Jeanie Kaidy, May 30, 2013 (Rochester Democrat and Chronicle)
“Every energy source, traditional or alternative, comes with economic and environmental drawbacks…Considering the cutting-edge technology that is currently emerging, a more honest cost benefit analysis should not be restricted solely to wind power, but to wind power versus all other traditional fuels… “…There are several ways to overcome [wind’s variability]…State-of-the-art grid-connected systems developed at MIT store excess power generated by turbines…[for] when wind is not blowing…Turbines require oil and lubricating fluid [that could leak but]... Each fracking [natural gas] well requires 350 barrels of toxic chemicals that can permanently poison aquifers. Last month, 210,000 gallons of crude spilled from the Exxon pipeline into the backyards of Mayflower, Ark…”
click to enlarge“…[Old turbines require decommissioning but there is] nuclear waste still on site at every reactor in this country…[with] no safe means of disposal. According to Bloomberg Business News, the two-year wait for new turbines has created a thriving market for refurbished turbines…[Wind gets a federal tax credit but taxpayers] hand over huge subsidies to the fossil fuel industry while energy companies make record profits… “…[Birds are killed by wind turbines but they can be positioned so that they do not interfere with major migration routes or breeding grounds. The American Bird Conservancy supports wind power as a strategy to mitigate climate change which will ultimately cause far more bird deaths than wind turbines…If we are going to have a meaningful discussion about the pros and cons of this low-impact, economically viable energy source, then let’s make it an honest one.”
0 comments:
Post a Comment