SaskPower’s blog speaks about “Misconceptions about wind and solar facilities”
Note:
Facing a groundswell of opposition to a proposed 200 megawatt wind project near Weyburn which would be built, operated and owned by Enbridge as an independent power producer, SaskPower posted the following on its corporate blog on Aug. 23.
That blog posting was then promoted via advertising on social media, including Facebook.
What the blog does not say is that Alberta’s fleet of now 47 wind farms, with a total capacity of 5,214 megawatts was producing 35 megawatts at 3:38 p.m. on Thursday, Aug. 22, according to X account @ReliableAB. That’s after the recent addition of a new 466 megawatt windfarm which is being brought online. And 35 megawatts was 0.7 per cent of capacity at that moment, while 5,214 megawatts is nearly the entire Saskatchewan grid if every single generating facility was running full our, which never happens.
The ads below are not part of the original blog, but part of every Pipeline Online story to pay the bills. This is that blog posting, verbatim.
“Don’t call me Shirley.”
(You knew that was coming, Brian.)
There’s a much larger one planned to be built (starting 2027) near Regina, RM of Lajord. Been kept pretty quiet by saskpower to avoid opposition. Wonder who’s been paid off there to get this one going. I believe it is several hundred MW, of wind and equivalent of solar. Will cover something like 50 square miles.
I’ll track down details and post later.
translation: you really should believe my lies, my grift and job depend on it.
And, many politicians and bureaucrats depend on the kickbacks to maintain their mansions in gated communities.
Having worked on the construction and startup of a few wind farms, I can honestly say that there is a misconception or outright lie in every part of the Sask power blog. To get a global overview of wind power go to
stopthesethings.com. It’s an eye opener.
They are selling a product and trying to make the case for them. Anyone who has driven past a wind farm when the temps are at minus 20 or thirty Celsius knows that they are full of it. Wind and solar have their places but only as very minor actors in a power ststem and it will take a mass death event to convince the public otherwise.
When I drive past them it’s usually in summer (that’s when I deliver stuff to farms.) That”s when I see the blades aren’t turning.
There cannot possibly be any downside to paving the prairies with lightning rods.
They contrast intermittents with gas turbine plants..yet never acknowledge that the cost/kWhr generated difference is profound.
As the thermal plants generate near nameplate for hour after hour,year after year.
Not so Gang Greens Product.
And the Wind generates inside a very narrow weather envelope..if the wind is blowing..
And “Solar” generates zero at night…imagine that.
So the cost and duration of each infrastructure may be close..
The payback and benefit to the tax payer are hugely different..
Maybe the people promoting these idiocies should “make good” their failures.
First by enormous fines every time the grid fails because of their foolishness.
Second by public execution of a few each Canada day.
For compound stupidity is the definition of evil.
John.
Look at the off-short wind farms on the US east coast that are coming apart (blades)
The clean up is a mess.
Dust
A few years ago there were 16 thousand wind mills that were nonfunctioal, in the USA.
John R.: “So the cost and duration of each infrastructure may be close… […]”
But… if you go with wind and need reliability, you have to build a hydrocarbon burning spinning reserve backup plant to cover those times the wind doesn’t blow hard enough, blows too hard, or doesn’t blow at all.
So, with unreliable wind, you must buy two generating systems, whereas if you just bought the hydrocarbon-based system in the first place and skipped the whirligigs, you would only have to pay for one, more reliable system. Birds and bats everywhere will applaud that decision.
Wind is not and will never be baseload power until we can mine enough hopium and unobtanium to make the necessary backup storage batteries. That being said, wind sometimes is the best solution for a particular application, but those applications are not base load power generation.
Just so.
I was using their claim.
Totally agree that the real cost of intermittents is not being discussed by the Gang Green Ghouls.
Smart meters exist. Legislature and City Hall offices should be alloted electricity according to windmill and solar panel output. Maybe Courthouses too.
Enbridge is tapped into the free green money.. In return they are a propaganda organ for the zero carbon swindle.. Sworn testimony from seniors and single moms told me so.. Its free what do have to lose?..
Their forays into ‘green’ is why, IMO, Enbridge continues to have suboptimal stock performance, never living up to the hype. It’s a company to avoid as long as it keeps throwing good money after bad.
Are these pretend power sources worth the decimation of birds.
When there aren’t enough birds left to eat the insects that eat our crops perhaps this atrocious idea will be seen for the horseshit that it is.
Windmills are a 1000 year old technology for milling grain, … we are in the 21st century … we have better tech now.
They want us to live as if it was 1000 years ago.
US, not THEM, of course.
Try flying a spray plane around the things of course it effects farming. Only way for non carbon is nuclear, I don’t know why we are wasting money on windmills. Maybe save a bit of money before we go down this road. I believe we are paying some like 40 billion in interest now. A touch of common sense would be welcome.
FWIW
Re “Opportunity costs”
In “EV vs INTERNAL COMBUSTION – 10yr CO2 shootout! I ran the numbers… | AutoExpert John Cadogan”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vybnoHVHMdQ
(Salty as usual)
He makes the point that the Mazda leaves about $60,000 for use for other purposes.
Seems to me that there is a similar argument for not burdening a modern coal, gas or nuke plant with a dangle of wind and solar
FWIW
“Debate: Is A Demonstration Project Really Necessary?”
“My repeated calls for a Demonstration Project of a zero-emissions electrical grid have led to a spirited debate among knowledgeable commenters. While most back my position, some say that a Demonstration Project is really not necessary and would be a waste of effort.”
More at
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2024/08/19/debate-is-a-demonstration-project-really-necessary/
Concluding example Germany –
“In short, this large and seemingly sophisticated country is completely delusional, with no sane voices anywhere to be heard. A demonstration project that fails spectacularly is the only thing with any hope of saving them.”
The lifespan of a Nat. Gas power plant is 25-30 years? Really? I find that VERY hard to believe. Do some components require replacement and renewal? Sure. But the entire plant has only a 30-year lifespan? Utter rubbish.
And how does an untrained, non-expert like me know this? Well … The Moss Landing, CA Nat. Gas power plant was built in 1950 and is still operating. And, although they aren’t exactly fossil fuel power plants, I live near the Richmond and Martinez oil refineries … multiple refineries that were built long before my mid 1950’s birth and have been in continuous operation ever since.
These “fact” sheets about wind and solar power are just so much gaslighting nonsense.
You’re exactly right. And they want us to believe that wind farms will last for 20 years, when in fact they are a constant maintenance nightmare.
Imagine going to a store and asking for help and the clerk says, “You want me to work? Then blow me.”
Like the old Australian joke. Melbourne woman walks into a hardware store, says, “I’d like to buy a hinge”. The clerk fetches the hinge, says, “would you like a screw for that hinge?” And the woman says, “No, but I’ll blow you for that toaster on the top shelf there.”
The whole story on the miserable failure of the ‘Energy Transition.”
https://stopthesethings.com/2024/08/06/energy-numbers-decades-of-data-detail-wind-solars-pathetic-performance/