The More People Learn About Wind Power – The More They Hate It!

Wind Turbines….A Scourge on Rural Areas, and a Burden on All of Us!

stopthesethings's avatarSTOP THESE THINGS

Ontario april-28-protest-rally-3 It doesn’t take long ….

****

Remember all those glowing stories about wind power outfits being welcomed into rural communities with open arms? You know, tales about how farmers are dying to have turbines lined up all over their properties? How locals can’t wait to pick up some of the thousands of permanent, high paying jobs on offer? How developers are viewed with the kind of reverence reserved for Royalty?

No?

We’ve forgotten them too.

It’s ‘outrage’ that’s become the order of the day. With the wind industry facing growing and increasingly hostile hordes, their teams of community ‘liaison’ officers have taken to literally thumping their message home, setting the muscle on to old-age pensioners and disabled farmers:

Wind Industry Belting its ‘Message’ Home: Trustpower’s Thugs Assault 79-Year-Old Pensioner & Disabled Farmer

And middle-aged women:

Wind Industry Goons Beating Up On Women, as Furious Community Defenders Shoot…

View original post 1,210 more words

My Wind-Fighting Mentor….”Calvin Luther Martin”

How to Fight the Big Wind Onslaught

Calvin Luther Martin, January 2009

Yesterday I turned 61. I’ve been fighting the wind bastards well over 4 years. Four years devoted to almost nothing else. Put a big book on hold with Yale Univ. Press for this. In those years I’ve answered thousands of emails from people around the world. Japan. Cyprus. Norway. Sweden. Czechoslovakia. Australia. New Zealand. Ireland. England. Wales. France. Canada. Many states of the Union. On and on.

In those years (which included years of fighting the wind thugs in three or four different iterations) in my backyard and beating the sons of bitches (at least for now), I’ve learned some valuable lessons. I oughta write a book. Consider this the first installment of that book.

I am no longer an academic. I’m a writer. Writers write to convey something in the most appropriate language for the matter at hand. For wind energy the most appropriate language is profanity, vulgarity, and obscenity. The louder the better. These are not honorable people. Wind energy is not an honorable enterprise.

Big Wind is obscene, profane, and vulgar.

Okay, rough draft of book:

Chapter 1. Courtesy doesn’t work.

Chapter 2. Questions don’t work. Stop going to meetings and asking questions. Problem is, you’re asking questions of the wind sharks. This is akin to the hens asking questions of the foxes who are about to pounce on the henhouse. Wake up!

Second, stop expressing your concerns at meetings. Weenie word. Your biggest rhetorical enemy in this fight is this word, concerns. Drop it! The media (see below) loves to describe you as concerned. (“The hens expressed some concerns to the foxes.”) Screw concerned and start getting angry and defiant. And stop asking the windies questions and start informing them of the fact they and their goddam monster turbines and substations are not welcome in town. This is the your conversation with them: Get the hell out of Dodge!

Chapter 3. Real evidence doesn’t work. The wind sharks fabricate their own, using whorish little companies to perform noise measurements and do environmental impact studies, including bird and bat studies. Companies often consisting of four guys with sweaty balls and BS degrees from nondescript bullshit state colleges, from which they graduated three years ago. But they’ve got a website and stationery and PO Box — and they’re rarin’ to get those permits for Big Wind. Give me a break!

Chapter 4. Meetings with state senators, governors, premiers, department heads, county commissioners, the media, other various and assorted lawmakers — don’t work.

Chapter 5. Following the rules at public meetings does not work. The meetings are (a) a charade, (b) a farce, (c) a hoax, and (d) altogether a mockery of public participation. The fix has already been made, the deal bought and paid for. Refuse to be silenced by Robert’s Rules of Order. Screw Roberts! Major Henry Martyn Robert never had to abandon his home to a wind turbine!

Chapter 6. Lawsuits don’t work. They might appear to initially, but ultimately, at some level of court, they fail. With very few exceptions, lawyers and lawsuits are a waste of time, money, and mostly strategic advantage. You’re barking up the wrong tree with a lawyer. Your town board and county commissioners are poised and prepared for you to take them on legally; they’ve got attorneys on retainer and they can swallow you whole in the byzantine legal process.

Don’t bother going down that road. Dr. Martin Luther King (see below) didn’t use lawyers. Neither did Gandhi, who was a trained lawyer. Wrong strategy. If you think the Big Wind Onslaught is not on the scale of a Gandhi and King, but just a minor issue — think again. I suggest you do some reading on the English Enclosure Movement. Look for parallels. The Big Wind Onslaught is a big deal. Stop imagining otherwise. This from a (retired) professional historian (see attached c.v.).

Chapter 7. Wind energy is bullshit. Nitwits who begin their case by telling the local newspaper, “Well, Gee, we fully support renewable energy, including wind energy, and we feel wind turbines are marvelous so long as they’re placed in the right spot” — nitwits who start off their campaign with this are doomed. Wind energy, folks, is horseshit. From beginning to end. Fairy Godmother economics. Right up there with the Easter Bunny. This is 4.5 years of reading thousands of documents, yes, much of it on the physics and economics of wind energy. (By the way, my BA is in science and I did several years of graduate training in hard core science. Science doesn’t scare me.) Wind energy, when subjected to Physics 101, falls apart. It’s laughable. Buy a textbook in introductory physics. Start reading.

Chapter 8. Wind energy works because of (a) carbon credits (an unspeakable scam), (b) federal and state subsidies of various sorts, (c) a slow bleed from your monthly energy bill (check it out), (d) PILOT (Payment in Lieu of Taxes) arrangements with communities, and (e) huge tax write-offs for wind investors, including big Wall Street banks. It does not work because it is economically feasible — it’s not — or because it produces meaningful electricity — it does not. And if I hear that it “gets us off foreign oil” I’m gonna scream. For that statement, you need not a beginning physics text, you need your head examined.

Chapter 9. Wind energy companies are bullshit. I guarantee you, you know virtually nothing about that wind company that’s been schmoozing your town board. You know nothing about their financial records, background, credit, or trustworthiness. Nothing. In fact, you know nothing about 98% of their personnel, including what they like to call the Principals. (You will love the pretentious names they bestow on themselves.) These people just drop out of the sky — like snake oil salesmen in the Old West. No different. They’re carnies, carpet baggers, grifters, and cons. All of ’em. Including more than a few Enron re-treads. Amazing, in fact, how many are from Ireland. (I’m Irish.) To treat these people with respect is hilarious. Like treating the Three Stooges-who-turn-out-to-be-your executioner with respect. One more thing: most of these companies are 200% leveraged (no money of their own).

Chapter 10. Most of the jerks who sign wind leases either (a) don’t live there, or (b) if they do, their property’s big enough they make sure those turbines are next to your house, not theirs, or (c) they’re so stupid and such losers and so desperate for money they’d sell their first-born for several grand a year. Successful, smart farmers don’t sign wind leases. Except for a slight modification. It’s called the Domino Principle. It’s insidious. Consider Farmer Brown. He’s smart, he’s successful. But he’s surrounded by Farmers Jones, Smith, and Martin — all of whom are losers and pikers. Jones, Smith, and Martin have signed on with the windies. Brown realizes he’s gonna be looking at these damn things and listening to them whether he “hosts” them or not. So he turns to Hortense, the wife, “Jeez honey, we might as well have a couple and make some money, too, since we’re gonna have to be dealing with these friggin things anyhow.” Nasty, yes. Remember, it’s called the Domino Principle. Windies play this game every day. It’s their favorite strategy for winning the hearts and minds of the community.

Chapter 11. We need to take a look at Economics 101. This is a long one. I apologize. America (insert any nation here, as you wish) is in a profound recession. Profound in the sense it has exposed a systemic, structural flaw within the nation’s economy. A strong argument can be made that America’s economy has for decades (probably since WWII) run on “bubbles.” Perhaps it would be more accurate to say the “bubble” ratio in the overall economy has grown since WWII.

The most recent bubble, the housing bubble, accounted for a surprisingly large part of the nation’s economy. To wit, people used their homes as piggy banks, and Wall Street rode this bubble (mixing metaphors, but we’ll let it pass).

My point is for you to notice that at the bottom of a bubble is something which appears to have real value. Your house. Or that house you’re thinking of buying over there and which you know will increase dramatically in value, real quick. (Remember, the USA no longer has a gold standard, so gold ain’t it.) There was a whole financial sand castle built on the back of your house. But, alas, the sea inexorably came in and washed away the sand castle (Wall Street, mortgage lenders like Countrywide Financial), and your house has gone back to being worth far less than you dreamed it was. (Or your house is on its way to readjusting to its more realistic value. May not have reached that level yet.)

Now listen. We need another thing that gives the appearance of value. That seems tangible, solid, ubiquitous, and can somehow enter the nation’s financial account, funny numbers, Enron-esque imagination, and bizarre Wall Street lingo. And, on the back of this New Basis of Bubble we will build the Next Big Bubble.

I’m here to strongly suggest that your property value has become, and is becoming, the basis of the Next Big Bubble.

Consider Barbara Ashbee, in rural Ontario. You can read about her plight on the windturbinesyndrome.com website. Barbara’s a realtor, which makes this story even more poignant. Barbara and husband Dennis are just like you and me: our major investment is in our home and property. Notice this: she just had her property value stolen from her. Bam, just like that. Her property, to her, is now nearly worthless. Same with Daniel d’Entremont (Nova Scotia), Gerry Meyer (Wisconsin), Jane and Julian Davis (England), Charlie Porter (Missouri), Cheryl LeClair (New York State), and so on. Hundreds of people? Nope, thousands. Or more.

Now, think: Who just gained from Barbara Ashbee’s loss? The wind developer. Worthless wind power and worthless turbines have now acquired something worthwhile and real, something tangible, something that gives the appearance of value — the value of your property (even though you are not “hosting” turbines) and, even more so, the value of “host” properties.

More than this, wind companies now control the value of whole communities. Churubusco, NY (next door to me), Chateaugay, NY (next door to me), Bellmont, NY (next door to me), Ellenburg, NY (next door to me), Altona, NY (next door to me). All these communities have become (or are becoming) industrial wastelands — in my eyes and yours. But not so for wind developers and their stockholders and the banks that own them: this is now financially controlled and financially-manipulable land. Read those lease contracts.

Even without a contract your property value plunges when turbines go up in your community. Land use has now changed from “lovely rural bucolic I want to live here and raise my kids it’s so quiet and nights are dark and magical we’ve farmed this land for eight generations and I want to pass it on to my kids” to “I can’t stand living here I hate these turbines the noise drives me nuts and the spinning blades are horrible and the whole landscape looks surreal and nobody in his right mind would move here and my kids won’t live here when they grow up and dear God I pray the developer buys me out.”

In Enron and Wall Street economics, the value of your community — a value that has now shifted to Enron-spawned wind companies and Wall Street banker control — is something that can be traded, bought and sold, reassigned, financially speculated in, financially gambled with, sold as hedge funds, investments, preferred stock.

I’ll stop with this, since it gives you the gist of what I believe is happening. I admit I don’t have the details worked out fully, and one can certainly make corrections and additions and refinements to my argument, but I suspect you, dear reader, are creating the basis for the next bubble. The Renewable Energy Bubble (read, Wind Bubble), built on the stolen value of your land and your town’s value.

Anyhow, ponder this and consider that this forms yet another reason to stop being polite and cordial and reasonable with the wind/Wall Street sharks. Wall Street: You don’t believe me that big banks are heavily invested in that cutely-named wind company that’s moved into town? Better look harder, buddy.

Chapter 12. Given the last chapter, why on earth do you think any lawmaker or other government official or agency is going to listen to your pleas about not building wind turbines in your backyard? Are you nuts? Wind energy is the perfect storm, as I keep saying: it’s our solution to Global Warming, The Energy Crisis, Jobs, The Economy, The Recession, Environmentalism, Foreign Oil, General Electric’s Bottom Line, and Fill-in-the-Blank. (Note to Barbara Ashbee: Wind energy is the answer to Ontario Premier McGuinty’s most fervent wish and fantasy. Even Obama, clearly an intelligent man, has embraced Big Wind with the devotion of a Born Againer.)

One of the problems with nukes, by the way, is that they don’t provide a basis for a New Bubble: nuclear plants don’t rob millions of people of the value of their land, which land the wind developers in a weird sense now control (for trading and investment purposes).

I have been paying attention to the feverish activity of little wind companies going around and snapping up “wind leases” even as the bum economy prevents them from building “wind farms,” as yet, on those properties. One company in particular, whom I won’t name, has been working New England and the Midwest (now Minnesota) even as this company, to our eyes, appears to be bankrupt. Hmmm. Interesting.

(Here’s a tip to anyone unscrupulous reading this: Wanna get in on the ground floor of The Next Bubble? Form a bullshit wind energy company and start buying up wind leases which, I believe, also control underground rights. There you get into natural gas and fracking. Fracking? Look it up and be prepared to be horrified. Fracking is now about to move to the Marcellus Shale, NY State and indeed much of the Appalachian region, from the West and Southwest.)

Okay. What works, and the only thing that’s going to work, is . . .

Chapter 13. Civil disobedience. Use it imaginatively, floridly, boisterously, loudly, and as obnoxiously, extravagantly, creatively, and brilliantly as you possibly can. Start this weekend.

Here is exactly what I mean by civil disobedience. Signs, placards, banners, handbills, marches, demonstrations, picketing, shutting down public meetings both large and small and both high falutin’ and low falutin’, shouting matches, getting arrested for refusing to shut up and sit down. As Rosa Parks did, when she sparked the Civil Rights movement: you need to refuse to give up your seat to the wind bastard on the bus. Do this with the wind sharks and your town officers, all the way up to state and federal government.

Here is exactly what I don’t mean by civil disobedience: Breaking the law. Nor am I advocating violence. I detest violence. For me, violence is not only illegal; it’s abhorrent, it’s inelegant, and nothing can be stupider. It accomplishes nothing good. Ever. I say this as a former professor of history. I stand with Gandhi and M.L. King on this matter. My sympathies lie with Quakers, not jihadists.

I believe in working within the system, and the system includes the Bill of Rights in the US Constitution. “Congress shall make no law … abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.”

This is all you need. Add in the right to vote, by the way. Working within these parameters, apply what Martin Luther King in his letter from the Birmingham jail called direct action.

“The purpose of our direct action program is to create a situation so crisis-packed that it will inevitably open the door to negotiation …. Indeed, this is the very purpose of direct action …. It seeks so to dramatize the issue that it can no longer be ignored …. My citing the creation of tension as part of the work of the nonviolent resister may sound rather shocking. But I must confess that I am not afraid of the word “tension.” I have earnestly opposed violent tension, but there is a type of constructive, nonviolent tension which is necessary for growth.”

None of the public agencies and bureaucracies will take seriously any of your marvelous evidence about the follies and dangers of wind energy (including Nina Pierpont’s, or Rick James’s, or Glenn Schleede’s, or God’s for that matter) until — à la Martin Luther King — you demonstrate to them that they are going to have to take your evidence seriously.

The operative word is demonstrate. This is not done by reason or argument or a sense of fairness or justice. Sorry to disillusion you, and sorry to shoot down one of the cornerstones of academia: that “the truth will set you free” and “reason prevails over ignorance.” Gandhi, Nelson Mandela, Martin Luther King all knew the vital word in their struggle was demonstrate.

Dr. King had plenty of sociological and economic and constitutional and statutory and even theological evidence in his briefcase — but it was going nowhere until he showed Alabama and the nation and the US Attorney General and Congress: “Ladies and gentlemen, we are all going to take my evidence of racism and Jim Crow and lynching and economic and political harassment and general disfranchisement very seriously, okay? And to drive home my point that you whities are gonna take the evidence seriously, we colored folks are gonna get in your face about it until you take us seriously.”

It’s precisely for this that he wound up in the Birmingham jail.

Let me rephrase. You can have all the Nina Pierponts and Rick James and Glenn Schleedes you want, yet they amount to nothing if you have failed to convince your audience (lawmakers) that they are going to have to take this seriously. This is the role of civil disobedience. Reason, meetings, arguments, fairness, justice: reliance on these will not and does not work. Civil disobedience. King’s “direct action.” Nonviolent tension that’s “so crisis-packed that it will inevitably open the door” to being listened to. This is the route to follow.

The wind developers and their shills? You will never convince them. They are not your audience. Don’t make the blunder of imagining them to be your audience, and don’t argue with them. Cut them out of the discourse! Don’t rise to them! The people whom you need to impress with your nonviolent tension are not the developers; it’s the lawmakers.

By the way, stop reading wind developer websites. These carpetbaggers are not your audience: I can’t emphasize this enough. It’s like reading the handbills distributed by snake oil salesmen at 19th-century carnivals. Why bother? For entertainment, yes. But for truth, use your brain. As in, “If it smells like a turd and looks like a turd and tastes like a turd, chances are it is.” Likewise, “if it sounds almost too good to be true: it is.”

The media? Simpering assholes who have all gone with the wind. (Don’t you love it when they interview the smilin’ smirkin’ salesman sayin’ “Them turbines, folks — why them turbines is gonna electrify 35,000 American homes” — except nobody mentions it’s only if the wind’s blowing 25-35 mph 24/7, 365 days a year. That’s my all-time favorite line, right after “Don’t you worry ’bout them turbines and noise. No louder than a hummin’ ‘frigerator, and God’s my witness!” Newspaper reporters always fall for this crap. Always. Everywhere.)

Anyhow, media. This is where you need to place large, costly, frequent ads in the local newspaper. And start your own website.

You’ve got your facts, your figures, your data. What you don’t have is civil disobedience. Till you do, your facts, including your Wind Turbine Syndrome facts, are valueless. Remember M.L. King. He knew his facts (Jesus, he even had the law on this side!) were worthless until he began marching and picketing and getting in their face.

Whether you call it civil disobedience or direct action, I suggest that before you begin, check with your local police department and find out the local regulations on peaceful demonstration. (Matters like not blocking public access, not blocking automobile traffic, etc.) If you need a permit, get one. Police and the courts are not your enemy. Police, the law, and the courts are not the issue; the issue is demonstrating to lawmakers that your evidence and your plight must be taken seriously.

Second, when elections come round in November, it is essential you run anti-Wind candidates for town board, county legislature, state senator, etc. But mostly town board. Work within the electoral process: it works! To elect these people means you’re going to have to do a lot of leg work and advertising. Lots of door to door. Pamphlets. Leaflets. Public meetings to meet the candidates. It works.

Many people seem to think the Big Wind Onslaught doesn’t call for such measures. People are being driven from their homes, and made ill besides — and they don’t seem to think these measures are appropriate. They write letters to bureaucrats. They speak politely at town meetings where the Wind Mafia are “presenting.” These thugs need to be shouted down. These meetings need to be legally obstructed to the point where they can’t function.

Best of all — ready for this? — get arrested. Before TV cameras: arrested. Hundreds of you. Old ladies, ministers, college professors and deans, doctors. Arrested. Little kids too. Then, watch to see how the county commissioners and the conniving lawyers — watch how they come around. It’s miraculous how they change.

Big Wind is being given a free pass to destroy communities and lives and homes and health. Pretend these assholes are Martians, with little antennae and a Mother Ship parked somewhere, and they’re taking over your community. (When you survey an operating windplant, the analogy is not far fetched.) What would you do then? Still discuss the matter politely with your county commissioners and health commissioner and department of environmental conservation and town board? Still “follow the usual channels”?

Hell no! You’d take to the barricades and the streets and shout to these commissioners, “Hey, wake up! We’ve been invaded!”

My apologies for being cranky. I’ve been playing games with wind bullshit for too many years. I’ve seen too many sheep led to the slaughter. Sheep now have to take up the instruments of civil disobedience. Otherwise sheep is toast. (Mixing metaphors again.)

One last time: What doesn’t work in this mass movement (which I’ve outlined above in caricature) is polite discourse. Nor do letters to politicians berating them for not doing “their job.” Their job! Their job? Their job, dear reader, is to promote big business and big ideas and panaceas. That’s their job. To think otherwise is naïve.

Politicians hate (make that HATE) public demonstrations. Nothing worse. They hate marches and banners and slogans and placards and picketing. The television crew arrives with cameras rolling, the klieg lights suddenly switch on, and the town board, minister of the environment, county commissioner, state senator — writhe.

Consider Barbara Ashbee’s home. It’s worthless. Toxic. She’s a realtor; she knows better than I that she could not give away her home. Nor can she bear to live in it. She’s now in the horrible world of the d’Entremonts: Abandonment.

Abandon your home: that’s really the only option for many people, isn’t it? Or get bought out by the so-called developer. (Isn’t there a more appropriate name for people who do this to you?)

Big Wind picks you off, one township at a time. Like shooting fish in a barrel.

So, what have you got left? You’ve got your pen, you’ve got your voice, your wits, and your anger. Use them effectively.

Calvin Luther Martin

Ph.D. (History) 1974 University of California, Santa Barbara

Author, Keepers of the Game: Indian-Animal Relationships and the Fur Trade (California 1978). Winner of the American Historical Association’s Albert J. Beveridge Award 1979 for the “best book of the year in American History.” Subject of Shepard Krech, ed., Indians, Animals, and the Fur Trade: A Critique of Keepers of the Game (Georgia 1981).

Editor, The American Indian and the Problem of History (Oxford 1987)

Author, In the Spirit of the Earth: Rethinking History and Time (Johns Hopkins 1992)

Author, The Way of the Human Being (Yale 1999). Winner of the Westchester County Library System’s Anne Izard Storyteller’s Choice Award 2000. See Calvin Luther Martin, Insanin Yolu, Turkish trans. by Ayse Sirin Okyayuz Yener (Phoenix 2002).

Author, The Language of Wildness (Yale, probably. Slowly forthcoming)

Hartwick College, assistant professor 1974

Rutgers University, assistant professor 1975, associate professor (with tenure) 1978

Queen’s University (Kingston, Canada), visiting professor 1978

Dartmouth College, visiting professor summer 1983

Alaska (Native) Moravian Seminary (Bethel, Alaska), visiting professor 1995-1996

Hartwick College, Distinguished Visiting Scholar in the Humanities, 2000-2003

Newberry Library Center for the History of the American Indian 9/73-6/74

Henry E. Huntington Library, summer 1976

Henry E. Huntington Library, June 1980

National Endowment for the Humanities, July and August 1980

National Endowment for the Humanities Senior Fellowship 7/81-6/82

John Simon Guggenheim Memorial Fellowship 7/82-6/83

American Council of Learned Societies Fellowship 7/86-6/87

http://www.aweo.org/Martin.html

Wind Turbine Investors Losing Their Shirts…

Germans Losing €Millions on Community Wind Farm ‘Investments’

wind-turbine-money

Anyone that’s looking to make a small fortune, need only hand a very large one to a community wind farm operator:

More Wind Power Outfits Go Bust: “Farmer-Investors” Lose their Shirts in the US

Community Wind Farm Investors Losing their Shirts

Part of their pitch (some might call it laying bait for the more gullible fish in the pond) is to throw a few grand at the local footy team (new jumpers all round) or theatre group (new curtains and lights); or wombat preservation (see our post here).

STT has pointed out just a few times that the wind industry is little more than the most recent and elaborate Ponzi scheme in a list that dates back to “corporate investment classics”, like the South-Sea Bubble and Dutch tulip mania.

In the wind industry, the scam is all about pitching bogus projected returns (based on overblown wind “forecasts”) (see our posts here andhere and here and here); claiming that wind turbines will run for 25 years, without the need for so much as an oil change (see our posts hereand here and here); and telling investors that massive government mandated subsidy schemes will outlast religion (see our post here).

STT has also had a go at unpicking the scale and scope of the financial precariousness at the BIG end of town in our posts:

The Wind Industry: You Know It’s a ‘Ponzi’ Scheme When its Targets Include Schools & Councils

Pacific Hydro’s Ponzi Scheme Implodes: Wind Power Outfit Loses $700 Million of Mum & Dad Retirement Savings

In the first of the above, we pointed to the efforts of Simon Holmes a Court to build an “empire” around 2 clapped out Suzlon/REPower 2MW turbines speared into Leonard’s Hill, using money siphoned from 1,900 gullible, greentard ‘investors’. That community calamity (see our post here) kicked off in 2011, but has yet to return a single cent to investors in that time.

But, hang on a minute? Whatever happened to all that ‘love’ for ‘clean, green’ power – that’s said to drive power consumers to lap it up with a fork and spoon – and all that talk about wind power being ‘free’? Surely, there couldn’t be a safer bet for anyone looking to grow their rainy day savings?

Well, maybe not …

German ‘investors’ in so-called ‘community wind farms’ are licking their wounds, as their operators rack up cumulative losses in the tens of €millions.

Lured By “Unrealistic Promises” Of Profit, German Communities Wind Up With “Financial Disasters” And Damaged Environments
NoTricksZone
Pierre Gosselin
1 January 2016

The FDP Free Democrat party in the state of Hesse (central Germany) writes in a press release how local utilities and communities are suing wind park development company JUWI, accusing it of “making unrealistic promises” regarding wind energy projects, and calls them “highly speculative business with enormous risks for public budgets“.

Over the years German local utilities and communities have invested tens of millions of euros in local wind parks with the hopes of seeing a ruddy return on investment and making a noble contribution to climate protection at the same time. That dream, it is turning out, has shattered.

The FDP press release in English:

Millions in losses with wind power projects

WIESBADEN – Once again wind projects are producing negative headlines. In the spotlight is “wind energy pioneer” JUWI, which is one of the largest project developers in Hesse. With the Pfalz City Utility and the City Utility of Mainz, two large community electric utilities are suing currently JUWI because the wind prognoses made never materialized, and thus the returns fell way below the planned budget. Instead of posting profits after more than ten years in operation, community company “Pfalzwind GmbH“ has seen double-digit millions in losses. Pfalzwind operates more than 60 turbines.

‘We see the same result in Hesse as well. Everywhere communities, utilities and energy co-ops were lured by large profits, but in the end most wound up with losses that the citizens will have to cope with. Not only are they stuck with damage to the environment and the landscape, but now they also have a financial disaster to cope with,’ says René Rock, energy policy speaker of the FDP faction in the Hesse state parliament.

Rock adds:

‘The lawsuits by the community utilities once again show that promises made by the wind industry are unrealistic. And due to the falling feed-in rates, the economic prospects are worsening in addition. Also large utilities in Hesse, such as Mainova AG in Frankfurt, are losing money with their stakes in wind parks.

Currently alone in Hesse some 470 wind turbines are in the permitting process. Instead of blindly trusting the promises made by project developers, planned wind power projects involving investment by communities should be halted based on economic sense. In truth wind parks are highly speculative businesses with enormous risks for public budgets.’”

And never mind the industrial blight and environmental destruction they are causing to Germany’s once idyllic landscape, and the threat to human health and wildlife.
NoTricksZone

empty-wallet1

YES! to Nuclear….NO! to Wind!

India’s Energy Experts Baffled by ‘Greens’ Hostility to Nuclear Power

nuclear-power-a

****

After the Paris Climate Jamboree, the wind industry, its parasites and spruikers are licking their chops at the prospect of having the rich world fund the construction of millions of these things in the dark corners of the Planet.

But, while the eco-fascists that ponced around Paris are ready to foist a wholly weather dependent technology – that was abandoned in the 19th Century, for fairly obvious reasons – on people who are still left cooking with twigs and dung, sensible first world economies have tumbled (albeit, belatedly) to the fact the wind power is patent nonsense.

world wind investment

STT has always thought that if man-made CO2 emissions really were destroying the planet, then sensible governments would have moved to build nuclear power plants from the moment the Chicken Littles started wailing about the heavens collapsing.

The French generate over 75% of their sparks using nukes – and have used nuclear power – without any serious incident – for over 50 years: the first plant kicked off in 1962.

Nuclear power is the only stand-alone thermal power source that is base-load; and which does not emit CO2 emissions when generating power.

It’s a fact not lost on those with the task of dragging hundreds of millions out of stone age poverty in the World’s largest democracy, India. And its hard-pressed populace, who have already worked out the significant difference between ‘real’ electricity – available 24 x 365 and ‘fake’ electricity – that’s as fickle as a summer breeze (see our post here).

Experts ignite debate on nuclear power as clean energy
The Hindu
7 January 2016

Experts participating in a two-day seminar which began here on Wednesday expressed divergent views on the role of nuclear energy as a cleaner alternative to fossil fuel sources.

Governor P. Sathasivam, who inaugurated the seminar, set the ball rolling by stressing the role of nuclear energy in the move towards cleaner energy sources necessitated by India’s climate change commitments. T.P. Sreenivasan, Vice Chairman, Kerala State Higher Education Council, said it was time to think of a world without nuclear energy and set a timeframe for the transition from nuclear power to cleaner sources such as solar and wind energy.

Pointing out that countries such as Germany, France, Switzerland and Austria were either committed to closing down nuclear plants or opposing nuclear renaissance, he stressed the need to formulate a new approach between nuclear enthusiasts and opponents. A former Ambassador and governor for India at the International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna, Mr. Sreenivasan said India, China, and Russia were the only countries enthusiastic about nuclear power today.

Striking a different stand, Ashok Chauhan, Director (Technical), Nuclear Power Corporation of India, said the increase in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions posed a greater threat to the world than nuclear energy. “In fact, nuclear energy offers a solution to the threat posed by greenhouse gases that are responsible for climate change and rise in sea level.”

Citing the assessment of lifecycle GHG emissions, Mr. Chauhan said solar and wind energy were no match for nuclear power as an alternative to fossil fuel. The lifecycle GHG emission of nuclear energy is 15 gm of co2/ kwh against 45 gm for solar power and 11 gm for wind energy. But wind energy had the disadvantage of a lower conversion rate of 22 per cent against nuclear power (90%). Solar power generation also required huge tracts of land and was not capable of uninterrupted power supply.

Mr. Chauhan said India would have to augment its nuclear generation capacity in a big way to meet its climate change commitments. He added that nuclear plants in the country conformed to international regulations in safety and technology.

Mr. Sreenivasan, who chaired the session, pointed out that the Paris climate change summit had not endorsed nuclear energy as a solution to the problem caused by GHG emissions.
The Hindu

The reason that the climate-cult haven’t “endorsed nuclear energy as a solution to the problem caused by GHG emissions” is twofold: there’s $billions to be pocketed in massive subsidies directed to meaningless power sources that are never available on demand; and the cultist, in a form of perverse neo-Marxism, is hell-bent on depriving the poorest on the planet from ever approaching the Champagne and Caviar lifestyle, that they selfishly enjoy and take for granted; like the ACF’s CEO Kelly O’Shanassy.

india wind farm

****

The Hindu’s piece was picked up and parsed by WattsUpWithThat.

Indian Energy Experts Baffled by Green Hostility to Nuclear Power
WattsUpWithThat
Eric Worrall
7 January 2016

The Hindu reports on a fascinating top level debate occurring at a conference in India, between politicians and energy experts. The energy experts are struggling to understand why nuclear power is not the favoured Western option for reducing CO2 emissions.

… Pointing out that countries such as Germany, France, Switzerland and Austria were either committed to closing down nuclear plants or opposing nuclear renaissance, he [Governor P. Sathasivam] stressed the need to formulate a new approach between nuclear enthusiasts and opponents. A former Ambassador and governor for India at the International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna, Mr. Sreenivasan said India, China, and Russia were the only countries enthusiastic about nuclear power today.

Striking a different stand, Ashok Chauhan, Director (Technical), Nuclear Power Corporation of India, said the increase in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions posed a greater threat to the world than nuclear energy. “In fact, nuclear energy offers a solution to the threat posed by greenhouse gases that are responsible for climate change and rise in sea level.”

Mr. Sreenivasan, who chaired the session, pointed out that the Paris climate change summit had not endorsed nuclear energy as a solution to the problem caused by GHG emissions.

I suspect it won’t take the Indian energy experts long to conclude that Western opposition to nuclear power is irrational, which will likely lead them to question the legitimacy of other things Western “experts” have told them.

Former NASA GIS director James Hansen, and a handful of other leading climate alarmists, have repeatedly stated, that the only plausible means of reducing CO2 emissions, is a vast expansion of nuclear capacity.

But as the Indian energy experts will quickly discover, pointing out the bleeding obvious to green fanatics rapidly leads to bullying and name calling – even if you are James Hansen.
WattsUpWithThat

Deprive Indians of secure, reliable and affordable power and they’ll remain dirt poor forever, but who cares, right?

poverty india

Wind Energy is Not Viable….Here’s Why!

The way the wind blows in New Hampshire

Credit:  By Fred Ward | Monadnock Ledger-Transcript | Tuesday, January 12, 2016 | (Published in print: Tuesday, January 19, 2016) | www.ledgertranscript.com ~~

We all want clean, cheap, reliable electric energy. And there is plenty of clean energy available in the winds that come and go over New Hampshire. However, converting this intermittent energy source into electricity is not easy. There are engineering, aesthetic, environmental and political problems. And, there is an additional problem, purely economic. It applies not only to Antrim Wind Energy, but to any proposed industrial wind facility, or IWF, in the state of New Hampshire.

An intermittent power source like a wind turbine will generate between zero percent and 100 percent of its maximum power, depending on the wind speed. A wind turbine of 3 Mw rated power, with an efficiency of about 33 percent, will actually produce between zero Mw and 3 Mw, with an average power output of 1 Mw. The difference between its 3 Mw maximum power, and its 1 Mw average power, is a factor of three, the inverse of its 1/3 efficiency.

In order to reach the legislated mandate of 25 percent average renewable power by 2025, wind would have to contribute at least 10 of the 25 percent. This would require at least 500 3 Mw turbines, averaging 500 Mw, but actually generating between 0 Mw and 1,500 Mw, at least occasionally. If all the turbines spun randomly, they would generate about 500 Mw most of the time. However if winds made them spin together, near 1500 Mw surges would be a frequent occurrence. This raises a critical question. How well do the winds harmonize the spin of different IWFs all over New Hampshire or New England? And send 1,500 Mw surges to the ISO-NE electric grid? The meteorological question is simple. How well harmonized are the wind speeds at various weather stations throughout New Hampshire or New England?

Wind data are available from weather stations from Caribou in northern Maine to Bridgeport in southwest Connecticut and from Albany, New York, just over the western border of New England, to Portland, Maine and Providence, Rhode Island on our easterly boundary.

Analysis of these National Weather Service data, publicly available for many decades, shows very clearly that the winds all over New England are highly harmonized. When the winds are strong in one part of New England, they are generally strong over all of New England, and when the winds are light in one area they are generally light all over New England. And since the station-to-station winds become increasingly harmonized with increasing altitude, this harmonization will be even higher for the winds blowing over 2,000-foot hills and ridges.

The net of this analysis is that for wind power to provide even 10 of the 25 percent legislatively mandated average renewable power, these synchronized wind facilities will actually have to generate between 0 percent and 30 percent of our average power.

To put this 30 percent in perspective, a single nuclear, hydro or coal plant, or Northern Pass, generates less than 30 percent of our average power. This highlights how these large wind surges would raise havoc with the ISO-NE grid. A scan of the New England wind data shows that large wind-generated electric surges would hit the ISO-NE grid once or twice each week, and last many hours.

If this problem weren’t already insurmountable, the topography and meteorology of New Hampshire add an additional, and large, problem. The only feasible locations for IWFs are over the tops of our isolated hills and elevated ridges.

The winds that blow at 2,000 feet over New Hampshire hills and ridges reach their maximum at night, with lesser winds in the daytime. This means that these large surges will be inflicted on the ISO-NE grid at night, when demand for electric power is at a minimum.

There is no obvious solution to this problem, and it indicates that wind is not a viable source of electric energy in New Hampshire. The wind power industry should be required to offer a solution before any more wind facilities are approved in New Hampshire.

Meteorologist Fred Ward lives in Stoddard; he holds bachelor, master’s and PhD degrees from Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Source:  By Fred Ward | Monadnock Ledger-Transcript | Tuesday, January 12, 2016 | (Published in print: Tuesday, January 19, 2016) | www.ledgertranscript.com

Wind Turbine Terror: Spanish Home Hit by Flying Blade – Just 1 of 3,800 Blade ‘Fails’ Every Year

turbine blade germany

****

The number of cases involving collapsing turbines and flying blades (aka “component liberation”) has become so common that, if we were a tad cynical, we would go so far to suggest the possibility of some kind of pattern, along the lines proffered by Mr Bond’s nemesis, Goldfinger: “Once is happenstance. Twice is coincidence. Three times it’s enemy action”.

turbinedutchbladeaccident

****

Turbines have been crashing back to earth in frightening numbers – from Brazilto KansasPennsylvaniaGermany and ScotlandDevon and everywhere in between: Ireland has been ‘luckier’ than most (see our posts here and here) and their luck is being enjoyed in Sweden too (see our posts here and here).

Then there’s the wild habit of these little ‘eco-friendlies’ unshackling their 10 tonne blades, and chucking them for miles in all directions – as seen in the video below – and see our posts here and here and here and hereand here.

turbine blade donegal

****

Fire (spontaneous combustion), wind and gravity have taken their toll on these things all over the Globe – with fatal results, snuffing out over 160 lives, so far; a fair bit sooner than the victims expected. For a breakdown on wind power fatalities: 290 Tonne Vestas Wind Turbines Dropping Like Giant Wounded Flies

Blade failure is the most common ‘accident’ on the wind industry’s list of death and destruction. For a taste of the chaos, let’s head to Spain

House hit by debris following blade failure
Windpower Monthly
Michael McGovern
5 January 2016

BladeFailure_Spain

SPAIN: A house has been hit by pieces of a turbine blade that fell from a 300kW turbine in Spain following high winds, several local press are reporting.

Two 15-metre blades from the turbine disintegrated in the early morning of 3 January, striking an occupied house 280-metres away.

The blade failure occurred on one of 61 Desa A300 turbines at the 18.3MW Corme wind plant in the Ponteceso district of Spain’s northernmost province of Coruna.

The project is owned and operated by EDP Renovavais and has been online since 2000. Desa once belonged to Spanish turbine pioneer Abengoa and is now partly owned by EDP.

The owner of the house affected reported to local media that the turbine had been making “unbearable noises” for a few days before the incident, following high winds in the area.

On the eve of national holidays in Spain, EDP failed to comment to Windpower Monthly on the incident. But the company had issued a provisional statement to the local press saying it was “too early” to pinpoint the causes.

Its statement firmly denied that an explosion had occurred in the turbine, as reported by some local witnesses.

It also confirmed the turbine was operating at the time of the incident, as wind speeds at the time were within safe operational limits, at 90km/h (25m/s). Turbines had been halted in recent weeks due to higher winds, the statement said.
Windpower Monthly

turbine001 kerry

****

Now, if the 50m plus blades of giant industrial turbines were engaging in just the odd burst for component liberation neighbours’ anxiety levels might settle around the mild-edginess level.

However, those bunking down within less than 2km of these things can be forgiven for feeling a state of constant panic in the knowledge that close to 4,000 blades are busting free from their moorings every year.

In one serious scientific study into the distances blades are likely to travel during “component liberation” – covering over 37 “component liberation” events – blade throw distances of up to 1,600 m were recorded: that study was completed in 2007 – there have been many more bids for blade “freedom” since then (up to 2014 there have been 309 ‘incidents’, as detailed here).

In Australia, for “planning” purposes, the various states have a variety of “set-back” distances between wind turbines and residential homes – said (laughably) to avoid noise impacts: in South Australia it’s 1km.

For a few years the Victorians set it at 2km – but, before 2007 there was no set-back required and plenty of homes ended up with turbines within 600m. However, there is no such limit placed on the distance between roads and turbines.

So drivers, too, might be excused for being more than just a little nervous  – with whole (50m) blades travelling up to 200m, bigger heavier chunks likely to travel well over 300m and the smaller pieces (referred to in the study linked above as “10% blade fragments”) flying out to distances of up to 1,600m (for a 10% blade fragment – think 5m long blade chunks weighing a tonne or so) – and hundreds of turbines planted within 100m of roads at places like Cullerin, Waterloo and Macarthur.

And, from the reported numbers of blade ‘failures’, for very good reason.

Annual blade failures estimated at around 3,800
Windpower Monthly
Shaun Campbell
14 May 2015

WORLDWIDE: Wind turbine rotor blades are failing at a rate of around 3,800 a year, 0.54% of the 700,000 or so blades that are in operation worldwide.

The figures, from research carried out by renewable energy undewriter GCube, were delivered by Andrew Bellamy, former head of Areva’s 8MW blade programme, in his opening address to Windpower Monthly’s blade manufacturing and composites conference in London on 12 May.

Bellamy, co-founder of renewables advisory firm Aarufield, pointed out that blade failures are the primary cause of insurance claims in the US onshore market. They account for over 40% of claims, ahead of gearboxes (35%) and generators (10%).

The wind industry also faces a struggle to secure the carbon fibre materials it needs for lighter and stronger blade designs, warned Bellamy.

“There’s growing competition for these materials from the automotive and aerospace industries,” he said. “And they are willing, and able, to pay more than we are.”

Recent examples of blade failures include a blade from a Vestas V90 3MW turbine that snapped on a wind farm in the north of Denmark last year. At the time, Vestas said the winds were not particularly high.

In another case last year, GE was forced to replace 33 blade on its turbines at a Michigan wind farm after a blade broke on the project.

GE put the failure down to a “spar cap anomaly”. It was the second such incident involving the 1.6-100 model, and was followed by a third at the 94MW Orangeville wind farm in New York State, also in November.

Possibly the biggest blade issue was faced by Siemens in 2013 when it was forced to curtail around 700 turbines worldwide. This was caused by a bonding failure in its B53 blade.
Windpower Monthly

bladethrow-shredding-ocotillo

****

Good to know that when these whirling Danish Dervishes were throwing their 10 tonne spears to all points of the compass when “wind speeds at the time were within safe operational limits”; and when “the winds were not particularly high”….

One can only wonder at the chaos and carnage when the wind really picks up. Although this video of one of Vesta’s ‘eco-friendlies’ letting loose gives a bit of a clue.

****

Backlash Against the “Climate Change Scam”!

“Climate change” is toxic: Republican Candidates now competing to be skeptics

The Green Blob must be hating this. It’s the worst kind of momentum shift…

In 2008 the main US Presidential contenders were all supporters or “the free market solution” for carbon (called cap n’ trade in the US). But in 2015 the political landscape cracked, and now they’re going out of their way to reverse that. It’s now seen as a bad thing to look like a gullible patsy for Big Green.

How times have changed.

U.S. Republicans Increasingly Sceptical Of Climate Alarm

Amy Harder and Beth Reinhard, The Wall Street Journal

GOP presidential candidates who had generally accepted the scientific consensus on climate change have said recently that it is unclear how much, if at all, humans are contributing to warmer temperatures.

Shortly after a conservative website on Wednesday posted 2008 footage of Sen. Marco Rubio backing a cap-and-trade program to combat climate change, his campaign roared back with a counterattack that included an entire web page aimed at debunking the video.

In media-speak, this is not so much about Republicans waking up to something, it’s Obama’s fault:

Mr. Rubio’s muscular response revealed how toxic the issue of climate change has become in the Republican Party under President Barack Obama, who has sought to make reducing carbon emissions to alleviate global warming one of his signature accomplishments.

Until 2008, many Republicans, including then-presidential nominee John McCain, supported cap-and-trade to address climate change. Once Mr. Obama won the White House, Republicans swiftly unified against nearly all of his initiatives, including a cap-and-trade bill that would have set limits on carbon emissions and allowed companies to trade pollution credits to comply.

As I’ve said before, having GOP candidates compete on this changes everything. The shift that occurred in the US in 2015 was big. There is an opportunity for sensible people all over the world to pick up this momentum and run with it.

Wind Turbine Industry is a Job-Killer!

US Study Shows Wind Power Push to Kill 1.2 Million Real Jobs

economics101

Most, gifted with the slightest grip on the basics of economics, pick up on the fact that producers of widgets (and the like) are driven by the prospect of profits (a motive lost on Labor/Green apparatchiks), which, in turn depend upon input costs.

For widget makers, butchers, bakers and the like, drive up input costs and, all things equal, their profits will fall; and their ability to invest in their business and employ people will drop off, too.

Where the item is high on the list of inputs, a jump in its cost may see that business, or even whole industries, collapse; as they end up insolvent.

As just the most glaring example, where the input is electricity, industries that use stacks of it – like manufacturers, miners and mineral processors – have been literally crushed, as power prices have skyrocketed; thanks to wind power subsidies and the additional and unnecessary costs of peaking power to back it up when it disappears every day:

Britain’s Economic Nightmare Unfolds: Wind Power Costs Killing Thousands of REAL Jobs

While Spaniards watched their government squandering hundreds of €billions on renewable subsidies, they headed for the dole queue – unemployment rocketed out of control. And, in a double whammy, the promised wind industry jobs ‘bonanza’ turned out to be little more than a cruel hoax.

Instead, of being its economic salvation, the insane cost of subsidising wind and solar power helped to kill off productive industries, with the general unemployment rate rocketing from 8% to 26% – youth unemployment nudged 50% in many regions (see our post here). For more detail on Spain’s renewables disaster see the study produced by the Institute for Energy Research available here.

In Spain, just as everywhere else, the great bulk of employment in the wind industry involves fleeting construction work (once the turbines are up, there’s nought to do) – of the jobs created:

“two-thirds of which came in construction, fabrication and installation, one quarter in administrative positions, marketing and projects engineering, and just one out of ten jobs has been created at the more permanent level of actual operation and maintenance”.

That the Spaniards had to stump up “subsidies of more than €1 million” to create each wind industry job; that each wind industry job thus created, killed off 2.2 jobs elsewhere in the economy; and that each MW of wind power capacity installed destroyed 4.27 jobs – is nothing short of an economic disaster (see our post here).

South Australia is Australia’s ‘wind power capital’ and has seen power prices and unemployment skyrocket. Under its current vapid leader, Jay Weatherill, SA’s Labor government has been talking up a completely wind powered future for months now; swanning off to Paris via Labor’s fantasy world, where the wind blows and the sun shines 24 x 365; and the power is, of course, totally “free” – with his claims that SA can ‘enjoy’ more than 50% of its power from the sun and the wind, with just a little (more) government “help”.

Back in ‘harsh reality land’, however, Jay’s presiding over the worst unemployment in the Nation, at 8% – and soon to rocket – worse still than perpetual basket case, Tasmania. Power hungry businesses, like mineral processor, Nyrstar are gripped with panic, as they face a further doubling of power prices and a grid on the brink of collapse (see our post here).

Throw massive and endless subsidies to producers of an unreliable and, therefore, inferior product (with the superior product already in abundant supply and available on-demand at 1/3 the cost); add the entire cost of those subsidies to the price of a key input; sit back; and watch your economy wilt.

Any job that relies on a subsidy results in a loss of employment elsewhere in the economy.

In Germany, the subsidies for “green” jobs are paid for in rocketing power prices, which impacts on the profitability and competitiveness of all businesses and industries. German manufacturers – and other energy intensive industries – faced with escalating power bills are set to pack up and head to the USA – where power prices are 1/3 of Germany’s (see our posts here and here and here).

In the result, Germany faces a decline in industrial output and, therefore, declining employment.

In the US, the same false promises have been pitched by wind worshippers for the same mercenary ends. However, in a monumental own goal, one study purporting to lay out America’s path to a 100% wind powered future, came to the obvious (but somewhat ‘inconvenient’ conclusion) that it’s a path to penury, with more than 1.2 million Americans facing permanent unemployment.

Enviros Accidentally Tout Study Showing 100% Green Energy Will Permanently Kill Millions Of Jobs
Daily Caller
Michael Bastasch
8 January 2016

Environmentalists are pushing a Stanford University study they claim proves the economy could run on 100 percent green energy, but they must not have realized the study also shows nearly 1.2 million Americans permanently out of work.

Stanford professor Mark Jacobson published a study last summerclaiming “each of the 50 United States to convert their all-purpose energy systems… to ones powered entirely by wind, water, and sunlight” by 2050. The study is touted by environmental groups and liberal news outlets featured Jacobson saying things like going 100 percent green “will create 22 million more jobs worldwide than the fossil economy.”

But Jacobson’s study doesn’t show net job increases anywhere close to what he claims, according to an investigation by Energy In Depth (EID) — an oil and gas industry-backed education project. EID dug into Jacobson’s data and found the professor’s study actually shows 3.8 million Americans put out of work. A greener America would only add 2.6 million long-term jobs — that’s a net loss of 1.2 million jobs.

“In transportation, more than 2.4 million men and women would be put out of work. Over 800,000 people working to produce oil and natural gas would lose their jobs,” according to EID’s Steve Everley. “Nearly 90,000 jobs connected to coal mining would be wiped out. All told, more than 3.8 million jobs would be lost, far more than the nearly 2.6 million long-term jobs that Jacobson has estimated would be created.”

“In a highlighted column entitled ‘Net Long Term Jobs,’ Jacobson’s table shows a negative 1,284,030,” Everley writes.

renewables-job-loss

And the job losses won’t be spread evenly throughout the economy. Even states already aggressively mandating green energy will be hit.

California, for example, mandated 50 percent of its electricity come from green energy by 2030. Environmentalists cheered California’s decision, but Jacobson’s study predicts if California gets 100 percent of its energy from green sources it will lose more than 221,000 long-term jobs.

“Other states would also see huge losses,” Everley notes. “Texas, the country’s largest oil and natural gas producer, would shed more than a quarter million long-term jobs by transitioning to 100 percent renewables. In Wyoming, the largest coal producing state, the transition would destroy more than 32,000 jobs connected to the energy sector.”

Interestingly enough, green groups have ignored this inconvenient truth about a study claiming the U.S. will prosper using only green energy.

Anti-fracking filmmaker Josh Fox feature Jacobson’s work in his “Gasland” film series. Fox even went on a tour last year to tout green energy and said it “can benefit culture and democracy as well as being the next major economic development force.”

Environmentalists like the Sierra Club and Greenpeace also tout Jacobson’s study. The Sierra Club says using 100 percent green energy will have “positive environmental, social, and economic benefits,” like “new jobs and sources of revenue.”

Greenpeace says Jacobson’s plan is “the answer to alarming climate science” and will “eliminate most air pollution and global warming, create jobs, and provide energy stability and energy price stability.”
Daily Caller

The desire to condemn more than 1.2 million Americans to poverty is evidence enough to show that the wind industry and its mouthpiece, Greenpeace are a band of delusional human-haters – who regard people, in the words of Greenpeace founder, Patrick Moore “as the enemies of the Earth, a cancer on the planet”.

But, as this study shows, the facts never seem to run with the propaganda that they pedal.  Let these lunatics dictate energy policy, and we’ll all be on the dole queue – and that’s a fact.

depression

Wind Industry Goons Use Organized Crime Tactics Against Wind Farm Opponents.

Wind Industry Goons Beating Up On Women, as Furious Community Defenders Shoot Up Turbines (Again)

bouncers

****

Back in October last year we covered the antics of another foreign owned wind power outfit struggling to come to grips with the fact that Australian rural communities have had – as they say – ‘a gutful’ of the wind industry’s lies, treachery and deceit. And they’ve especially had enough of the bully-boy, stand-over tactics adopted by the thugs employed by the likes of Trustpower and Epuron:

Wind Industry Belting its ‘Message’ Home: Trustpower’s Thugs Assault 79-Year-Old Pensioner & Disabled Farmer

The vast majority of rural Australians – living with or faced the threat of these things – have worked out the scale and scope of the economic fraud behind it all.

They’re hip to the fact that the $45 billion in subsidies designed to be siphoned off to these characters over the remaining life of the LRET is being used to literally steal their homes from under them:

Potential Wind Farm Neighbour Finds Idyllic Property is Now ‘Unsaleable’ at Any Price

And they’re wise to the fact that the characters programmed to destroy every last inch of Australia’s most productive farming country, couldn’t give a flying fig about any living soul within these communities; or the laws that are purported to ‘protect’ them:

Pacific Hydro & Acciona’s Acoustic ‘Consultant’ Fakes ‘Compliance’ Reports for Non-Compliant Wind Farms

Armed with that knowledge, groups are getting organised and turning mere grumbles into a simmering rage. And the rage is not limited to Australians. Oh no, it’s an International thing.

Precisely what you’d expect where the wind industry is universally peopled by liars, bullies and thugs that – in their previous callings as second-hand car salesmen – never had to deal with people armed with enough knowledge to call them liars and enough bottled up anger to fight back.

Our first story is from upstate New York, where a wind power outfit’s goon – faced with more than just a little opposition – decided to ‘shape’ the debate by attacking and assaulting a middle-aged mother.

Enfield wind farm board member faces harassment charge
The Ithaca Voice
Michael Smith
22 December 2015

ITHACA, NY – “I want the cops here right now!” called a clearly upset woman from the back of the Enfield gymnasium.

It was approaching the end of an over two-hour-long, often heated discussion about the Black Oak Wind Farm, a proposed set of seven wind turbines to be located in Enfield. The meeting hadn’t been without its loud moments of chaotic cross-talk, but it appeared as though things had escalated.

“I haven’t been able to talk all night because I’ve had a gag clause… I’m afraid I’m gonna get sued! And then the wind people just grabbed my arm. This is the kind of shit I’m talking about!” said the woman, whom the police report identified as Theresa Guler of Enfield.

Margeurite Wells, vice president and project manager for Black Oak, has denied that the Good Neighbor Agreement signed by some residents carried a “gag clause.”

A man, who identified himself as Guler’s husband, added, “Lexie just grabbed her arm and pulled her out the door… that’s real nice representation from the board of Black Oak Wind Farm.”

The person he was referring to was Lexie Hain, who serves as secretary on Black Oak’s Board of Managers.

Details of the police report

Here is how Guler described the event to the Tompkins deputy:

“I walked out of the gym area to get a drink. When I did so, I noticed a female named Lexie staring at me. She was doing this in a way that made me feel intimidated. Lexie and I have a history because she is upset with me and Rich Teeter about the wind project.

As I was walking, Lexie grabbed onto my left arm near my elbow and squeezed. I instantly felt pain, and she wouldn’t let go. I have had nerve problems in that arm, and this has made it worse. I was scared and in a lot of pain from what Lexie did to me. I don’t get into fights, and I did not start this.”

Guler declined to have an order of protection issued.

Following an investigation, Hain was charged with “harassment in the second degree: physical contact.” She is due to appear in Enfield town court on January 4.

Hain made the following statement to the Ithaca Voice: “As reported, tensions at the meeting were high. This was certainly the case in this instance.”
Ithaca Voice

‘Tensions were high’, well, what a surprise! A band of liars prepared to attack an unarmed women, posing no threat, seems to expect all to bow down before the Wind Gods; and relinquish every hard won right, without so much as a whimper.

The wind industry routinely trots out 4 or 5 year old community surveys (where the respondents don’t and will never live within commuting distance from these things) that purport to show the ‘love’. But, when the question is put fair and square to people that know they’ll end up as wind industry “road-kill”, the results tend to come out a little differently:

1,000 Sign Petition Against Mt Emerald Wind Farm: Survey says 92% Opposed

After years of being lied to, bullied, berated and treated like fools (at best) and “road-kill” (at worst), for most, the ‘gloss’ comprising wind industry PR efforts to ‘win hearts and minds’ has well and truly worn off.

These days, the communities aren’t so gullible; they aren’t so welcoming; and they aren’t willing to take it lying down. Despite having the skills of the best spin doctors in the business at its disposal, it’s “outrage” that’s become the word synonymous with the wind industry, wherever it goes. In short, rural communities have had enough – and they’re fighting back, by fair means and foul:

Angry Wind Farm Victims Pull the Trigger: Turbines Shot-Up in Montana and Victoria

Angry Neighbours Shoot-Up Wind Turbines; as Hosts Hit With $Millions in Developers’ Debts

And, it seems, that Community defenders aren’t about to lay down their arms, any time soon; as this story from Ontario attests.

Wind turbine shot south of Wallaceburg
Blackburn News
Matt Weverink
1 January 2016

Chatham-Kent police are investigating an apparent act of mischief at a wind turbine on Mud Creek Line in Dover Township.

Police say it appears someone shot three rounds from a rifle at the wind turbine and officers have been able to locate and seize one of the rounds for forensic examination.

The damages are estimated at $50,000.

Investigators believe the windmill was shot sometime over the past few days, but they haven’t been able to identify a suspect yet.

Anyone with information is asked to contact police or Crime Stoppers.
Blackburn News

shooting turbine

****

Citizens are bound to react against any industry quick to destroy their lawful rights to live in and enjoy their own homes. And they’re bound to react violently when that industry is devoid of any moral compass, let alone human empathy. An industry that openly displays a callous disregard for basic human rights – such as the ability to sleep comfortably in one’s own bed – using its shills to call them “wind farm wing-nuts” and otherwise dismissing or ridiculing their wholly unnecessary suffering – as the wind industry’s parasites do, on a daily basis:

Thai Turbine-Terrorist, RATCH Scores Monumental “Own Goal” during Senate’s Wind Farm Inquiry

If anybody in government still believes that the politics of “renewables” is all about blindly favouring them, then the events outlined in this post and the posts linked above should provide pause for thought.

The warm and fluffy tag “renewables” is used to garner political support for the wind industry – but there’s a distinction between giant industrial wind turbines grinding away in the next paddock at 2 in the morning and solar panels on the house next-door. STT’s yet to hear of a case of anyone unloading their grandpa’s .303 on their neighbour’s solar panels.

While the local police play CSI and investigate a crime scene, it’s clearly arguable – on moral, if not legal, grounds – that what is laid out in the story (and the posts linked above) is conduct aimed at preventing a series of greater – and wholly unnecessary – crimes.

Faced with the threat of sonic torture, smashed property values and the risk of death and injury from collapsing 290 tonne Danish Dervishes, self-igniting turbines and “uncontrolled flying blades” – from the developer’s potential victims’ viewpoint – it could equally earn the tag of community “self-defence”. And self-defence is a complete defence, to all bar murder.

People shooting up turbines and dropping MET Mast are ostensibly acting to protect their homes, families and businesses from an acoustic trespasser (see our post here); and so the “castle doctrine” clearly comes into play.

That doctrine is one of some force and antiquity – it’s been on the books for nearly 400 years, when lawyer and politician Sir Edward Coke (pronounced Cook), scratched it out in The Institutes of the Laws of England, 1628:

“For a man’s house is his castle, et domus sua cuique est tutissimum refugium [and each man’s home is his safest refuge].”

And so, if a few pro-family and pro-community activists have to drop a MET mast here and there, or plug away at the turbines that destroy their right to sleep in their very own homes, to make their point in the active defence of their homes, and the health and safety of their families, it’s action that’s probably excusable and clearly understandable.

And, all the more so, when those that are paid handsomely to protect thehealth and welfare of their citizens, do little more than spin propaganda on behalf of the wind industry – a form of malign indifference, at best.

Many a good revolution kicked off with a handful of hotheads out to make their point, with a few misdemeanors against the property of the powerful; acts quickly deemed ‘threats to civil order’, if not ‘crimes against the state’, by those under threat – with the actors just as quickly rounded up in chains.

In the main, efforts aimed at suppressing the outrage that led the offenders to act, and punishing them for their actions, only added to their fury, and encouraged other, less passionate souls, to eagerly join the fray; and, thereafter, the rest – as they say – “is history”.

storming_the_bastille1-e1318690559144

The trouble with Statistics Canada’s solar and wind energy data

As the Wind Scam Continues, the Plot Thickens…

Donna Quixote's avatarQuixotes Last Stand

“Is Ontario generating less electricity from solar panels and wind turbines than it did years ago, despite billions in subsidies to the renewable energy sector?”

Peter Kuitenbrouwer — Financial Post — January 14, 2016

TORONTO • Is Ontario generating less electricity from solar panels and wind turbines than it did years ago, despite billions in subsidies to the renewable energy sector? Statistics Canada data suggest so. But the province maintains it gets a growing share of its power from the wind and the sun, and that — just as a growing push for climate policies would seem to call for meticulous monitoring of renewable energy — the numbers coming out of Ottawa are simply wrong.

In the past few years, thanks to generous provincial incentives, homeowners and power companies have blanketed rooftops and farmers’ fields with solar panels, and forested farm fields across the countryside with wind turbines. For example…

View original post 44 more words