DYSPEPSIA GENERATION

We have seen the future, and it sucks.

The True, Tragic Cost of British Wind Power

7th March 2012

Read it.

Two studies published this week calculate the astounding cost of Britain’s go-it-alone obsession with using wind turbines to generate so much of the electricity the nation needs.

Both studies make remarkably generous concessions that favour wind technology; the true cost, critics could argue, will be higher in each set of calculations. One study reckons that the UK can still meet its carbon dioxide emissions targets and save £140bn – but only if it dumps today’s inefficient hippie technology. The other puts the potential saving at £120bn – pointing out that the same amount of electricity could be generated using open cycle gas plants at one-tenth the cost of using wind turbines.

Turns out that wind power is more a religion than an alternative energy source. Who knew?

2 Responses to “The True, Tragic Cost of British Wind Power”

  1. Steve In Tulsa Says:

    So is solar. I price systems for my home and after adding in the battery replacement costs and the entire cost over thirty years it turns out that solar only costs a little more than double what normal electricity from hyrdo, gas, coal, or oil.

    I do not want to pay double.

  2. RealRick Says:

    I worked on a coal gasification project years ago. Natural gas (from Canada) was selling for around $2/MCF. Synthetic gas could be manufactured for $14/MCF.

    I still contend that a lot of the push behind greenhouse gas regulation is to drive up the cost of conventional power generation until these alternative projects actually look attractive. They may succeed, but it will be a classic Pyrrhic victory.