More Hot Air from Wind Farms

The UK Telegraph reported yesterday "the wind farm industry has been forced to admit that the environmental benefit of wind power in reducing carbon emissions is only half as big as it had previously claimed."

The British Wind Energy Association has admitted to cooking the books on its calculations of the amount of carbon dioxide displaced by wind power.  According to the report a wind farm industry source offered this bizarre excuse for the inaccurate figures:

"It's not ideal for us. It's the result of pressure by the anti-wind farm lobby."

It's the fault of the anti-wind lobby that the wind farm industry has been forced to tell the truth? Shame on those pro-pollution Neanderthals.

So how many windmills does it take to save the planet? (Or at least to make the "greens" on the tiny island of Britain feel good about themselves?) A lot.

Experts have previously calculated that to help achieve the Government's aim of saving around 200 million tons of CO2 emissions by 2020 - through generating 15 per cent of the country's electricity from wind power - would require 50,000 wind turbines.

But the new figure for carbon displacement means that twice as many turbines would now be needed to save the same amount of CO2 emissions.

That's at least 100,000 windmills to minimally reduce CO2 emissions.  (All of these numbers assume, of course, that there is some wind to mill.) Picture it: a hundred thousand windmills doting the island. Should be a real boon for tourism.

Obama wants to build a few windmills in America. Electrical generation in the United States releases just under 3 billion metric tons of CO2 into the atmosphere each year. Do the math people.  To reduce the amount of CO2 by just 10% would require at least 150,000 windmills. I sure hope Obama sticks them in your backyard not mine.

While wind farms may be one of the most expensive, unreliable and maintenance-intensive ways to make electricity known to mankind, at least we know the proponents of the technology provide some form of energy. They are full of hot air.

Hat tip: Otis Glazebrook (IV)
The UK Telegraph reported yesterday "the wind farm industry has been forced to admit that the environmental benefit of wind power in reducing carbon emissions is only half as big as it had previously claimed."

The British Wind Energy Association has admitted to cooking the books on its calculations of the amount of carbon dioxide displaced by wind power.  According to the report a wind farm industry source offered this bizarre excuse for the inaccurate figures:

"It's not ideal for us. It's the result of pressure by the anti-wind farm lobby."

It's the fault of the anti-wind lobby that the wind farm industry has been forced to tell the truth? Shame on those pro-pollution Neanderthals.

So how many windmills does it take to save the planet? (Or at least to make the "greens" on the tiny island of Britain feel good about themselves?) A lot.

Experts have previously calculated that to help achieve the Government's aim of saving around 200 million tons of CO2 emissions by 2020 - through generating 15 per cent of the country's electricity from wind power - would require 50,000 wind turbines.

But the new figure for carbon displacement means that twice as many turbines would now be needed to save the same amount of CO2 emissions.

That's at least 100,000 windmills to minimally reduce CO2 emissions.  (All of these numbers assume, of course, that there is some wind to mill.) Picture it: a hundred thousand windmills doting the island. Should be a real boon for tourism.

Obama wants to build a few windmills in America. Electrical generation in the United States releases just under 3 billion metric tons of CO2 into the atmosphere each year. Do the math people.  To reduce the amount of CO2 by just 10% would require at least 150,000 windmills. I sure hope Obama sticks them in your backyard not mine.

While wind farms may be one of the most expensive, unreliable and maintenance-intensive ways to make electricity known to mankind, at least we know the proponents of the technology provide some form of energy. They are full of hot air.

Hat tip: Otis Glazebrook (IV)