There’s both good and bad news when it comes to wind power’s potential. A new, authoritative study by Oceana, a respected environmental group focused on oceanic issues, says offshore wind power in Atlantic waters could provide about half the electricity needed for the East Coast. The study predicts that North Carolina, Massachusetts and Delaware could generate all the power they need via offshore wind energy, while South Carolina, New Jersey and Virginia could produce around two-thirds of their needed energy. Not only that, putting such a plan in place would create up to 200,000 jobs or more, based on experience in Europe, where the offshore wind industry is far ahead of ours.
So what’s the bad news? First of all, as BlueNC points out, “Going from ‘could’ to ‘is’ requires vision and leadership that has (so far) been lacking on the energy front.” And second, it’s bad news that the U.S. is lagging far behind other countries that are relying on wind power now. As BlueNC blogger S.C. Harrison reminds us, “We’re not talking about a ‘theoretical’ source of clean energy; Europe has been eating our lunch on this for years.” In fact, Great Britain cranked up the largest offshore wind farm on earth last week; when the power from that wind farm is added to previous wind power capacity, it will be enough for Britain to power all the homes in Scotland. This is for real, folks, and it’s happening right now, as our leaders schlep around doing nothing. As a pre-geezer who vividly remembers the days when the U.S. was the undisputed, hands-down leader in any and all technological innovation, it’s disheartening, to say the least, to find this country’s progress being held back by businesses and politicians that profit mightily from our addiction to oil and coal.
There is hope, though. U.S. senators from both parties — Tom Carper, Olympia Snowe, Sherrod Brown, and Susan Collins, have introduced a bill to provide essential tax incentives to spur investment and production of offshore wind energy. If you’d like to send a message to our senators, urging them to support the bill, go here.
This article appears in Sep 28 – Oct 4, 2010.
Wind energy? Are you kidding me? Can we use the hot air spewing from this blog to power the wind turbines when the weather doesn’t cooperate? Because as any dummy knows, the wind does not blow ALL THE TIME therefore there will be a need for a backup source of energy. All the libs are on board with this until they want to build windfarms in their back yard: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/energy/windpower/7648857/US-approves-first-offshore-wind-farm-despite-Kennedy-opposition.html
Here’s the simple answer, SP: Wind farms are built in places where the wind blows a lot, and most of the time. Not only that, SP, but you’ll never guess what: they can store the energy that’s generated so it can be used later (like when the wind isn’t blowing). Is that a simple enough explanation for you now?
Comments like these by “SP” are the kind of kneejerk ultra-conservative knothead-ism that is holding this country back from competing in green technologies. As the article said, this isn’t some future technology; it’s being used right now – and America is getting its ass handed to it because other countries’ oil and coal lobbies aren’t strong enough to stop wind power. So, SP, maybe try to wake up, realize this isn’t the ’50s or ’60s, the U.S. doesn’t rule the world’s technological innovation anymore, and it’s high time we caught up. If retro morons with SP’s attitudes had been in charge throughout US history, we’d still be riding horses and lighting our homes with oil lamps.
And, finally, what does Kennedy’s opposition to a wind farm have to do with the new report, other than trying to score an irrelevant political point about liberals? Both the left and the right in European countries got behind wind power; only our socially and historically retarded rightwingers in America could think of ways to make this a lib vs. cons issue. Christ, no wonder we’ve fallen behind.
Yes SP, you’ve picked up on something some of the greatest energy minds in the world must have missed.
You little genius conservitard you.
HERPADERP THE WIND DON’T BLOW ALL THE TIME LIB YEEHAW
My point is that the elite ruling class in government thinks wind power is a great idea but have the “not in my backyard” mentality. To them it’s a great idea until it ruins their view of the ocean where they sail their yachts.
All politicians suck; both Republicans and Democrats are out to grab more power and tell the American people what they can and can not do. Wind power would have to be subsidized (wind farms only operate at 30-40% capacity). Where is that subsidy going to come from? The American people because the government will tell us “we HAVE to do this” and then raise our taxes or print money out of thin air. I’m all for something that is going to make our lives better but not when it involves the government. Hell they are now telling us what kind of lightbulbs we can and can’t use.
Wes – do you ever have a point or an original thought?
So Mr. Grooms, if you get a chance instead of name calling why don’t you enlightened us to the government action that created to the automobile or the lightbulb? There must have been tax-code nudging to grow those energies, correct? How much does a project like this cost, and where to you propose that money come from?
SP, your comments on the “elite class” not wanting wind farms near them is still irrelevant to the issue at hand, which is whether to have more offshore wind farms. Even so, one group of rich Cape Codders doesn’t justify the conclusion that wind farm supporters are hypocrites. Frankly, I support wind farms and if they want to put one in my backyard, I’m game. I think you’re letting your deserved distrust of government color your assessment of wind farms’ usefulness and feasibility. Governments are about the same everywhere in terms of efficiency (or lack of it), but wind power is being produced NOW, subsidized by those other governments, so it’s not as if it can’t work.
BV, specifically then: as the blog post says, there’s a bill before Congress to provide essential tax incentives to spur investment and production of offshore wind energy. That’s a good start. As for specific cost, the new British wind farm cost $1.4 billion, and was financed by an energy fund which funnels money collected from polluting industries into renewable energy resources. We could do that here, if backward-thinking mopers would ever get out of the way of progress.
I’ll tell you what’s a silly fantasy, Billy Frank: your notion that wind power isn’t ready for prime time. How many other countries have to be ahead of us in this technology — not in a theoretical way, but as I keep trying to point out, in a working, functioning way that is producing enough electricity NOW to power every home in Scotland, for crying out loud — before you guys catch on?
And something being subsidized makes a project bogus somehow? Maybe among free market fundamentalists, but in the real world, govt. subsidies for public necessities such as highways, railways, subways, hospitals, sewer systems, and on and on, are how things get done. You guys really, really need to get out from behind your computer screens and learn something about how the world outside the American rightwing’s bubble operates.