Does anyone agree with me that the proposed "Ocotillo Wind Express Energy Project" is bad for the desert community of Ocotillo? My concerns are as follows:

Only about 20% of the proposed 550 megawatts of power are usually utilized by a wind farm and this low figure only helps to create more oil and natural gas fired generation systems, such as the ones constructed by Sempra Energy in Mexicalli, Mexico. These power plants were not constructed to the environmental standards required in the United States.

Could it be possible that Pattern Energy is constructing this wind turbine project only to recieve government funding and future carbon credits.

Is this project really good for the desert. This project will sit on 15,000 acres of BLM property. An estimated 32 miles of roads will be constructed on desert property. This is the same property that had some areas off limits to OHV activity. Wasn't the reason originally to protect the habitant. Why now is this area acceptable to construction traffic?

Pattern Energy has an MO of proposing wind turbine projects near small towns, knowing very well that the peopple are ill equiped to properly fight these projects.

What are some of your concerns?

Last week I watched a documentary on wind farms on one of the PBS stations, "They're Not Green" by Pena Productions. It showed the inefficiencies of wind power in the S. Cal area.
1. The wind blows more at night but more energy is needed during the day and the energy can't be stored for day use.
2. Wind farms are rated at potential energy, not average energy (14-20%).
3. Lots of concrete used to provide a foundation for the mills.
4. Blades and other parts are not recyclable.

Brew

You are right on Brew. I missed that documentory, hope it replays. Maybe the officials at BLM saw it, I sure hope so, since this project sits on BLM land. Let me correct that, one of the proposed 240 windmills sits on private property. You mentioned the massive quantity of concrete. Each wind generator will sit on a 8' deep X 80' X 80' foundation. That is 1,806 cubic yards of concrete each. BTW, these monsters will be 453' high. That is as high as a 45 story building.

The Scoping Report is out, this is good reading. Sorry if you already have this. It show what all our concerns are, etc. The link is below or you can go to www.blm.gov, and find it. It very long , so I save it as a phf, and printed out the "Table of Contents", and "List of Acronyms", you'll need it, and read it on screen. some very interesting information in this report.

Subject: review

http://www.blm.gov/pgdata/etc/medialib/ ... eport1.pdf

Also the "Ocotillo Express Wind Facility Plan of Development" is out. This Report tell exactly how they plan to do each step, how much of each item they plan to use (water, concrete, etc. This is the report I was saying to read on screen off your computer. Enjoy

You can down load this as a Text or PDF file for easier reading. I printed the first 8 pages so I had the Table of Contents, and “The List of Acronyms” you really need this for the document to make total sense.

Click on link

http://www.scribd.com/doc/46219782/Ocot ... evelopment

I think we should exploit all sources of energy for our current and future needs, within reason. However, we need to keep in mind that the attainable contribution that wind and solar together can make to our total energy needs is around 5% to 8%, despite what the industry tells us. In addition, we must be very careful with subsidies. In fact, I'm in favor of no subsidy whatsoever. I know personally of two solar panel manufacturers which have used the so-called "stimulus" money given to them by Congress and the Obama Administration to relocate outside of California, ultimately to China. That's right. They used US Taxpayer funds given to them without strings attached, to relocate jobs, purchasing, demand for capital equipment and services, and all the associated secondary and teriary economic transactions, and moved it overseas. (one is actually temporarily relocating some of their manufacturing to North Las Vegas, but it will eventually go to China in about 3 years).

Having said that, there IS a way to store energy during off-peak hours. But it requires MASSIVE battery banks, which have a finite shelf life, and must be replaced surprisingly often. The cost of this just keeps mounting, and will shortly exceed 10X what current fossil-fueled and nuclear power costs are per megawatt-hour. This will ultimately lead to very little job creation in this industry, unless it is somehow mandated by Congress, ultimately adding further to the cost.

Fact is, green jobs kill regular jobs. For every "green" job, we lose an average of 2.2 regular jobs. Pretty consistent with what they have found in Spain, where so-called "green" jobs have been mandated for quite a while.

Don't get me started on the economics of solar and wind projects killing off recreational opportunities on public lands, and how much of that public land these projects occupy and monopolize.

Can you tell I'm not sold on solar or wind power projects?

How do you feel about subsidies to Oil Corporations like Exxon?

sal, your post was way off topic.

Mike

Sal, I'm not generally in favor of corporate subsidy. Not sure what subsidies you're referring to, but if there is a ROI that can be realized, I'm not against that. For example, efforts our government undertakes to keep oil prices low benefit not only consumers of oil products, but the entire economy. The collection of additional tax revenues due to the increased consumption of oil products and the economic stimulus effect which lower oil prices have on the economy, are a calculable return on that investment. There is no such calculable return on wind projects, only subsidy that isn't generating greater positive revenue on the other side of the ledger.

In other words, there has to be a cost/benefit analysis just as there should be in environmental projects. Spending millions creating a tiny benefit to a very small group of politically-connected and very vocal people in terms of policy is hardly a justification for most environmental projects, unless those policies make us MORE free. But nearly all subsidized environmental projects remove freedoms, rather than add to them. Therefore, such projects should be held to a strict standard of having a favorable cost/benefit analysis completed. Having said that, most couldn't possibly be justified in terms of ROI, only how they make that very small well-connected group feel about their advocacy and political clout.