Warning: Undefined variable $child_categories in /nas/content/live/granitegrok/wp-content/plugins/code-snippets/php/snippet-ops.php(582) : eval()'d code on line 42

Gulf of Maine Wind: Helping to Make Electricity a Luxury at the Expense of The Environment

by
Steve MacDonald

Much time and no amount of treasure will follow the steamrolling of wind farms into the (fragile) Gulf of Maine. The progressive whiners want what they want. And while there are many environmental reasons to slow down or stop, the biggest problem is … Well, this.

I managed to take [Dr. Shahrar Ali] to task in the ensuing debate by pointing out that even if you believe CO2 causes warming, then it is a big leap to conclude that building windmills will change the weather. This is the so-called mitigation strategy that can only work if 1) CO2 is the only climate control knob (we know this to be untrue from paleo-climate records) and 2) everyone else follows the strategy (you only need to look at charts of global greenhouse gas emissions to see this is also untrue). A far better strategy is one of adaptation which has the advantages of being cheaper and will work regardless of the actions of others and regardless of the causes of global warming. The mitigation strategy we are pursuing is one of unilateral economic impoverishment and the Net Zero “cure” is far worse than the alleged climate change “disease.”

Their plan makes no sense unless the goal is energy destabilization, shortages, and the inability to do much of anything. Forget competing globally in any theater (economics, culture, war). We get misery and death while China, India, Africa, and the poorer parts of the world burn wood, coal, oil, gas, and whatever burns cheap to get ahead.

Suppose you truly wanted to reduce global emissions. In that case, you’d invest in cleaner gas, hydro, and nuclear and make them so affordable (competition and deregulation) that second—and third-world countries would save money and resources buying it or investing in the technology whose sale benefits America and rising economies in a way that solves the problem Nut Zero fanatics claim wind is needed to resolve (emissions/warming – if you still believe that).

Instead of us calling tankers of fuel energy from around the globe to our shores (at their prices and mercy) to address shortages (assuming we’ve left anything in which to burn them), we’d have our own in abundance and then some. Instead of sending dollars overseas, we’d be bringing them in.

There are no “good green jobs,” and “green” energy destroys more jobs than it creates.

Related: Last Chance to Speak Out Before the Gulf of Maine OSW Lease Sale

So, the only thing green about wind is the price tag and the cost of the electricity (and the foam in the blades that pollutes the sea when they fail). And if CO2 and warming are a problem, Off Shore Wind in the Gulf of Main puts sea life at risk for nothing at best but is more likely to make matters worse at rates (prices) likely to be well above plan or estimate, sucking vast sums out of the economy for something we could get at a fraction of that cost.

All this does is make electricity a luxury at the expense of the planet.

Author

  • Steve MacDonald

    Steve is a long-time New Hampshire resident, blogger, and a member of the Board of directors of The 603 Alliance. He is the owner of Grok Media LLC and the Managing Editor of GraniteGrok.com, a former board member of the Republican Liberty Caucus of New Hampshire, and a past contributor to the Franklin Center for Public Policy.

Share to...