are destined to that same fate I think. They do not look so great, except in a cool distressed kind of vibe that ignores the reality of the harm to the local environment taking place.
And there is the simple fact that yes, wind farms do kill birds, and a lot of them. Birds are just not able to cope with something that moves as fast as the average windmill in a good wind.
To me wind farms. at least from windmills were always the absolute worst of alternative energy ideas. Something with moving parts is I think an inherently bad idea, compared with solar especially.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
I wonder if the corruption was ever this bad...in Massachusetts, one of the most favorable political climates for a project like this, money wins out. I know political corruption has existed forever, but it seems like you can't get anything done unless you have enough money to pay for a lobbyist. If everything normal people want grinds to a halt, they're eventually going to get fed up.
The thing that sucks is that most good people avoid politics because they see what a dirty business it is. Even in the large companies I've worked at, politics rules every decision regardless of merit of the apolitical folks' opinion. The problem is that it's a very "if you can't beat 'em, join 'em" kind of game and enough good people have to cycle in once in a while.
That also makes me wonder 2 things...when an idealistic new Congressman or state representative comes in, when does the corruption begin? And how exactly do lobbyists pay their targets? I imagine journalists are scrutinizing their every moves to see if any bags of money are changing hands.
Any turbine could be a safe place to swim to if you were a woman thrown out of his yacht.
R.I.P. Cape Fear
Not sure where you got those numbers for Block Island and Cape Wind because they are not in the Wikipedia page but that page does show the cost of onshore wind to be $24 to $60 MWh ($0.03 to $0.06 per kWh) with offshore wind being about twice as expensive.
(For comparison, coal $100, natural gas $60, nuclear $95, solar PV $58. All of these are minimum costs.)
Costs are dropping rapidly for wind and solar so the original plans are out of date.
I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
Put some eagle sounds on stupid windmill to scare stupid birds ....
You all raise hell about the dangers of monopolies, but what is "government" other than a monopoly?!
Indeed, "government" is worse that a market monopoly! The "government" is a monopoly that arose not through voluntary trade by providing a productive service, but rather "government" is a monopoly that arose through violent imposition by the barrel of a gun.
Executive: Pack up. We're leaving. We only have a thousand dollars anyway.
Mayor Quimby: There's a thousand dollar leaving-town tax!
Capitalism will kill us all!
We need COMMUNISM!!!!!!!
UNITE with the Campaign for a Free Internet because today, our future begins with tomorrow!
Free to keep paying Hydro Quebec if you want heat or a/c ir lights!
The problem is that -this- project isn't cost effective. The electricity purchase deal was going to substantially raise the cost of electricity for everyone...
Our assumption here is and should be that you are an intern at a lobbying firm.
Wind power works as does wave power and currents as power sources. And the financial calculations are 100% nonsense. For example, you may have four wind towers in a square pattern. Why not run netting around them and establish a fish farm which could provide quite a bit of money as well as the power generated by the wind? On land, one might provide walls and a roof to raise mushrooms, chickens or other profitable products. Just because one has wind mills or solar panels on a property does not mean that other businesses can not exist on the same lot. In the cities there have even been chicken ranches in high rise buildings such that the chickens and eggs are raised on various floors, slaughtered and processed and sold on the ground floor. Such a building could also support wind or solar equipment. The cost of producing wind or solar energy is not a simple calculation at all.
If windmills are so great and changing the view is no problem, then why not put them on the ridges of the Grand Canyon and also all along the Mall in Washington DC?
Cats kill 3.7 Billion a year... that is with a B. You were saying?
https://www.usatoday.com/story...
Capitalism is locking exploited workers in shanty, deathtrap warehouses by their own choice.
That's not allowed!
Only the Dear Leader should be able to choose how workers are exploited!
Citations? Those numbers look like mixing wholesale and retail prices.
Sure, the protection of property rights can be implemented by a violently imposed monopoly (e.g., a "government"). However, there's no reason why providers of this service shouldn't also compete in the market.
The best separation of powers is competition within a market. Even if one service providers rises above all others to become a monopoly, it would still be better than a government, because that market monopoly will have arisen through voluntary trade rather than through violent imposition. At best, your "government" is the failure mode of freedom.
Trade is made voluntary by contracts in advance of interaction, and the negotiation/enforcement of contracts is an iterative process; there is profit in agreement, and so there is an incentive to come to terms rather than wage war. Consider that there has never been One World Government.
From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... :
In 2009, the State of Rhode Island designated Deepwater Wind to begin with pilot projects.[15][16] In that year Deepwater signed an agreement with National Grid to sell the power from the wind farm off Block Island, at an initial price of 24.4(cents)/kWh.[17]
From https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... :
On November 22, 2010, a 15-year Power Purchase Agreement between Cape Wind and National Grid was signed for 50% of the electricity, at a price of 18.7(cents)/kWh,[39] adding $1.50 a month to the electricity bill of an average home.[40]
Minimum costs are rarely realized.
Do those price estimates factor in the cost of having metric buttloads of fossil fuel powered generators sitting around waiting for when the wind stops blowing?
I believe nuclear power is the only type which requires "spinning reserve" in case it shuts down. With wind, it's probably prudent to have some natural gas plants on standby if the wind forecast for the day is low. Utilities have gotten quite good at managing generation from various sources with varying load from their customers.
I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
Those costs are almost ten years old. Wind is much cheaper now.
I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
Those are all PPAs (power purchase agreements... wholesale).
I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
Do you have a source? I'm very interested in seeing current pricing.
I am armed because I am free. I am free because I am armed.
My source for this was the Wikipedia article referenced by the OP.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
Not sure where you got those numbers for Block Island and Cape Wind because they are not in the Wikipedia page but that page does show the cost of onshore wind to be $24 to $60 MWh ($0.03 to $0.06 per kWh) with offshore wind being about twice as expensive.
(For comparison, coal $100, natural gas $60, nuclear $95, solar PV $58. All of these are minimum costs.)
Costs are dropping rapidly for wind and solar so the original plans are out of date.
Those costs depend on the location. Coal is in the range of $40-$70 in most places, depending on if the mine is nearby or not.
Your cost for nuclear and natural gas are also inflated.
The LMP map for the MISO region shows prices (at the moment) between $0 and $40, but it is 8PM on a fall/winter evening. If your prices were correct, none of those energy sources would "clear the market" (win the bid), but the lights are on so we know that is not the case.
When sea levels rise and ruin most rich-owned waterfront property. Damn, almost makes you desire global warming.
You sound like the scam artists that pushed the same crap back a decade ago here in Ontario. It *did* push the cost of electricity though the roof here. The situation here is now so dire that they've mandated by law that they can't cut off power in the winter, for fear of people freezing to death. This, along with what happened in Ontario is gigantic clusterfuck. Nothing more, nothing less and in both cases one would have led to higher energy prices much higher, and in the other case did lead to much higher energy prices. So much so that the government is backtracking because by june of next year it will likely cease to be an actual political party.
Om, nomnomnom...
Of course they don't want wind farms off the coast of the cape. That's where all the rich Kennedy's live with all their cohorts. In the second breath they will also piss and moan about how coal fired plants are causing such environmental harm. I recommend we all burn tires in our back yard as a form of protest. 'You could have prevented this by allowing renewable energy off the coast of Cape Cod.'
How it will work in the medium term future. Renewables as the main energy with nuclear as back up but also powering high energy recycling to create zero waste cities, converting all waste back into useful raw materials. The big growth in new power stations, interconnected suburbs with solar panels and batteries, even domestic vertical axis wind turbines (low) noise, the burbs supplying power for the rest of the city, with every roof fully covered in solar panels, power station already built, just need the energy generators.
Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
They will just "buy" a win, as they have for the last several years.. What is the current plan? Remortgage electric prices for a 25% reduction to get the election win, and in return we pay $25 billion in interest.
They will just "buy" a win, as they have for the last several years.. What is the current plan? Remortgage electric prices for a 25% reduction to get the election win, and in return we pay $25 billion in interest.
They tried that three times already, they're also trying with the "$15 minimum wage" which is at the very best going to lead to 60k people losing their jobs. What's the current plan going to have to be? Break all FiT contracts, and stop telling companies not to produce electricity - which would drive the costs down for the end consumer.
Look at the polling though, since early this year the ontario liberals haven't polled above 18% they've been as low as 11% support. Wynne's popularity is 5-7% and hasn't increased at all. The very best case going by how things are right now is they'll scrape out with 11-13 seats in the GTA. And lose to a conservative majority.
Om, nomnomnom...
They havent yet activated the final part of their "strategy". You know, when "working families" (https://workingfamilies.ca/ ) which is really just a thin union coating spend millions on attack ads for the liberals. This lets them strategically use their own funds for positive messsages, while letting "someone else" do the dirty work.
Might be different this time as they finally took on some of the "third party spending" laws they should have addopted decades ago.
They were also able to get use taxpayer money to fund their own party. Like how they got the "ontario electric benefit" broken down on the electric bill, so you can clearly see what the libs are doing for you (all in the name of transparency) yet they were never able to spell out what the "debt retirement fee" or the "global adjustments" were. Odd how they were not interested in transparancy and outline how their disasterous "green energy" fixed rate contracts is what caused electricity prices to skyrocket.
Hide the negative, oversell the positive.
I live on Cape Cod, and was opposed to cape wind from the beginning.
They flat out said the project wouldn't happen if it didn't before government subsidies for it expired. They needed my taxes to pay for it.
Then they needed laws requiring my electric provider to buy electricity at a high rate from them causing my electric bills to go up.
Very few people opposed to this were rich people concerned with their views.
Yeah, it's too bad that Ontario decided to go all in on expensive and inflexible nuclear power. Now you're stuck with these problems.
I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
Yeah, it's too bad that Ontario decided to go all in on expensive and inflexible nuclear power. Now you're stuck with these problems.
You mean the part where nuclear carries the base load and is still only 0.085kWh with refurbishment included for the reactors? Unlike today where it's: Overcast, with no wind. Yeah those solar cells and windmills are sure working great!
Om, nomnomnom...
Not sure if I'm misreading your post, but wind energy sources didn't screw over the rates up here. Don't blame the technology. 17 years of bad policy decisions by politicians who didn't understand the energy market and changing energy needs caused the current problems. Like signing 20-year contracts for new power when existing infrastructure was already over-capacity and demand was declining.
This article is good summary too, without the rhetoric of the financial post article which states there is likely no health benefit to reducing coal reliance.
Problem with saying "60k people losing their jobs" is the few areas in the US that enacted ordinances and legislation for that same end goal have not had a net reduction in employment.
https://tvo.org/article/curren...
I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
Why bother? We won't have that many people in the future. The future is not big cities full of redundant population, but smaller communities where only the Worthy will be living. Less energy consumption, less production of waste, a more sustainable civilization. We only have the deplorables, the uncouth and uncultured working and middle classes, to lose and we never wanted to keep them, do we?
have you been out of sight of land, ever, off the Cape? The wind never stops blowing off the Cape.
Why are so many ignorant buttheads like you allowed to post?
It's also good to use multiple types of renewable energy in the mix. Wind is often at its best on cloudy days when solar is inefficient. Hydro is only seriously affected by long term issues like droughts. Geothermal and tidal act as baseline sources that are constantly available.
Probably to offset the ignorant buttheads who have no clue what they're talking about.
The author is a very well known anti-nuke nut FYI. So much so that he makes Japanese anti-nuke nuts seem reasonable.
Om, nomnomnom...
Problem with saying "60k people losing their jobs" is the few areas in the US that enacted ordinances and legislation for that same end goal have not had a net reduction in employment.
This is Canada, specifically Ontario. Those few areas in the US that have enacted those ordinances have seen jobs flee and businesses shutdown. If 60k people lose their jobs at the very best, the province will be strained to have enough money for UI and welfare payments.
Om, nomnomnom...
Sounds like he has good reason to be antinuke.
I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
If areas with a higher minimum wage haven't had a net reduction in employment, and these are perforce better jobs, what does it matter if some jobs flee? They're made up for by higher-paying jobs.
Try a little empiricism sometime.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
"Renewables as the main energy with nuclear as back up "
It's cheaper and more reliable to just run with nuclear. Even old fashioned water moderated nuclear.
And, surprisingly, nuclear produces less waste than the renewables do over their respective lifespans (IF LFTRs can be made viable then nuclear will reduce this by 99% on the output and a further 88% on the input sides.)
Why bother? The future is humans wiped out by the next mass extinction event.
I mean, if you're going to take the long-term view, you may as well take it seriously. Plus you know you'll almost certainly be proven right (to some hypothetical outside observer) eventually.
Personally, I'm rooting for the supervolcano team, but the large extraterrestrial object team has some great players too.