“It is entirely possible that the total costs to build, maintain and replace units every 20+ years (at end of service) would be prohibitive compared to other sources of energy. Beyond these cost considerations, sources indicate that the turbine blades cannot be recycled and are piling up in landfills. Fossil fuels will also still be needed to maintain the lubrication of these units, and what about potential for spillage?” (Jeff Wyles, below)

The old joke comes to mind: Q: When is an environmentalist not an environmentalist? A: When it comes to wind power.

Make that double for offshore wind, and wild-eyed California politicians are having trouble hiding the problems. Consider a recent op-ed, Rethink Floating Wind Turbine Power Off Our California Coastline?,” an environmental feature of California newspaper MendoFever (February 12, 2024).…

“The House bill [H.R. 6544] would also extend the Price-Anderson federal accident insurance subsidy, first enacted in 1957 and renewed seven times since then. The program expires at the end of 2025. It isn’t clear why this federal subsidy for nuclear in still needed when the industry insists its new, advanced reactor designs are ‘inherently’ walk-away safe.”

The U.S. nuclear industry in recent days has hit three cherries on the federal money-and-policy slot machine. The open question is whether the largess (some might call it pork) will have the intended results: revitalizing a moribund industry by hitching its wagon to the feverish fear of climate change and long-run animosity toward nuclear rivals China and Russia.

First, the money–the most tangible of the goodies Congress and the White House have doled out.…

Ed. Note: This post excerpts energy and climate material from the Media Balance Newsletter, a free fortnightly published by physicist John Droz Jr., founder of the Alliance for Wise Energy Decisions. The complete Newsletter for this post can be found here.

Unreliables (General):
*** US counties are blocking wind and solar energy: These maps, graphics show how
*** The American revolt against green energy has begun
*** Blackouts, Here We Come
Out Of Transmission Revisited
Planning for climate blackouts

Wind Energy:
*** Taking the Wind Out of Climate Change (referencing 60± studies)
*** A Blow to Big Wind?
*** Hurricane Threats to Ocean Wind Turbines

Nuclear Energy:
*** U.S. Seeks to Boost Nuclear Power After Decades of Inertia
*** The Role of Nuclear in the Global World of Energy
*** On Radiation: Nuclear energy myths versus facts

Fossil Fuel Energy:
*** Biden liquefied natural gas export ‘pause’ hurts Americans and our allies
*** Chinese Control Over U.S.…

“The green movement calls for a shutdown of coal and gas power plants. At the same time, it demands a switch to electric vehicles, electric home appliances, and green hydrogen produced by power-intensive electrolyzers. This and the AI revolution portend a breakdown of the so-called energy transition.”

Twenty-three states have adopted goals to move to 100 percent clean energy by 2050. State governments propose to retire coal- and gas-fired power plants and adopt wind and solar systems. But these goals conflict with efforts to promote electric vehicles (EVs), electric appliances, and a new application (AI) that will increase the demand for electric power.

The green energy push seeks to eliminate greenhouse gas emissions to fight human-caused global warming. Leaders tell us that without a complete transformation of electric power, transportation, and home appliances to achieve Net Zero carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions, we are doomed to suffer from increasingly severe climate change impacts.…