Why Illinois is grasping fairy dust

By:  Diane Benjamin

Even if you believe in man-made climate change, the facts presented in the story below should make it clear Illinois is not using any logic in their goal of all renewable energy by 2050:  https://www.bnd.com/news/politics-government/article227067919.html

All they will accomplish is making electricity un-affordable.

Full disclosure:  I believe this is a hoax to separate people from their money, but that is immaterial to this story

The article was written by a guy who does believe in man-made global warming.  Quote:

In 2002, shortly after I turned 30, I decided I wanted to dedicate myself to addressing climate change. I was worried that global warming would end up destroying many of the natural environments that people had worked so hard to protect.

The title is:

https://quillette.com/2019/02/27/why-renewables-cant-save-the-planet/?fbclid=IwAR01WNpNeu-AScWOsFQ5EBf7sKrEVbr5slkmIFo5wHGJr_5OJqIsmVAN0Og

 

Why Renewables Can’t Save the Planet

.

.

.

Illinois will keep pretending renewables can power Illinois.  Facts don’t matter, just the agenda.

Please read the whole story.  He has a long list of problems with wind and solar.  I will go ahead and blow the end for you:

It turns out that scientists have studied the health and safety of different energy sources since the 1960s. Every major study, including a recent one by the British medical journal Lancet, finds the same thing: nuclear is the safest way to make reliable electricity.

Keep in mind, this guy believed in wind and solar until he spent years trying to make them work.  Illinois will fail, the only question is how long the charade goes on and how much they take from us before they realize it.

.

.

.

.

.

 

16 thoughts on “Why Illinois is grasping fairy dust

  1. Well, the state is broke, but at least our hearts are in the right place, and wow…would you look at all those pretty windmills!!!

    Like

  2. Back in the early 80’s Carl Sagan and several other prominent scientists wrote an extensive article in SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN about a “Nuclear Winter” and it roughly compares to “global warming” in that IF you heat up the globe, you melt ice, heat the place up and that creates clouds, which will cool things down, just like on a cloudy day. So, here we have some “Joe” who wants to do good and keep us from sane fuels. He’d rather we waste resources building wind turbines and solar, neither of which is reliable. SOMEONE needs to take away these peoples pens..
    I suppose he’s got an economic way of doing all this too. Just like the Green Deal.

    Liked by 1 person

  3. So what we’re supposed to believe global warming is a hoax because you’re a expert on climate? No you’re not. In 2018, 23 States across the South and Southeast had much above adverage summer temperatures. The adverage overnight low summer temperature for contiguous U.S. was 60.9 degrees F. (2.5 degrees higher than the previous 2016). Hurricanes have strengthened dumping more water on states like Georgia, Texas and Florida. Tornadoes are migrating from The Plain States to the Southeast.Tornadoes are also strenghing hitting earlier in the season and also later in the season. The Arctic is warming forcing down extreme cold polar jet stream father south. All these indicators point to the Earth is warming at a rate that is not natural.

    Tariffs have hit farmers hard across the country including Illinois. Many farmers depend on selling solar energy power to make ends meet because the price of crops like soybeans have tanked.

    Like

    1. The middle ages were warmer. A glacier used to cover half of Illinois. The 1940’s had wild weather, Funny how stats start in the 1960’s so they aren’t part of the hoax. Just who decided what the perfect temperature is and why should we believe them?

      Like

      1. We know why ices ages including the last ice age happen. It’s the tilt of the Earth in relation to the sun. The middle age warming period was followed by a cold period. These also happened because of the tilt of the Earth or volcanic activity. None of that is happening now. No one is “deciding” perfect temperatures, but scientists who have spent their lives studying climate know that catastrophic changes in warming in the Arctic and Antarctica have caused huge raise in sea levels. You give no actual evidence of “wild” weather in the 1940’s. Or that “stats” only start in the 1960’s, which isn’t true. Climatologist have been studying paleoclimates for years. You’re not a climatologist and you’re claim of a hoax holds no scientific validity.

        Like

      1. I’m not “ignoring” the story. However your posilating that hundreds of thousands of scientists over the world including scientists at NASA and NOAA are in on a massive “hoax” which involves all the data that supports the fact that the Earth is warming. That’s hardly credible and you don’t have the credentials to call those scientists liars. You also don’t have the credentials to state that both solar power and wind power which have gone through several generations of refinements are “fairy dust”. That is your opinion not based on any facts.

        Like

  4. I drove a first generation Prius for 15 years and would still be driving it today except that it needed a $1300 fuel tank because the float in the old one was not working properly. I loved that fun little car. I think hybrids rock.

    But I think electric cars are stoopid. When I pointed out to a Left Winger that IF your electricity comes mostly from coal, and you plug a car in to charge the car, then your car is a coal powered car. She said, “That’s horrible! Even if it is true, I’d never repeat it because that sounds really bad! That’s just horrible!”

    “Well, you can call a pile of poo whatever you want to call it, but it doesn’t change what it really is…Same is true of coal powered cars. You can call it whatever you want to call it but it’s still powered by coal.”

    She doesn’t seem to like me anymore. Shame. Yvonne

    >

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Yvonne and Diane, I would respectfully point out that the wind generators as time goes forward, will play a far greater role in our “power grid”. Please be aware that in 2020, Budweiser, Walmart, and J B Hunt will put on our roads a few hundred 80,000 lb trucks that are electric operated. There are others too, and more company’s looking to see how these do. These will require a larger proportion of usable electricity and at a higher speed to recharge them. Now this is just the start of trucks going to electric powered as this will, down the road, decrease the need for diesel mechanics and engines. Now will our Illinois be the just Illinois source? Not hardly, but it may very well be a strong provider. On a side note, my belief in these wind towers is that they are mechanical, and as you know anything mechanical will do two things that we need to be aware of, they can break down and do wear out. Somewhere we must maintain requirements that when one or all of a Wind Farm’s profitable life span is over, not should, but must be removed and that land put back like when it was found.
      Not all that long ago our country roads had lots of tall poles on both sides of the roads. These were for not only electricity, usually on one side, but telephone poles on the other side. Due to “Party Lines” there would often times be more than a dozen phone lines on these poles. In the seventy’s party lines were ether reduced or done away with and the new wires were buried and the old poles and lines removed. Or put back like it was found.
      So as Henry figured out after he got that car started, now he had to build them efficiently. the same will happen in the Wind Towers also. What we see today will change with each new generation of towers. Taller, shorter, one large pole in place of a tower? Who knows what will transpire, but rest assured it will grow as demand will make it grow. Like how we older folks thought of kids having “calculators” in school and later computers, why them kids would never amount to a hill of beans. Hello.

      Like

      1. More fairy dust – ironic it’s coming from a troll! 🙂
        Wind has low ‘energy density’ and thus makes for very expensive electricity. For illustration, compare a breath of air with a chunk of plutonium – A breath of air can create a small vapor cloud or blow up a balloon, at most. A chunk of plutonium can level a city. Which can more efficiently be harvested to run our air conditioners? Wind power is certainly better than ‘breath power’, but Way below coal, oil, gas, or nuclear. 100% efficient wind power still provides less usable electricity than 1% efficient nuclear power.
        And wind is unpredictable, meaning it requires redundancy. Or looking at it from the other perspective, wind power is itself redundant, which again raises costs. The Real advances we need are not in better windmills, but in better ways to store our excess generation capacity from 10-6 every night so it can be used later during the 6-10pm demand peak the following evening.

        Liked by 1 person

  5. Lol, more trolls too dumb to realize that the US military use up half the energy in the world. Stop insane and illegal wars to save the planet. But they never talk about that.

    Like

  6. People are afraid of things they do not understand–EXCEPT when MONEY is knocking on their front door.

    Government officials decide what land can and cannot be used for. Having sources of renewable energy is a great thing, but in exchange for how much expense and impact? This reminds me of the debate about landfills vs incineration. Incineration eliminates garbage, CAN produce electricity, AND offset greenhouse gases. However, people don’t understand incineration and therefore, are afraid of having an incinerator in their community. (I, for one, am happy that a lot of medical waste is required to be incinerated.)

    We have to look at GOOD scientific evidence (there is a difference between good science and bad science) and where proof does not exist, make the best educated decision that will benefit the most humans possible. However, it is very obvious to me that oftentimes, “officials” do not take the time to educate themselves in areas they have little or no education in and make decisions anyway. AND they rarely think of long term consequences–after all, they won’t be here to deal with it.

    Government officials need to always “BEGIN WITH THE END IN MIND”. Nuclear is the MOST efficient means of producing power. Wind farms are not. SO WHAT DOES THE END OF A WIND FARM PROJECT LOOK LIKE? Is there a requirement to have a plan for what happens when the turbine has exhausted it’s use? Where is the documentation about how to dismantle a wind turbine? How much will it cost? Where does the waste go? And WHO pays for it?

    I have a background (bachelor’s) in safety/environmental, and have worked in a variety of arenas (including federal). I have worked with radioactive and hazardous waste. I have to say I am pro-incineration, pro-nuclear and anti-wind farm. The science is there.

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s