{"id":13674,"date":"2011-02-16T05:00:13","date_gmt":"2011-02-16T10:00:13","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.windturbinesyndrome.com\/static\/static\/?p=13674"},"modified":"2012-02-03T09:03:10","modified_gmt":"2012-02-03T14:03:10","slug":"its-our-money-editorial","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.windturbinesyndrome.com\/static\/2011\/its-our-money-editorial\/","title":{"rendered":"&#8220;It&#8217;s our money!&#8221; (Editorial)"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"pf-content\"><h4>What part of &#8220;<em>It&#8217;s our money!<\/em>&#8221; don&#8217;t the politicians get?<\/h4>\n<p><span style=\"color: #768b2e;\"><em>Editor&#8217;s note<\/em><span style=\"color: #768b2e;\">: \u00a0Mary Kay Barton is a resident of Silver Lake, NY. \u00a0She has been heavily involved in wind energy issues for years, and is a frequent commentator on the subject. \u00a0The following is reprinted with appreciation.<br \/>\n<span style=\"color: #ffffff;\">\u00b7 <\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: center;\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.windturbinesyndrome.com\/static\/wp-content\/uploads\/2011\/02\/fat-cat-final.jpg\"><br \/>\n<img loading=\"lazy\" class=\"size-full wp-image-13695 aligncenter\" src=\"https:\/\/www.windturbinesyndrome.com\/static\/wp-content\/uploads\/2011\/02\/fat-cat-final.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"265\" height=\"300\" \/><\/a><\/p>\n<h4 style=\"text-align: center;\"><span style=\"color: #8b008b;\"><em>Fat Cat Wind, LLC<\/em><\/span><\/h4>\n<p style=\"text-align: left;\"><span style=\"color: #ffffff;\">\u00b7<\/span><br \/>\n\u2014Mary Kay Barton, <a title=\"website article\" onclick=\"window.open('http:\/\/thedailynewsonline.com\/opinion\/editorials\/article_886768a8-32ea-11e0-a04d-001cc4c002e0.html?mode=story','','scrollbars=yes,resizable=yes,width=1000,height=1000,left='+(screen.availWidth\/2-500)+',top='+(screen.availHeight\/2-500)+'');return false;\" href=\"http:\/\/thedailynewsonline.com\/opinion\/editorials\/article_886768a8-32ea-11e0-a04d-001cc4c002e0.html?mode=story\" target=\"_blank\">The Daily News<\/a> (2\/7\/11)<\/p>\n<p>After reading <a title=\"website\" onclick=\"window.open('http:\/\/www.invenergyllc.com\/','','scrollbars=yes,resizable=yes,width=1000,height=1000,left='+(screen.availWidth\/2-500)+',top='+(screen.availHeight\/2-500)+'');return false;\" href=\"http:\/\/www.invenergyllc.com\/\" target=\"_blank\">Invenergy\u2019s<\/a> self-serving pontifications in their recent article, \u201cInvenergy and <a title=\"NY State Energy Research &amp; Development Authority\" onclick=\"window.open('http:\/\/www.nyserda.org\/','','scrollbars=yes,resizable=yes,width=1000,height=1000,left='+(screen.availWidth\/2-500)+',top='+(screen.availHeight\/2-500)+'');return false;\" href=\"http:\/\/www.nyserda.org\/\" target=\"_blank\">NYSERDA<\/a> enter renewable energy credit purchase agreement,\u201d it seems we need to step back and take a look at the bigger picture here:<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>I (and most citizens) agree we have environmental and energy issues; and<\/li>\n<li>I (and most citizens) agree that these technical matters should be solved using real science \u2014 not propaganda being put forth by corporate salesmen.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>Real science is not a collection of theorems, but is a process \u2014 the core process being the scientific method. The scientific method consists of a hypothesis (e.g., that wind energy is equivalent to our conventional power sources) being subjected to a: (1) comprehensive, (2) objective, (3) independent, (4) transparent, and (5) empirical-based assessment.<\/p>\n<p>The fact is: This has not been done for wind energy \u2014 anyplace!<\/p>\n<p>Said in an another easy-to-understand way:<\/p>\n<p>Since we are in agreement that we have energy and environmental issues, let\u2019s say that some entrepreneurs step forward and present us with a black box they claim holds a partial solution to these issues. Due to \u201cconfidentiality\u201d reasons, they can\u2019t tell us what\u2019s in the box, but they assure us that it will work. Would we just say, \u201cGreat \u2014 who do we make the $100 billion check out to?\u201d<\/p>\n<p>I think not.<\/p>\n<p><!--more-->We would say something like, \u201cThanks \u2014 that sounds good, but first we need to see the proof that your product will be an effective cost-benefit solution before we mandate your product on citizens.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Again, this is exactly what has not been done for wind energy.  All the Invenergy and NYSERDA propaganda puff-pieces in the world will not change this simple fact. As we\u2019ve been asking for years now, show us the proof!<\/p>\n<p>The fact is: Because industrial wind is not reliable, predictable, or dispatchable \u2014 it provides virtually no capacity value (specified amounts of power on demand) and, therefore, needs constant \u201cshadow capacity\u201d from our conventional power sources. Thus, wind has not and cannot replace our conventional power generators (i.e., coal plants), and has not been proven to significantly reduce CO2 emissions anywhere.<\/p>\n<p>The \u201ceconomics\u201d of wind are just as grim (Click <a href=\"http:\/\/www.masterresource.org\/2011\/01\/false-wind-claims\/\" target=\"_blank\">here<\/a>.). Let\u2019s take a look at just a few of the government programs that enable the boondoggle of wind to exist:<\/p>\n<p>Of the $2.2 billion of stimulus money that went to renewables (mostly wind), 80 percent of that went overseas (see &#8220;<a href=\"http:\/\/investigativereportingworkshop.org\/investigations\/wind-energy-funds-going-overseas\/story\/renewable-energy-money-still-going-abroad\/\" target=\"_blank\">Renewable energy money still going abroad, despite criticism from Congress<\/a>&#8220;).<\/p>\n<p>Another is the direct cash grant program from the U.S. Treasury, worth 30 percent of the value of these industrial wind projects, which had been due to expire Dec. 31, 2010. However, thanks to politics in Washington, this very generous federal grant program (our money) was extended for another year when it was inserted at the last minute into in the recent federal tax compromise bill.<\/p>\n<p>The project manager of the Lackawanna Steel Winds Project told us three years ago that each turbine cost approximately $5 million. (Could be much more by now, as in December 2010 the U.S. Energy Information Administration determined that the cost of new wind projects increased by 21 percent last year.) Forty-five turbines make Invenergy\u2019s proposed Stony Creek project in Orangeville worth $225 million \u2014 with a 30 percent direct cash grant totaling  $67,500,000 of our taxpayer dollars. We wouldn\u2019t even be talking about the Stony Creek project anymore if this \u201cfree taxpayer money handout program\u201d had not been extended.<\/p>\n<p>This my friends, is corporate welfare! \u00a0(For even more infuriating details, see &#8220;<a href=\"http:\/\/online.wsj.com\/article\/SB10001424052748704635704575604502103371986.html\" target=\"_blank\">Wind Jammers at the White House: A Larry Summers memo exposes the high cost of energy corporate welfare<\/a>.&#8221;)<\/p>\n<p>Adding insult to injury, as cited in Invenergy\u2019s press release, now NYSERDA is paying Invenergy for the \u201cRECs\u201d (Renewable Energy Credits) using ratepayer dollars that NYSERDA collects from us every month in our electric bills via the \u201cSystems Benefit Charge\u201d (SBC).<\/p>\n<p>And wait \u2014 there\u2019s more! On Jan. 25, 2011, NYSERDA announced another $250 million of ratepayer dollars that\u2019s collected in your electric bill each month for the Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) will be going to renewable developers (i.e., wind) \u2014 transferring ever more of our money from U.S.\/NYS citizens\u2019 pockets to the international developers\u2019 pockets (<a href=\"http:\/\/www.timesunion.com\/default\/article\/State-touts-energy-effort-975421.php#ixzz1CCQJ6vNL\" target=\"_blank\">click here<\/a>).<\/p>\n<p>What part of \u201c<em>It\u2019s our money!<\/em>\u201d don\u2019t our political leaders get? Industrial wind salesmen offer to give communities back a mere pittance of their own money in return for permission to destroy the very environment they claim they wish to save.<\/p>\n<p>Those who are content to participate in this energy scam, drawing in dollars by bellying-up to the corporate welfare bar, are \u2014 unwittingly or not \u2014 hurting us all.<\/p>\n<\/div>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>What part of &#8220;It&#8217;s our money!&#8221; don&#8217;t the politicians get? Editor&#8217;s note: \u00a0Mary Kay Barton is a resident of Silver Lake, NY. \u00a0She has been heavily involved in wind energy issues for years, and is a frequent commentator on the subject. \u00a0The following is reprinted with appreciation. \u00b7 Fat Cat Wind, LLC \u00b7 \u2014Mary Kay Barton, The Daily News (2\/7\/11) After reading Invenergy\u2019s self-serving pontifications in their recent article, \u201cInvenergy and NYSERDA enter renewable energy credit purchase agreement,\u201d it seems we need to step back and take a look at the bigger picture here: I (and most citizens) agree we have environmental and energy issues; and I (and most citizens) agree that these technical matters should be solved using real science \u2014 not propaganda being put forth by corporate salesmen. Real science is not a collection of theorems, but is a process \u2014 the core process being the scientific method. The scientific method consists of a hypothesis (e.g., that wind energy is equivalent to our conventional power sources) being subjected to a: (1) comprehensive, (2) objective, (3) independent, (4) transparent, and (5) empirical-based assessment. The fact is: This has not been done for wind energy \u2014 anyplace! Said in an another easy-to-understand way: Since we are in agreement that we have energy and environmental issues, let\u2019s say that some entrepreneurs step forward and present us with a black box they claim holds a partial solution to these issues. Due to \u201cconfidentiality\u201d reasons, they can\u2019t tell us what\u2019s in the box, but they assure us that it will work. Would we just say, \u201cGreat \u2014 who do we make the $100 billion check out to?\u201d I think not.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[16,173],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.windturbinesyndrome.com\/static\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/13674"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.windturbinesyndrome.com\/static\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.windturbinesyndrome.com\/static\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.windturbinesyndrome.com\/static\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.windturbinesyndrome.com\/static\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=13674"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.windturbinesyndrome.com\/static\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/13674\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.windturbinesyndrome.com\/static\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=13674"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.windturbinesyndrome.com\/static\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=13674"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.windturbinesyndrome.com\/static\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=13674"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}