Wind Power Advancements Translates To More Competitive Energy Source

Past wind farm deployments and advances in the wind energy sector have worked to open up new areas primed for future deployment.  As tower heights rise from 50 meters to 80 meters above the ground, turbine can capture more wind captured at one time (higher wind speeds are usually present away from the ground) as well as during more parts of the day.

The result is that instead of 7.4-8.4 m/s wind speeds, new turbines can capture 8.5-10 m/s winds (see map below (gif source & pdf).  This translates to a 1.2 cent reduction per kilowatt-hour of wind energy: 10.8 cents, down from 12.0 cents.  My utility currently charges 4.6 cents per kilowatt-hour of energy.  The utility’s energy mix as of 2010 was: 61.31% coal, 26.88% natural gas, 10.26% wind, ~1% rest).  They are also filing for a 5.99% increase in electricity charges.

Unsurprisingly, the cost of wind continues to fall as deployment accelerates and R&D is performed.  This happens while corporate welfare for dirty energy still dwarfs the subsidies for clean energy.  It is remarkable that the renewable energy sector grew at the rate it has while it has faced a relatively hostile policy environment.  Imagine what the clean energy industry (and our environment) would look like if we were serious about it 40 years ago.

I’ll have more of my thoughts on this kind of news going forward.  Transitioning from 61.31% coal, 10.26% wind and 0.29% solar to a clean energy-dominant mix will prove incredibly difficult, for instance.  Some good policies have been implemented to help that happen, but I wonder if the scope of the problem has been accurately assessed.

Gulf Coast Oil Spill: Worse and Worse and Worse

In light of the fact that BP was not sufficiently prepared to be doing the kind of work they were doing (at immense and obscene profits), the news yesterday that the rate at which oil is leaking from the bottom of the Gulf of Mexico where BP was drilling has likely increased day by day for 10 days now is shocking and damning.

Instead of the original 1,000 barrels per day (42,000 gallons) of oil leaking, pro-environmental groups examining satellite data helped convince the government and BP to revise that estimate upwards dramatically – to 5,000 barrels per day (~200,000 gallons).  Further examination indicates that a worst-case scenario is developing that far outpaces that 5,000 barrel per day estimate.

A Florida State University professor has come out with an 8 million to 9 million gallons of oil already leaked estimate.  The Exxon Valdez oil spill back in 1989 totaled 11 million gallons of oil.  This newest spill could easily become the largest oil spill disaster in American history.  That well head isn’t expected to be capped for weeks to months.  How much environmental damage will occur in the meantime as oil sloshes around the Gulf of Mexico?  How many small businesses will be shut down that depend on Gulf wildlife in their jobs?

Oil is dirty.  Oil drilling is dirty.  It’s that simple.  Instead of expanding off-shore drilling, as President Obama outlined earlier this year, drilling should have been placed under more common-sense regulations and problems that have been festering for years should have been taken care of.  As I wrote above, the oil industry’s profits are obscene.  It’s not like they don’t have the money to invest in a little safety.

As I wrote yesterday, wind and solar energy are called “clean” for good reasons.  Oil, coal and natural gas are called “dirty” for good reasons.  Note the dirty energy industry’s attempts to relabel itself as “clean” on dozens of commercials per day.  They’re spending a lot of money in a re-brand attempt.  We need to end our addiction to dirty energy.  Clean energy resources exist in such abundance that the world’s energy needs today are dwarfed by the supply.  We don’t need to suffer through mine explosions, oil spills and environmental disasters that grow worse by the year.

Off-Shore Drilling Rig Exposion Leads To Growing Environmental Disaster

If this happened under the Bush Regime, you could have filed this under, “Nobody ever could have foreseen …”.  Iraq, Katrina, Great Depression II are all examples of disasters that received that ridiculous verbal hand-waving in pointless attempts to deflect responsibility.  The Deep Horizon oil well disaster would have fit in perfectly.  Everybody knows that the Dirty Energy industry is called “dirty” for very good reasons.  Oil spills happen more when people drill for that dirty fluid.  It’s going to happen.  The only question is, how often and how much?

In the immediate aftermath of the Deep Horizon oil well explosion last Tuesday, the giant dirty energy corporation BP assured everyone that they were going to cap the well at the bottom of the ocean and the threat to the environment would be minimized.  Because drilling is much cleaner than the stupid public has been led to believe?  Hardly, as it turns out.  As events have unfolded, it appears that the well head at the ocean bottom is leaking out at the rate of 42,000 gallons per day.  And if you think that volume isn’t noteworthy, I challenge you to dump 42,000 gallons of oil on your front yard and tell me what you think afterward.

In reality, the oil spill stretches across more than 1,800 square miles of Gulf of Mexico waters.  As a result, the Coast Guard is trying to come up with plans to protect shorelines (if they can) and clean the oil slick up with BP’s help.  BP is planning on lowering a dome to capture the oil on the ocean bottom.  Unsurprisingly, it’s never been tested for the depth at which the leak is occurring – 5,000ft below the sea surface.  Haven’t we all heard the virtues of mega-corporations, who altruistically ensure all their operations are completely safe?

Why would corporations need restrictive things like regulations, after all?  In another unsurprising piece of news, BP was among a list of corporations that vigorously attacked a proposed rule issued by the Interior Department’s Minerals and Management Service that would have changed, get this, voluntary safety program audits to required audits once every three years.  Gasp!  The horror that a safety audit every three years might be drastically imposed on the poor, suffering drilling industry!  What kind of socialists would even dream up such a business-killing proposition anyway?

The same folks who have noted that “there were 41 deaths and 302 injuries out of 1,443 incidents from 2001 to 2007″.  The same folks who “issued 150 reports over incidents of non-compliant production and drilling operations and determined there was ‘no discernible improvement by industry over the past 7 years.’”  Yeah, voluntary safety audits are sure taking care of all the problems, aren’t they?

Who’s going to get to pay the bill for this containment and clean up effort?  Financially, the U.S. taxpayers, followed by local small businesses and tourism; physically, the environment.  Wildlife Refuges, barrier islands and other coastal locations are under direct threat of this disaster.  Ads run by BP continue to tout their “clean” way of conducting business.

Obama Opens Up Off-Shore Areas For Dirty Energy Exploration

President Barack Obama announced his off-shore oil drilling plan today.  Count me among the folks who are pretty frustrated with the announcement and its details.  I’ll start with what the announcement included, then get into why I think it’s a bad set of proposals.

Atlantic coast drilling would be open for exploration from Delaware to mid-Florida.  Gulf of Mexico exploration would be open off the south and west coasts of Florida.  The Chukchi and Beaufort Sea areas off the north coast of Alaska would be opened.  For now, the West Coast remains off-limits.  Additionally, the Department of Agriculture will work with the Pentagon to use more biofuels in military vehicles.  Thousands of hybrid vehicles will also be purchased for the federal motor pool.

This decision marks a reversal of off-shore drilling policies that Obama campaigned on in 2008.  To secure the Democratic Party nomination and win the general election, Obama distinguished himself from the Bush Regime and Sen. McCain.  Now, “compromise” and “bipartisanship” appear to demand something else entirely.

Colorado News Stories: Connecting Some Dots

Today was another day in which a number of news articles caught my eye.  They warrant additional context, especially the connections between some of them.

Interior Secretary Ken Salazar has been working behind the scenes to talk with what the corporate media likes to term “centrist”/”moderate” Democratic Senators regarding health care.  He will continue to try to convince CorporateDems to vote to allow debate on the Senate health bill.  What’s the center position between corporatist lackeys and principled public servants anyway?  Another very popular Washington buzzterm came into play: Salazar is involved because he was involved in several bipartisan agreements while a Senator.  He was at the forefront of what I term the Gaggle of Gangs in the Senate – joining with other “centrists” to keep the filibuster around but ensure Democrats wouldn’t use it while in the minority.  Which is part of the reason why Salazar is being sent back to work on his former colleagues: the Cons are threatening to filibuster the health bill (though Democrats won’t actually force them to carry one out) and -gasp- Democrats might join them.  That’s the answer to “How did that bipartisanship end up working out”.  Whatever happened to the Cons’ “Upper-down-vote!” they couldn’t get enough of?  One person of concern is Sen. Lieberman, the man who campaigned for Sen. John McCain in last year’s presidential election and is doing everything he can to keep himself in the news this year.  Salazar was “mentored” by Lieberman when he joined the Senate, so I’m sure Lieberman can be convinced to play nice – aren’t you?  Oh, and after watering down the bill with nonsense to appease “centrist” Republicans, where are their votes to move to debate?  MIA?  Why did we negotiate with them exactly?  They’re not going to vote for the final bill.