Alternative Energy Systems Not Cost Effective

Advertisement

Editor:

Mr. Estess’ correct reference to Mr. Welge as an engineer means Welge depends on the laws of nature, physics, and valid science and technology. Thus, Mr. Welge will never be able to fulfill Mr. Estess’ energy fantasies because no amount of engineering can overcome the periods of night, clouds, snow, rain, dust storms, excessively high winds and no wind at all which disrupt the trivial amounts of power these systems provide. A conventional power generation system must operate continuously to fill in for all these constant variations, and provide capacity to meet peak loads that the fantasy sources are completely incapable of supplying.

Certain readily observable facts demonstrate the inadequacy of fantasy energy systems:

Homeowners with their heavily-subsidized solar electrical systems brag about the occasions when their electric meter runs backwards. If the solar system were adequate for even a single-family residence (let alone a city or industry) the user would be off the grid completely.

If wind were a viable energy source, seagoing military and commercial vessels would still be sail-powered.

If the alternative energy systems were even remotely cost effective, they would not be subsidized and mandated by governments and Corporation Commission technophobes. Subsidies and mandates force utilization of entities so upside down in form, fit, function, efficiency, and cost effectiveness that they would never see the light of day in the real world otherwise.

The U.S. Department of Energy released a report on the cost of providing electricity by various means. Using their “advanced nuclear plant” cost as a baseline, this report shows that an electric bill would be 25 percent higher with wind power, 61 percent higher with offshore wind power, 16 percent higher with solar thermal, and 333 percent higher with solar photovoltaic. Look at your current electric bill, multiply it by 1.25 or 1.61 or 1.16 or 3.33 (depending on your favorite alternate source), and decide if you want that on a monthly basis.

Every dollar, man hour, and natural resource invested in fantasy energy generation is worse than a total waste, because it is a deliberate diversion of those resources from the power generation systems we need to keep our nation from degenerating into another third-world-class society.

We must avoid the staggeringly costly failures of the fantasy sources experienced by California (buying electricity from Arizona), Texas (buying electricity from Mexico), England, Spain, Holland — everywhere these “clean and sustainable energy sources” have been tried and found inadequate for over 30 years.

Terry Putnam

Comments

don evans 3 years, 1 month ago

Thank you Mr. Putnam for dareing to expose the myth's of fantacy energy resources. Wonder why our Payson public school district is now so heavily invested in solar photovoltaic. And at a 333% higher cost ratio per the US Department of Energy report?

0

Requires free registration

Posting comments requires a free account and verification.