If the chOIce is between oil rigs off Virginia Beach or windmills, it's no choice at all:
- Petroleum is the fuel of the past; wind is energy for the future.
- Petroleum contributes to global warming; wind doesn't.
- Burning petroleum pollutes; wind won't.
- Drilling for oil and gas leaves toxic chemicals in the water; wind can't.
- Oil and gas spill; spilled wind is called "air."
- Petroleum requires intrusive on-shore facilities; wind requires a connection to the electric grid.
- There isn't enough petroleum off Virginia to make a difference in prices; the state is considered the best location for a wind farm on the East Coast.
- Using petroleum perpetuates political, environmental and economic problems; wind solves them.
According to Pilot writer Scott Harper, a team from Old Dominion, Virginia Tech, James Madison University and Norfolk State have been studying possibilities for offshore wind farms, concentrating on a proposal for "100 wind turbines installed at least 12 miles off Virginia Beach, costing more than $250 million."
They have determined that a combination of available wind, shallow water, relatively few hurricanes and proximity to electric lines makes Virginia Beach a better choice - for example - than the Eastern Shore, where a proposal for a wind farm foundered a few years ago.
So far, environmentalists seem to like the offshore project, a stark change from their inexplicable opposition to on-shore proposals in Virginia's mountains.
Still to be explored, according to the researchers, is whether a wind farm is compatible with the Navy's training - a potential deal-breaker, as it is for oil and gas development - and the economic benefits of those 300-foot whirling turbines a dozen miles from the beach.
The 100-turbine farm, even if it were built, won't do much to satisfy Virginia's energy needs, although it can satisfy some in one of the greenest possible ways.
The Virginia proposal is modeled on a Danish wind farm that produces 160 megawatts of power; to put that in perspective, that's only a third of the power that would be produced by the much-reviled coal plant Dominion Virginia Power is building in Wise County. Wind turbines, however, don't foul the air with particulate matter, or add toxic mercury to Hampton Roads' fisheries.
Offshore drilling advocates accuse opponents of wasting a resource by leaving it in the ground, and promise all kinds of unknowable benefits if they are permitted to drill. The study on wind energy - only in its early stages - has already provided more real information, and more compelling arguments, than any oil advocate has.
"If wind energy development in the eastern U.S. is going to make a real rather than symbolic contribution to solving our energy and air pollution problems," Rick Webb, a University of Virginia scientist, told Harper, "it will certainly be offshore development."
Let's get started.
Delicious
Digg
Reddit
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
Do both, together
We can put men on the moon and strive to cure disease, we can cetainly solve our energy needs. Why not put oil, natural gas amd wind mills together in the same superstructures? We keep hearing that oil drilling won't help for ten years, but if we don't do anything now, where will we be in ten years? A third world country dependant on Venezuala and the middle east.
In my back yard? the nuke plant, of course
A typical wind turbine has a blade radius of about 170 feet. At one revolution per second, the tips of the blades are moving just under the speed of sound making a constant roar. The pressure waves as each blade passes by (3 per second) are palpable and very disturbing. Many people report nausea and headache just from being with in a mile of them.
And, of course, if there is a catastrophic blade separation as the blade is aligned with your house, the effect would be about the same as with an artillery shell hitting it.
On the other hand, no one in the US has been harmed by a nuke plant nearby and they are safe and clean.
In Your Backyard
Which would you rather have in your backyard -- wind turbines or a nuclear power plant?
Sept 8th, 2020
In today’s headlines, four people were injured at the mouth to the HRBT when their horse team bucked and threw them from their wagon. The injured were hauling manure cleaned from the interstate to the dump site at the former Fort Monroe. In other news, Pittsburg PA announced the reopening of 4 steel mills, as carriage makers, barrel makers, and plow makers have increased their demand for materials. These plants, along with the textile mills reopening in North Carolina, are expected to employ many of those put out of work when petroleum products were outlawed in the US and many fuel, lubricant, and plastics manufacturing plants were closed. In the NYSE today, synthetic lubricant shares posted another record high, and soybeans continue their upward race towards unheard of prices. On tomorrow’s front page: Railroads – how they are barely surviving on ethanol but still competing with the tall sail ships moving America’s products.
Don't forget coffee360 about these products...
That is a great list of what is made with oil or oil products. Let's not forget:
- the plastic housing for batteries in your hybrid car
- the interiors of same said cars
- airbags
- shoes
- colonoscopy scopes
- endoscopy scopes
- the plastic in hypodermic needles
- cell phones
- computers
basically anything with a hint of plastic is derived from oil. so now the question becomes, where do we get the oil for that? What about the oil to transport those hybrid batteries? and the list goes on and on and on... these are great reasons for drilling here, even if we do become independant on mid-east oil. we'll still need oil...
Dang it
There's just not enough square footage on the roof of my car to fit a windmill or even a sail. How about your automobile? We cannot ignore the present need of petroleum-based products to speculate solely on future alternatives. We need to accept this and use ALL available resources as we work to reduce our dependence of oil. T Boone Pickett is correct in his approach but make NO mistake about it. He is in this to make MORE money through gov't subsidies and tax breaks, not just help direct us into the future.
I often wonder what goes on at the VP anymore. Doesn't anyone actually read these articles before print? The slants are as clear as glass whether it's oil dependency, global warming, or politics. How about delivering the news instead of creating it. Sit back and reread your articles before print. Be objective and neutral. Remove the slants.
did the pilot editors walk or ride bikes to work?
"Petroleum is the fuel of the past; wind is energy for the future."
Catchy slogan. Too bad it fails to recognize that petroleum is also the fuel of the present. I don't particularly want an oil rig off the Virginia coast, but the Pilot, as usual, tries to sell its point of view somewhat dishonestly.
I am impressed, however, that the Pilot managed to refrain from what must have been its instinct to work Obama into the editorial.
Depleting a resource more precious than oil
The base capital cost per watt/hr of wind energy exceeds clean coal by a factor of three to one. But that's only the start, as wind energy is inconstant, requiring building at least double capacity distributed geographically, with a grid capable of moving the power efficiently, plus redundant fossil fuel capacity for those days the wind just doesn't blow. Overall, the capital cost of wind energy is 9 to 10 times the cost of clean coal. This is roughly equal to solar(photovoltaic).
We are not a nation of savers. Trying to provide even 10% of our energy needs with wind or solar would leave us with no investment capital for anything else. No modern car plants, no new factories of any kind, no new businesses, no research and development, no venture capital for the next new idea. There just isn't enough investment capital to chase this silly notion CO2 free energy by any means other than nuclear. We
Answers are easy
Answers always seem easy when you ignore all details and reduce it to some silly slogans.
great strategy
Use up our oil first so we can cut foreign dependence?
Everyting!
We need to do everyting to become energy independent!
UPDATE: "We have an uninformed newspaper"
My list should have also included "Wind Turbines."
We have an uninformed newspaper
When did Nancy Pelosi start writing editorials for this paper?
Below is a partial list of some of the products made from oil. Nearly everything in our lives is made from oil, made by machinery and systems dependent on oil, and transported by oil as either gas or diesel fuel.
Windmills will not product:
Ammonia, Artificial limbs, Aspirin, Balloons, Bandages, Cameras, Candles, Carpets, Combs, Cosmetics, Crayons, Deodorants, Detergents, Disposable Diapers, Dolls, Eye Glasses, Electrical Wiring Insulation, Food Preservatives, Food Packaging, Garden Hose, Glue, Hair Coloring, Hair Curlers, Hand Lotion, Hearing Aids, Heart Valves, Ink, insulation, Insect Repellent, Lip Stick, Milk Jugs, Nail Polish, Panty Hose, Perfume, Petroleum Jelly, Rubbing Alcohol, Shampoo, Shoes, Styrofoam, Toothpaste, Trash Bags, Upholstery, Vitamin Capsules, Water Pipes
...just to name a few.
Same tired lefty arguments ...
... that the public is rejecting en mass. DRILL HERE, DRILL NOW, PAY LESS!!
Yawn
"The 100-turbine farm, even if it were built, won't do much to satisfy Virginia's energy needs"
Let's just think if the navy will want their ships to run into a windmill farm in the water instead of a single oil platform. Environmentalists have opposed windfarms, and they'll oppose this, too, once they succeed in getting drilling off the table.
Common Sense Approach:
Do Both.
Wow....
Until wind can make any true difference in our energy problems, it would be prudent to stop trying to make it the cure all for such. Yes, it would make a small contribtion but in reality it will not change anything. Tapping our natural resources such as oil and natural gas make much more sense until we can develop ways to utilize electricity for everything. Petroleum products are the cornerstone to much more than just gas for our cars. This article and argument is about as pathetic as NObama. Nice try by the Pilot editorial staff but most of us know that it is a pipe dream. Then again, perhaps this increase in winds by gobal warming might pay off somehow.
Wind V. Petroleum
Do you advocate using sailing ships to haul construction materials to the site?