The Power and the Power Killers:
Energy in the United States of America
Victor Edward Swanson,
The Hologlobe Press
Postal Box 5263
Cheboygan, Michigan 49721
The United States of America
copyright c. 2012
April 25, 2012
When I was a boy in the late 1950s or early 1960s, I was able to be a part of a tour of the Enrico Fermi Nuclear Generating Station in Frenchtown Charter Township, Monroe County, Michigan; I went as part of a school trip, and, officially, the generating station was Fermi 1, which would be used from 1957 to 1972 (there would be Fermi 2 in the years to come, and plans would be started to create Fermi 3 in the years to come). It can be said that the big push to create nuclear power plants was in the 1950s, 1960s, and 1970s, and since the 1980s, the push to make power plants in the country has faded a lot, as has the push to make coal-fired power plants, which is especially true since the start of this century, and since the 1990s, the big push has been to create wind-turbine farms. I think nuclear power plants and coal-fired power plants are more viable for the long run of this country than wind-turbine farms are, and reasons for that statement are shown in this document, and, for now, I will say that I would not want this country to have an electricity-generating policy that is based mostly on only wind power--one source of power as the main source of power--since anytime a person relies on only one thing, the person can end up in deep trouble--having no backup plan, when the thing fails. This document focuses on talking about wind-created power generation, but the document is not specifically about only wind-created power generation, since the document has to touch on related subjects so that wind power can be shown for what it is and is not and what it can and cannot to for the country in the long run.
* * * Facts, Information, and Data * * *
This section--the first main section of this document--has information that you should know so that you can understand the conclusions that will be presented in the next section, which is the second of two main sections of the document. Of course, to understand the conclusions that are presented in the next section better, you will probably use knowledge that you have in your mind already; however, if the knowledge in your mind already is defective or if some of it is, then you might come up with wrong conclusions or not understand the conclusions that will be presented. In truth, this section is made up of parts, and a particular part may be labeled a "definition" or "definitions," a "list," a "fact," a piece of "information," or a piece of "news."
In the U.S., one feet is about 0.30 meter.
In the U.S., one meter is equal to 3.281 feet.
In the U.S., one mile is equal to 5,280 feet.
In the U.S., one mile is equal to 62 percent of a kilometer
In the U.S., one square mile is equal to 649 square acres.
In the U.S., one acre is equal to 4,804 square yards or 43,560 square feet.
In the U.S., a full football field is equal to about 1.32 acres, and a football field at 53.33 yards wide is about 90.75 percent of an acre.
In the U.S., one square mile is equal to 3,097,600 square yards or 4,014,489,600 square feet.
On November 15, 2009, the United States Census Bureau reported that the population in the United States of America was 307,940,188.
Here is information from WikiAnswers (of the Internet): "There were 119,117,000 housing units in the United States in 2001. Approximately 106,216,000 were occupied as regular residences and 12,855,000 were vacant or seasonal" and "Approximately 72,265,000 or 68 percent of the occupied units were owners in 2001."
A "watt" is a measurement of power used, and, in relation to electricity, one watt is equal to the amount of amperage (the flow of electrons) multiplied by the amount of volts involved (for instance, one amp times 15 volts is 15 watts). For those who know a little bit about mathematics, I can say that a 100-watt light bulb in a 115 volt circuit uses about 0.87 amperes of electricity, and what I said should should be understood.
A "kilowatt" is one-thousand watts (or 1,000 watts).
A "megawatt" is one-million watts (or 1,000,000 watts).
A "kilowatt hour" is about 3.6 kilojoules, or I will say that a "kilowatt hour" is the total amount of energy used during an hour by a constant draw of 1,000 watts.
Here is information from "U.S. Household Energy Report" for July 14, 2005, produced by the Energy Information Administration of the federal government, and the information existed under the heading "U.S. HOUSEHOLD ELECTRICITY CONSUMPTION IN 2001": "Electricity consumption by 107 million U.S. households in 2001 totaled 1,140 billion kWh. The most significant end uses were central air-conditioning and refrigerators, each of which accounted for about 14 percent of the U.S. total."
The Daily Herald in Chicago, Illinois, noted, in an article entitled "Plasma TV the new energy hog of the home" (for February 9 and 11, 2009), that 60-inch-plus plasma television sets operate within a range of 500 watts to 600 watts.
"Annual Energy Outlook 2009 with Projections to 2030" from the Energy Information Agency of the federal government had some of this text: "...Electricity demand fluctuates in the short term in response to business cycles, weather conditions, and prices. Over the long term, however, electricity demand growth has slowed progressively by decade since 1950, from 9 percent per year in the 1950s to less than 2.5 percent per year in the 1990s. From 2000 to 2007, increases in in electricity demand averaged 1.1 percent per year...." and "...With growing electricity demand and the retirement of 30 gigawatts of existing capacity, 259 gigawatts of new generating capacity (including end-use CHP) will be needed between 2007 and 2030...."
On Sunday, November 15, 2009, I found an article written by Michael J. Trebilcock entitled "Wind power is a complete disaster" from the Financial Post, (8 April 2009) on the Internet, and it had some interesting pieces of information. It had: "...Denmark, the world's most wind-intensive nation, with more than 6,000 turbines generating 19% of its electricity, has yet to close a single fossil-fuel plant. It requires 50% more coal-generated electricity to cover wind power's unpredictability, and pollution and carbon dioxide emissions have risen (by 36% in 2006 alone)." The article also noted: "...The U.S. Energy Information Administration reported in 2008, on a dollar per MWh basis, the U.S. government subsidizes wind at $23.34 -- compared to reliable energy sources: natural gas at 25 cents; coal at 44 cents; hydro at 67 cents; and nuclear at $1.59...." And I present one more section: "...The Ontario Power Authority [Canada] advises that wind producers will be paid 13.5 cents/kwh (more than twice what consumers are currently paying), even without accounting for additional costs of interconnection, transmission and back-up generation. As the European experience confirms, this will inevitably lead to a dramatic increase in electricity costs with consequent detrimental effects on business and employment...."
Here are some facts from the Energy Information Administration of the U.S. government, and the information comes from a chart entitled "Existing Energy Capacity by Source" (in megawatts) for a report entitled Energy Power Annual with data for 2007 (released January 21, 2009), and, by the way, it noted that the next report would be issued in January 2010. There are thirteen categories covered in the report:
Number of Generators = NG
Generator Nameplate Capacity = GNC (megawatts)
Net Summer Capacity = NSC (megawatts)
Net Winter Capacity = NWC (megawatts)
Headings: NG GNC NSC NWC
Coal 1,470 336,040 312,738 314,944
Petroleum 3,743 62,394 56,068 60,528
Natural gas 5,439 449,389 692,876 422,184
Other gases 105 2,663 2,313 2,292
Nuclear 104 105,764 100,266 101,765
HC* 3,992 77,644 77,885 77,369
Wind 389 16,596 16,515 16,541
STP* 35 503 502 422
(* = HC is Hydroelectrical conventional, and STP is Solar Thermal and Photovoltaic.)
Total 17,342 1,087,791 994,888 1,031,978
Note: I left out "Wood and Wood Derived Fuels," "Geothermal," "Other Biomass," "Pumped Storage," and "Other."
Here is information about the number of nuclear power plants--"operating units"--in the United States of America for a number of years:
1973 total -- 42
1975 total -- 57
1980 total -- 71
1985 total -- 96
1990 total -- 112
1995 total -- 109
1996 total -- 109
1997 total -- 107
1998 total -- 104
Each year from 1999 to the present -- 104
This information came from "Table 8.1 Nuclear Energy Overview" of Energy Information Administration/Monthly Energy Review October 2009 of the Energy Information Administration of the U.S. government.
"Table 8.1 Nuclear Energy Overview" of gives information about nuclear power plants, and here is information related to the last full year of statistics: In 2008, "Nuclear Energy Net Generation" ("Million Kilowatthours") was 806,425, and "Nuclear Share of Energy Net Generation" was 19.6 percent, and the "Capacity Factor" was 91.5 percent.
It was reported on Thursday, March 8, 2007, by Reuters that the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission approved on that day a permit for a nuclear power plant, making it the first permit--however, only an "early site permit"--issued in the previous in thirty years, it is was given to Exelon Corporation, and Exelon Corporation now had up to twenty years in which to get a license from the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission to build and operate a nuclear power plant, which in this case would be at Clinton, Illinois (it had been in September 2003 when Exelon Cooperation had asked for the "early permit"), and it was reported by Reuters that it would take about two years for the government agency to review the request of Exelon Cooperation's to build a nuclear power plant.
Jack Dini reported in his article entitled "Unequalities About Coal-Fired Power Plants" Hawaii Reporter (which was posted on October 19, 2009) that Navajo Nation members were angry that environmentalists had been able to get the proposed Desert Rock coal-based power plant (a 1,500 megawatt plant for Shiprock, New Mexico) blocked from being built for now by getting the Environment Appeals Board of the EPA to rescind a September 2008 permit and that, in 2005, environmentalists had been instrumental in getting the Mojave Generating Station [Mohave Generating Station] in Laughlin, Nevada, closed, and Jack Dini also reported that both events have caused the Navajo Nation to lose needed revenue.
A wind turbine is a device that is used to generate electricity. Electricity is produced when wind caused the fans of a wind turbine to turn, which turn cause a electricity producing device--an "alternator" or a "generator"--to produce electricity. There is a maximum amount of electricity that a wind turbine can produce, and that amount is the stated rating, which is called the "nameplate" rating or "nameplate" output, and the rating is noted in "watts" that can be delivered at a given moment.
On Sunday, November 15, 2009, I went to the Web site for Solardyne.com (http://www.solardyne.com/windgenerators.html), and I found this information: "Wind power has a versatility of uses. The wind turbines below are used worldwide for battery charging, home power, and water pumping applications, and range from 400 to 65,000 watts. Wind turbines start producing power at 7.5 mph wind speed, and increase their output through 45 mph wind. Higher wind speeds require blades to be slowed down to protect the equipment, but are very effective in wind speeds between 7.5 and 45 mph...." And the Web site gave information about the prices of some wind turbines that were available from this company; for instance, the "AIR X Wind Generator" had a retail price of $699.00, and it had a nameplate rating of 400 watts at a wind speed of 28 miles an hour, and the "ARE 442 Wind Generator," which was rated at 10 Kw and included a Grid Tie Inverter, had a retail price of $39,600.00, and the output was 1200 Kwh/month at 10 miles an hour, 1800 Kwh/month at 12 miles an hour, and 2400 Kwh/month at 24 miles an hour (the rotor diameter was 23.6 feet).
"...Wind turbines are typically arranged in single or multiple rows, depending on the size and shape of the landform. A single row is most often found on ridgelines and hilltops where the amount of well-exposed land is very limited. Broader and flatter land features can accommodate multiple rows of turbines. In both cases, rows are laid out to be as perpendicular as possible to the prevailing wind direction(s). The distance between wind turbines (between turbine rows and between turbines within a row) is commonly described in terms of rotor diameters. For example, if a project design is described as having 3 by 10 spacing, it means that the turbines are generally spaced three rotor diameters apart within rows, and the rows are spaced 10 rotor diameters apart (see Figure 2). For a project using wind turbines with a 70-m (230 ft) rotor diameter, this would mean spacing the turbines 210 m (690 ft) apart within a row, and 700 m (2,300 ft) apart between rows..." (WIND POWER PROJECT SITE: Identification and Land Requirements, NYS Energy Research & Development Authority, October 2005, page 7).
On Sunday, November 15, 2009, I found useful material from Jaquin Altenber (of Vert Investment Group, which is based in Houston, Texas) in "How Much Wind Power Can Be Generated From a Section of Land" published through ArticleSnatch.com: "...A one megawatt wind turbine typically generates anywhere from 25 to 35 percent of its nameplate capacity in output, depending on the location where it is erected. This is due to the fact that wind characteristics and speeds vary by location, and the natural downtime associated when no wind is present. The actual amount of power generated by a turbine at a given location versus its nameplate capacity, when measures as a percentage, is known as the capacity factor. Therefore, a 1MW turbine sited on a section of land that yields a 30% capacity factor would generate 1,000kW * 365 days/ year * 24 hours/ day * 0.30 = 2,628,000 kWh of electricity. An average household in the United States consumes approximately 10,655 kilowatt hours of electricity annually. Therefore, as many as 250 households (dividing 2,628,000 kWh by 10,655 kWh) can be powered a year with just 1MW of wind energy...."
On Sunday, November 15, 2009, a Web site for Heritage Sustainable Energy (of Traverse City, Michigan) noted: "...A wind turbine is a machine with both internal and external moving parts, and as such it will generate some sound. As a rule, wind turbines run smoothly and quietly. A properly operating wind turbine at a distance of up to 1,000 feet emits sounds at a level comparable to a household refrigerator."
Here is information from the Texas Electric Cooperative from August 2008: "...A ballpark figure on the cost of constructing a mile of 345,000-volt transmission line is $1 million, about the cost of building a mile of asphalt highway...." (Northcott, Kaye. "Electric Highways in the Sky." Texas Electric Cooperatives, August 2008.).
I looked at the document entitled "Ranking of U.S. Refineries: U.S. Refineries* Operational Capacity" (* = Only Refineries with Atmospheric Crude Oil Distillation Capacity) of the Energy Information Department of the federal government for July 2009 (the next edition would be put out in July 2010), and 143 entities were listed. The smallest on this list was the Foreland Refining Corporation, Ely, Nevada, having a "Barrels per Calendar Day" figure of 2,000, and the largest was ExxonMobil Refining & Supply Co., Baytown, Texas, having a "Barrels per Calendar Day" figure of 572,500.
Saul Alinski, who was a communist and an activist in Chicago, Illinois, had a manuscript of his published as a book entitled Rules for Radicals: A Pragmatic Primer for Realistic Radicals in 1972 (February 12, 1972), and, in essence, the book was and is a primer in how to tear down the culture and ways of the United States of America, and one way to do that is to get masses people to rally around a so-called common cause for change, especially a faux cause or a fake cause, such as pollution.
Suzlon Energy Limited is a company that was started in 1995, and, for one, is sells wind turbines in countries all over the world, and it has employees in 21 countries, and in November 2009, its biggest turbines were the S88-2.1 MW, the S82-1.5 MW, and the S66-1.25 MW.
GE (or GE Energy) entered the wind business in 2001.
It was in 2001 when REpower was founded as a maker of wind turbines, and, around 2009, the company was based in Germany and was making five-megawatt wind turbines for offshore use.
Enercon Systems was founded in 1983. In 2002, the company produced and put its first E-112 wind turbine into use, and the unit was rated at 4.5 megawatts, and the E-112 model was upgraded to six megawatts in 2005. In October 2007, the company set up the first of its E-126 models, which as rated at at least six-megawatts.
On Sunday, November 15, 2009, I went to the Web site for GE Energy, and it was noted the GE Energy had for purchase wind turbines (windmills) that covered a range of outputs from 1.5 megawatts to 3.6 megawatts, and that Web site noted that 5,000 units rated at 1.5 megawatts were in use around the world, and the Web site noted that the company had a new 2.5 megawatt unit now available, and it was also noted that the company produced 10,000 1.5-megawatts units that are in service around the world, offering 15,000 megawatts of capacity. Also, it is noted that the rotor diameter for the 15-megawatts unit is a minimum 77 meters (253 feet).
On Sunday, November 15, 2009, I found a Web page associated with Wolverine Power Cooperative (of Michigan), and the page was "http://www.wpsci.com/HarvestWindFarm.aspx" (and it had no date), and here is some of the information on the page: "...The Harvest Wind Farm spans 3,200 acres between Elkton and Pigeon, Michigan, in Huron County. Each of the wind farm's 32 turbines is capable of producing 1.65 megawatts of electricity, for a total project capacity of 52.8 megawatts. Construction of the wind farm began in June 2007, and the farm began generating electricity in December 2007. The project represents a $94 million investment."
On Monday, November 16, 2009, I went to the Web site for Horizon Wind Energy and got information about the Top of Iowa Wind Farm. This place occupies 5,500 acres in Worth County, Iowa, and the land is corn and soybean cropland. There are 89 NEG Micon 900kW turbines at the wind farm, and the facility is an 80 MW facility. The wind farm could supply enough power for up to 24,00 homes annually.
On Monday, November 16, 2009, I found information about the Rattlesnake Road Wind Farm (which belongs to Horizon Wind Energy), which is in Gilliam County, Oregon, and I discovered the wind farm has 49 Suzlon S88 2.1 MW turbines, and the "installed capacity" is 103 MW, which is reported as being able to provide enough power to run 30,000 homes in a year.
On Monday, November 16, 2009, I learned about the Wheat Field Wind Farm (which was associated with Horizon Wind Energy), which exists in wheat-field land of 8,500 acres, and this wind farm, which began to be used in April 2009, has 46 Suzlon S88 2.1 MW turbines, and the "installed capacity" is called 97 MW, which can provide up to 30,000 homes in a year.
On November 11, 2009, GE Energy released a press release about being involved with a new windmill farm called the "Lost Creek Wind Project," which would be located in DeKalb County, Missouri. The project would involved 100 1.5-Mw windmills (from GE Energy), which would be delivered in 2009 and 2010. Wind Capital Group was developing the project, which would have a "capacity" of 150 megawatts and would provide power for 50,000 homes.
On April 4, 2008, The Hindu Business Line (Business Daily from the THE HINDU group of publications) put out on the Internet this article: "Suzlon Wind gets $240-m order." In essence, Horizon Wind Energy (Texas) was ordering 95 S88-21 MW turbines from Suzlon Wind Energy Corporation (a subsidiary of Suzlon Energy Limited), and the contract included the product and two years of maintenance, and the order was for somewhere between $200 million and $240 million.
On May 15, 2009, Reuters reported that GE had received a two-billion dollar order for 667 1.5 MW wind turbines to be used at the Pampa Wind Project (in the panhandle of Texas) from Mesa Power LLP (which was related to a man named T. Boone Pickens).
In November 2009, Wikipedia.com noted that the Pampa Wind Project is a wind farm that will, in the end, encompass 400,000 acres of land near Pampa, Texas, and it will be a 4,000 MW facility, the first part of which was expected to be running in 2011.
Around July 2009, T. Boone Pickens' plans for the Pampa Wind Project seemed to be fading, or it seemed the project was going to be scaled back, and one of the problems is the lack high-tension transmissions line between what could sort of be called remote wind farms and the places where electricity could be used.
When the wind goes down, and there is no wind or little wind to turn wind turbine, which are used to create electricity, you have to have backup electricity-producing systems to cover the power requested by customers.
The South Texas Project Electric Generating Station (a nuclear power plant) is sort of near Bay City (and somewhat near Houston), Texas, and has two reactors, and the maximum output is 2,700 megawatts, and it can supply power for up to about two-million homes (in south-central Texas), and the site of the plant uses 12,220 acres.
The Fort Calhoun Nuclear Power Plant is a one-unit power facility in Nebraska, and the plant exists on 580 acres, and it has a generation capacity in million kilowatt hours of 3,515, and the net capacity is 482 MW(e).
The Columbia Generating Station (a nuclear power plant) is located in Benton County, Washington, and it has two reactor units, and the station is located on a 1,089-acre site, and the Net Capacity MW(e) is 1,131, and the generation ability in million kilowatt hours is 9,270.
The Cooper Nuclear Station (nuclear power plant), which was first put in service July 1974, is a single-unit generator that is run by the Nebraska Public Power District, which is based in Columbus, Nebraska, and the Cooper Nuclear Station has a maximum output of 791 megawatts, and this power station is located on a 1,251-acre site in Brownsville, Nebraska.
I went to the Web page for DTE Energy on Sunday, November 15, 2009, and I found this information: Fermi Nuclear Generating Station #2, which is located at Newport, Monroe Country, Michigan, exists at at 1,250-acre property, and the plant began operation in 1988, and the output (net capacity) of this station is 1,122 MW(e), and the generation capacity in million kilowatt hours is 9,613, and Detroit Edison (of DTE Energy), which runs the station, reports that it can provide up to about 30 percent of the electricity used in Michigan each day and that, since 1988, it has produced 143 billion kilowatt hours (and, in September 2008, Detroit Edison (of DTE Energy) began plans to construct Fermi 3 on the property).
Here is information about the number of vehicles in the United States of America, and the information was obtained from a table (available on the Internet) called "Table 1-11: Number of U.S. Aircraft, Vehicles, Vessels, and Other Conveyances" (which was issued by Research and Innovation Technology Administration (Bureau of Transportation Statistics) of the federal government. The table noted that, in 2007, the number of passenger cars was 135,932,930, and the number of motorcycles was 7,138,476, and the number of "Other 2-axle 4-tire vehicle[s]" was 101,469,615.
A "hybrid" is a vehicle that has a fuel-based engine and an electric engine, and a "hybrid" is not a true electric care (or all-electric car).
In early 2009, people were hearing about the Volt, which would be a new hybrid that General Motors was going to produce, and, at the time, people learned that the Volt could go about 40 miles before it would have to be recharged (if the gasoline engine did not kick in before that), and, at the time, people were hearing the car could cost $40,000 when it became available in 2011.
On Sunday, November 15, 2009, I went to the Web site associated with ieee spectrum, and I found an article of sorts entitled "Electric-Car Maker Touts 10-Minute Fill-up: Skeptics say substation-scale power levels needed are unrealistic" (written by Peter Fairley for November 2007), and I found this information noted on the page: "...Altair Nanotechnologies' lithium-ion batteries for electric vehicles (EVs) charge up fast. Very fast. One of the Reno , Nev.-based battery developer's 35-kilowatt-hour packs, capable of propelling an EV pickup truck for 160 kilometers, can fully charge in just 10 minutes...." and "...To charge a 35-wKh battery in 10 minutes requires 250 kilowatts of power--five times as much as the average office building consumes at its peak...."
Around September 2009, edmunds.com reported that replacement battery units for the Toyota Prius cost $2,999 for the first generation Prius and $2,588 for the current generation Toyota Prius (a hybrid vehicle) and that the price had been $2,985 for both (O'Dell, John. "Toyota Lowers Price on Prius Replacement Batteries, Says Business Slow - For Now." edmunds.com, 24 September 2008).
On November 9, 2009, through the Internet, The New York Times reported that about ten percent of the electricity available in the United States of America comes from Russia.
It is the Minerals Management Service (under the U.S. Department of the Interior) of the U.S. government that is directly responsible for leasing government lands to companies for extracting oil and gas, and the entity collects royalties related to the leases.
Since 1982, there has been a ban on offshore oil drilling (3 miles to 200 miles offshore) related to the continental shelf, and that ban was enacted by the U.S. Congress, and since 1982, executive orders have added information to the ban.
On June 15, 2007, Reuters posted an article by Tom Doggett entitled "U.S. law to spur new oil refineries a bust so far" on the Internet, and some information within the article was that the new big energy law--that of 2005--had not really spurred on an new construction in refineries in the country, and the article noted that, at the time, the U.S. used about 21 million barrels of oil a day and could only process about 17.5 million barrels a day, which meant some refined products came from other places in the world, and, in the article, one interviewee (Guy Caruso of the Energy Information Administration of the federal government) noted that a new refinery is a 20 to 30 year investment (Doggett, Tom. "U.S. law to spur new oil refineries a bust so far." Reuters, 15 June 2007).
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia made a ruling on February 8, 2008, in New Jersey vs U.S. EPA, about coal-fired power plants that noted that such power plants in 15 states would have to install new pollution control equipment, which would not only have to deal with mercury but also such other products as arsenic, chromium, and lead.
In April 2009, the governor of Kansas, Kathleen Sebelius, vetoed a measure that would have allowed the construction of two coal-fired power plants in Finney County of southwest Kansas (Kathleen Sebelius would resign as governor and become the head of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services on April 28, 2009).
Around early October 2009, a number of groups in Michigan were getting ready to hold a rally on Tuesday, October 6, 2009, in Lansing, Michigan, to try to persuade the Governor Jennifer Granholm administration to move quicker on issuing permits for two coal-fired electricity-generating plants--a 930-megawatt plant for the Bay City area (associated with Consumers Energy Company) and a plant at Rogers City (associated with the Wolverine Power Cooperative) (Lane, Amy, and Tom Henderson. "Biz, labor rally for coal plants: Permits take too long, groups say." Crain's Detroit Business, 4 October 2009, 8:00 p.m.).
Here are two pieces of fact. On November 22, 2004, MSNBC noted that about half of the gasoline used in the country comes out of the oil refineries along the Gulf Coast between Corpus Christi, Texas, and New Orleans, Louisiana, and that no new oil refinery has been built in the country since 1976 (Schoen, John W. "U.S. refiners stretch to meet demand." MSNBC.com, 22 November 2004, 4:44 p.m. ET). On August 21, 2009, it was noted in an article entitled "South Dakota approves air permit for controversial oil refinery" at JouirnalStar.com that the South Dakota Board of Minerals and Environment had recently proved an air permit for what was called the proposed Hyperion Center (in Union County, South Dakota) for Hyperion (which is based in Texas), and when construction would start, the plant would be the first new refinery built in the country since 1976, and the company had yet to attain other necessary permits from, for example, the federal government (Dreeszen, Dave. "South Dakota approves air permit for controversial oil refinery." JournalStar.com, 21 August 2009, 9:40 a.m., updated at 11:39 a.m.) [By the way, a refinery has to have an "air permit" so that it can operate, and the "air permit" is related to exhaust product of such a plant.]
The first annual Earth Day, which has become part of the "environmental movement," took place on April 22, 1970.
Here is information from "Who killed the electric grid? Fast-charging electric cars," which was a product of Low-tech Magazine and was a short article that appeared on the Internet on March 10, 2009: "...If you charge an electric car with a battery capacity of 25kWh [kilowatt hours] during 8 hours, it needs a power output of 3,125 watts. If you charge the same car in just 10 minutes, it needs a power output of 155,000 watts."...and "...In December 2006, a study at the US Pacific Northwest National Laboratory found that off-peak electricity production and transmission capacity could fuel 84 percent of the country's 220 million cars, if they were converted to plug-in hybrids....." (By the way, the article provided more statistics.)
A-Power Energy Generation Systems Limited, which is based in China, got into the wind-power business in 2008.
On October 30, 2009, the online edition of The Wall Street Journal reported information through an article about a new wind turbine farm that was in the works for Texas, and the article was entitled "Chinese Made Turbines to Fill U.S. Wind Farm." The project was going to be constructed on a 36,000-acre site in western Texas, and Shenyang Power Group (which is a unit of A-Power Energy Generation Systems Limited) was going to provide 240 2.5-megawatt wind turbines, and the project was considered a 600-megawatts development. It was predicted that the wind farm would begin operating in March 2011 and cost about $1.5 billion.
The weather cannot be controlled, and the weather can determine whether or not wind turbines can operate or can be used, and the weather problems are not restricted to wind problems, either too much wind or too little wind. It was around early February 2011 that a wind-turbine farm near Caribou Mountain, which is about twenty-kilometers northwest of Bathurst, New Brunswick, Canada, was shut down because ice was on the wind turbines (thirty-three wind turbines) and had the wind turbines locked up. The wind-turbine farm was run by GDF Suez Energy (for NB Energy), and an executive for the company--Julie Vitek--reported to a reporter named Greg Weston that: "...We can't control the weather." (Weston, Greg (Telegraph-Journal). "Northern New Brunswick wind turbines frozen solid." National Post, 15 February 2001.)
Note: If an ice storm hits a state, it is possible all the wind farms in the state could be shut down by ice, and if the state only gets electricity from wind farms, the state has no electricity.
Here is a a short list of the U.S. Presidents:
Richard M. Nixon, Republican, January 20, 1969 -- August 9, 1974
Gerald R. Ford, Republican, August 9, 1974 -- January 20, 1977
Jimmy Carter, Democrat, January 20, 1977 -- January 20, 1981
Ronald Reagan, Republican, January 20, 1981 -- January 20, 1989
George H. W. Bush, Republican, January 20, 1989 -- January 20, 1993
William Clinton, Democrat, January 20, 1993 -- January 20, 2001
George W. Bush, Republican, January 20, 2001 -- January 20, 2009
Barack Obama, Democrat, January 20, 2009 -- the present
Here is information about who--which main political party--has controlled the U.S. House of Representatives of the U.S. Congress at specific times since January 1955:
Democratic Party -- January 1955 to January 1995
Republican Party -- January 1995 to January 2007
Democratic Party -- January 2007 to the present
Here is information about which main political party has controlled the U.S. Senate of the U.S. Congress at specific times since January 1955:
Democratic Party -- January 1955 to January 1981
Republican Party -- January 1981 to January 1987
Democratic Party -- January 1987 to January 1995
Republican Party -- January 1995 to May 24, 2001
Democratic Party -- May 24, 2001 to January 2003
Democratic Party (with two "Independents") -- January 2003
Republican Party -- January 2003 to January 2007
Democratic Party -- January 2007 to the present
Barack Obama has not pushed to get new nuclear power plants and coal-fired power plants built in the country, and, for example, on January 17, 2008, in an interview with the San Francisco Chronicle, Barack Obama showed what he stands for and what is in his head by what he said, especially these parts:
"...You know, when I was asked earlier about, ah, the issue of coal, ah, you'll, under my plan, ah, of a cap-and-trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket. Even...regardless of what I say about whether coal is good or bad, because I'm capping greenhouses gases, coal power plants, you know, natural gas, you name it, whatever the plants were, whatever the industry was, they would have to, ah, retrofit their operations. That will cost money. They will pass that money on to consumers...."
"...I was the first to call for a hundred-percent auction on the cap-and-trade system, ah, which means that every unit of carbon or greenhouse gases wa, was emitted would be charged to the polluter. That will create a market in which whatever technologies are out there that are being presented, whatever power plants that are being built, that they would have to be meet the rigors of that market, and, and ta ratchet it down, ah, caps that are placed, ah, imposed every year, so if somebody wants to build a coal-fire plant, they can, it's just that it will bankrupt them, because they're going to be charged a huge sum for all that greenhouse gas that's being emitted...."
"...the same eh, eh, with respect to nuclear. Right now, we don't know how to store nuclear waste wisely, and we don't know how to deal with, ah, some of the safety issues that remain...."
[You are urged to see my document entitled "CAP AND TRADE" and Carbon Dioxide Facts and Nonsense, a link to which exists at the end of this document.]
* * * Conclusions and Head-scratching Stuff * * *
Generally speaking, in the first section of the document, you gathered information and facts and such and--it is hoped by me--stored that information and those facts in your mind, though it is important if you remember very big of information, since you can always look at the section again and I am going to repeat some of the material in this section. Now, you are going to take at least the real information that was presented in the first section and think, and you will think in a way that creates conclusions, and your work may make you think about questions that you would like to ask about the subject to others, such as to those who might try to push a "cap-and-trade" system on the country, which would be bad for the country. In addition, you will find some "fun" and will see the potential for mass failure in the future, especially that which will have ties to Barack Obama--his defective thinking and defective mind and defective socialistic, communistic, fascist, and Marxist political policies.
"Draw" is an electrical term that I should make sure you understand, and I will use a television to explain what "draw" is (at least what the "draw" that I am trying to express to you is). A television set is made up of parts, such as resistors, transistors, coils, and capacitors, and all the parts within a television set offer resistance to the flow of electricity, and, in addition, another factor that restricts the flow of electricity is impedance (but I will not explain what that is here, but I note when electrons go through a coil, an amount of impedance is created and exists, and the impedance restricts the flow of electrons). So, when you plug a television set into an outlet, only so much electricity can go through it, because residence and impedance impede the flow of electricity (or current or electrons) within the television set till a maximum amount of electricity that can flow through the television set is reached, and so it can be said that the television "draws" a certain amount of electricity when it is running. Incidentally, another type of device could have a bigger draw of electricity or a smaller draw of electricity than the television sets does because of what parts are within the other device (I will not talk about how the parts are connected up to other parts and how that affects the flow of electricity).
Let let me make a comparison (and I am using very rough numbers). The Harvest Wind Farm, which is in Michigan, has 32 wind turbines set out in a 3,200-acre site, and the total possible output ("nameplate capacity) is 52.6 megawatts. The Calhoun Nuclear Station, which is in Nebraska, exists as a 580-acre site, and the maximum output is 482 megawatts. If the Harvest Wind Farm were a site that could have at least on paper a 482 megawatt rating, it would have to have more turbines, and if those extra turbines were the same as what exists at the site now, the site would have to exist on 28,800 acres at least, especially if we think about the site providing 482 megawatts for every minute of a day or for every minute of a week or whatever. If must be remembered that wind turbines do not have what could be called a constant output over a day or week or month or whatever, since the wind changes, and I have shown in this report that wind turbines, generally speaking, only reach 30 percent of the "nameplate capacity" rating over a period of time. So, if the Harvest Wind Farm were to have a more likely 482 megawatt output on a constant basis, it would have to be three times the size of 28,800 acres, which would be 86,400 acres. And then there would be times when the wind was down, and all the wind turbines would be still, and then no electricity would be produced, so there would have to be back-ups systems.
Here is a fun calculation, and, yes, I use very rough numbers, not feeling it necessary to be exact (I am using whole numbers as a rule). Fermi 2 exists on a 1,250-acre site (by the way, the owners are working on plans to add Fermi 3 to the site sometime in the future), and the maximum output of Fermi 2 is about 1,250 megawatts. Remember (this sentence from "Calculation #1"): The Harvest Wind Farm, which is in Michigan, has 32 wind turbines set out in a 3,200-acre site, and the total possible output ("nameplate capacity") is 52.6 megawatts. About how many acres of wind turbines would be needed for Harvest Wind Farm to put out a maximum of 1,250 megawatts? The answer is it would have to be a 76,880-acre site (in relation to "nameplate" rating). Now, let me consider the 30-percent rule (I am using the middle of the 25-to-35 range rule), which I have talked about in this document). If it were to offer a full output over every minute of a week or a month or whatever, the site would have to be about a 230,400-acre site. (Yes, I am taking liberties about the Harvest Wind Farm, since part of the site may be vacant, but, for instance, the Fermi 2 site has bare space, too, some of which is being planned for use with the proposed Fermi 3 station.)
When people in a community run electrical appliances and those appliances try to draw current from the public electricity, power stations have to be able to provide the current (increase the output of their stations). The operators of a nuclear power plant can vary the current provided. The operators of wind turbines would like to be able to provide what is need when customers try to draw power, but the wind is unpredictable, and when there is a draw, there may be no extra current to draw from.
In the previous section of this document, I noted that the "AIR X Wind Generator" had a retail price of $699.00, and it had a rating of 400 watts at a wind speed of 28 miles an hour." You must remember the 400 watts is only a "nameplate rating." If a person were to buy the wind turbine to use at the person's residence, the person would have to be aware the average power would be 120 watts. I ask you: What could be run with such a wind turbine, especially if the wind turbine will not be running all the time? (By the way, I am not putting down the "AIR X Wind Generator" (it could be a good machine), but you have to be aware of what wind turbines do and can do or cannot do, depending on the wind.)
This time, I am going to create and build in your mind a wind farm that is called "The Victor Swanson Funny Farm Wind Farm." I this document I have talked about the "ARE 442 Wind Generator," which has a rotor diameter of about 27 feet and which has an output of 10 kilowatts ("nameplate capacity"). I am going to put 25 of those units on "The Victor Swanson Funny Farm Wind Farm," and I will use the "3 by 10" spacing rule, which I have talked about in this document. My calculations show that my wind farm would be (at a minimum) 1,080 feet by 405 feet, if I set the wind turbines in five rows of five, and that is about ten acres of land. By the way, 1,080 feet is about 20 percent of a mile (5,280 feet). I note that the "nameplate capacity" for each turbine is 10 kilowatts, and when I add the 25 units together, the total "nameplate capacity" is 250 kilowatts. Ah, there is then that 30-percent rule (again, I use the middle of the 25-to-35 range), which means, over time, I would only get as an average 30 percent of the 250 kilowatts, and that is 75 kilowatts. Since each unit costs (retail) $39,600.00, the total cost for the wind turbines on "The Victor Swanson Funny Farm Wind Farm" would be $9,000,000.00 (that is nine-million dollars). I have not taken into account how much I would spend to buy the land or how much in royalties that I would have to spend to lease the land, and I have not put in the cost for additional equipment, such as distribution lines and towers, and after a year or two (depending on the purchase agreement for the turbines, I would have to spend money on a maintenance), and, at all times, I would have to pay installments on an insurance contract, such as that which might cover tornado damage. Remember: "The Victor Swanson Funny Farm Wind Farm" could not operate steadily, as a coal-fired power plant or a nuclear power plant could.
Let me make "The Victor Swanson Funny Farm Wind Farm #2," and I will use the 1.5 megawatt turbine from GE Energy, which has a rotor diameter of 253 feet, and I will use 25 units, which will exist in five rows of five turbines. "The Victor Swanson Funny Farm Wind Farm #2" would have to be set up on land that is 10,626 feet by 4,301 feet (which is like about two miles by one mile), which is 45,702,426 square feet and which is about 1,049 acres. Once I complete the wind farm, my total "nameplate capacity" would be 37.5 megawatts, but the 30-percent-figure output would be 11.5 megawatts. (Remember: Fermi 2, which can put out constant power, exists on land that is less than 1,250 acres of land and has a maximum output of 1,122 megawatts.)
To get electricity from a generation station or a wind farm to the places where it can be used involves distribution systems, such as step-up transformers and step-down transformers (which change voltage from one value to another) and distribution lines, and during the distribution process, loss in power takes place because of, for example, resistance and impedance and leakage (energy turned into heat), so if I tried to distribute a given amount of power, such as 11.5 megawatts, from one place to another over a given moment of time, some of the power would be lost and I would not get a total of 11.5 megawatts to the "draw" locations.
There are a number of problems with wind power. First, you can see through what information has been presented in this document, that when you compare the land used by wind farms and by nuclear power plants, wind farms use much more land than nuclear power plants do at the same true output rating at a given moment. Second, wind farms cannot produce a steady output, as can nuclear power plants, or the output of wind farms is always dependent on the weather, and that means, generally speaking, the output will always be varying--if you look at a range from no wind to too much wind, the output of a turbine will go from nothing through a range of increasing values to nothing (when the turbine will have to be stopped).
In the last half of so of the summer of 2009, I spent several days being a volunteer at the Icebreaker Mackinaw Maritime Museum, which is a museum located at Mackinaw City, Michigan. On the days that I was there, I was usually working on Level 03, which is where the bridge is, and, from there, I could easily see the two big wind turbines that exist near Mackinaw City and see the eight or so small wind turbines that had recently been set up at and for the nearby new marina. There were times when most of the turbines were working, and there were times when most were stalled (for example, both of the big turbines were working at some times, and there were times when only one was), and I saw the turbines rotated or spun at different speeds over time. You should I do understand what the wind does to wind turbines.
I am not an expert in wind-farm technology, but I can present a logic puzzle about the trouble with the distribution of power from a number of wind farms. Pretend that all the electricity produced for Michigan comes from ten "Victor Swanson Funny Farm Wind Farms" scattered about the state (there are no coal-fired plants, no nuclear power plant, no hydroelectric plants, and no other types of plants in the state). When you have wind farms, all the wind farms will be working at capacities related to the movement of the wind (and the direction of the wind); some wind farms could be running at peak, and some wind farms could be running at non-peak (but running), and some wind farms could be not running (unable to run because of lack of wind), so how do you control the distribution of energy to different parts of the state? The draw will vary from day-part to day-part and even from moment to moment at every city and town and house in the state. If the wind all of a sudden stops at one wind farm or two wind farms, somebody is probably going to have a black out or a brown out for some amount of time, and if the wind stops at a number of the wind farms, such as half, it is very likely a bunch of people in the state will have no power or will experience a brown out, which could last for hours. Try to imagine the complex computer systems and switching systems that would have to set up to get make power available to all areas on a regular basis, constantly shifting the routes that are open lines to electricity. Remember: The output capacity will probably be designed so that one or two wind farms could shut down, and there would yet be enough power generated to cover the "draw" by customers, but since my discussion has no backup generating systems, if enough wind farms lose enough wind, people somewhere will not have power or a lot of people will not get enough power (and will have brown-out conditions).
I will not get into a discussion about how wind turbines affect wildlife, because the result of wind turbines being used on a mass scale has yet to be done over a long time, and I have to say that, I did find some information from the the U.S. Department of Energy about the death of birds, but, at the moment, I will not report on the information since I do not trust information coming from the U.S. Department of Energy on the subject, because I do not trust the Barack Obama administration, which is--it seems to me--pushing for the end of coal-fired electricity power plant and not pushing for nuclear power plants, but the Barack Obama administration is pushing for solar energy and windmills for the country.
A friend of my notes--They [the federal government, such as Barack Obama] wants us to use less electricity, but they want us to drive only electric cars.
I have provided, in this document, information about charging 35 kWh batteries and 25 kWh batteries, and I want to use the charging information related to 25 kWh batteries to make some calculations, and I am going to talk about only passenger cars. In 2007, there were about 135,932,930 passenger cars in the country. Let me play with half of those vehicles--67,966,465. Information within this document hints that it takes 3,125 watts to charge one 25 kWh battery in eight hours, and if each of the 67,966,465 vehicles has a 25kWh battery and is going to be charged up over eight hours (at night), the power that would be required to satisfy the draw would be about 212,395,203,100 watts or about 212,395 megawatts. I have shown that Fermi 2 can deliver a constant maximum of 1,250 megawatts. It would take 170 Fermi 2-type plants to service the 67,966,465 vehicles, and it would take at least 5,664 "Victor Swanson Funny Farm Wind Farm #2"-type wind farms--each offering 37.5 megawatts of power at a constant rate over eight hours (which is unlikely to happen in real life)--to service the 67,966,465 vehicles (I did not use the 30-percent amount for each wind farm).
I worked for AAA Michigan as a broadcaster for many years, and, during the roughly three decades there, I often reported that about 700,000 deer hunters were expected to take part in the fire-arm deer season in Michigan (which happens in the last half of November). Let me have some fun. Let us say that about 50,000 vehicles drive at least 150 miles to hunting spots on the day before firearm deer (which opens on November 15), and all will have to have a quick charge--a ten-minute charge during the trip. Pretend each vehicle has a 25 kWh battery, and pretend that all get a quick charge at the same time because most will leave from home at about the same time--in the morning--so that they can be at their destinations before dark. (Remember: There are a lot more vehicles on the road that might need to have quick charges, too, and, actually, many of the hunters will spend three hours or four hours or five hours driving ). In this document, I show that a vehicle with a 35 kWh battery can go about 160 kilometers (or 99 miles) on a charge. It takes about 155,000 watts to charge a 25 kWh battery in ten minutes. Let me charge up 50,000 vehicles in ten minutes. The power required is 7,750,000,000 watts or 7,750 megawatts, and that means, within the state, there would have to be about six Fermi 2-type nuclear power plants to provide the power or at least 2,066 "Victor Swanson Funny Farm Wind Farm #2"-type wind farms (each offering 37.5 megawatts of power at a constant rate over eight hours, which is unlikely to happen in real life). (Remember: There would have to be so many more electricity-generating entities in the state to constantly provide the required power to run everything else in the state--houses, buildings, factories, et cetera.)
The Traverse City area of Michigan is located sort of along Lake Michigan in the northwestern region of the Lower Peninsula of Michigan, and it is an area that seems to be a good region in Michigan to set up wind farms, since wind is regularly coming off Lake Michigan--from west to east. If ten wind farms were set up in the Traverse City area--maybe offshore in Lake Michigan--and if the power for those wind farms was going to be made available in Lansing (which is the location of the Capitol of the state), at least 200 miles of high-tension electricity line would have to be installed. If it costs about one-million dollars to erect or install one mile of 345,000 volt high-tension line, it would cost $200,000,000.00 to install transmission line between the Traverse City area and the Lansing area (and then support system would also have to be created, such as new substations and distribution stations). The more electricity-generating entities there are scattered about the state, the more high-tension line that will be needed to distribute the power, and all that new line is going to cost a lot of money, and the more electricity-generating entities there are scattered about the state, the more complex the line structure will be around the state.
People of today are unaware that in the early days of the telephone, such as around 1900, every phone that existed had to have a two-conductor line connected between the telephone and the central office (or CO), and so, in a way, the skies of the big cities with a lot of telephones had spider webs of wire all over the place. In the early 1900s, people began to invent and create multiplexing systems, in which, for example, four telephone conversations could be send down one two-wire line, because each conversation was sent on a different carrier wave (each of which was a different frequency). If you make wind farms a big deal in the country, you will have to have a lot of transmission lines crisscrossing the land--many more than are needed now--because much, much more land will have to be used for wind farms than are now and would be by using more efficient, powerful, and land-use-effective nuclear power plants or coal-fired power plants.
There is a rule--The bigger a target is, the easier it is to make a hit on it. I have shown in this document that a wind farm has to be much, much bigger than a nuclear power plant has to be to provide the same amount of power. If the country relies much on wind farms for electricity, there will have to be many more farms than nuclear power plants, and there will have to be larger wind farms, which will have to be set up in areas where winds are usually blowing regularly. In fact, large winds farms will be most likely exist in strong-wind areas, such as in what are considered the "Tornado Alleys" of the country (the central areas of contiguous region), and it will be very likely that such wind farms will be hit by tornadoes regularly, which would be a problem--it could be costly in repairs and costly in lost power to customers.
Michigan takes up 97,990 square miles, and Detroit takes up 143 square miles (and the population is about 912,062).
Calculation #9 (made on November 18, 2009):
In Michigan, there is a city known as Paradise (which is located in Chippewa County of the Upper Peninsula), and there is a city known as Hell (which is Livingston County in the Lower Peninsula), and here I do a calculation with a city/country that I call Paradise-Hell. My city/country has a population of 500,000, and it gets all its power from wind farms, since it has no hyrdoelectric plant (it having been shut down by environmentalists eight-years previously) and no nuclear power plant. How many wind farms are required to power the city if the "draw" is 204 megawatts (an amount I chose by taking a portion of what Fermi does in Michigan) and how much land (in acres) would be needed for the wind farms? The city/country exists on some amount (in acres) of land. Let us use 1.5 megawatts wind turbines. Well, 204 divided by 1.5 is 136. The city/country would need 136 turbines at a minimum (I have not considered the 30-percent rule). I will set up the turbines as ten rows 14 windmills. Each wind turbine has a rotor diameter of 253 feet. I calculate that I would need an area in feet for the wind farm that is 10,306 by 22,770, and that is about two miles by four miles and a half. Okay, I do not like that. Let me change to 3.6-megawatts turbines (from GE Energy). Well, 204 divided by 3.6 is about 57, but I will use 56. No! Let me use 60 so that I can make ten rows of six wind turbines. Would I save land by making one row of sixty? That would be a failure, since I would have the turbines set up on about a ten-mile long strip of land. In addition, I have discovered the 3.6 megawatts wind turbine is an offshore turbine (I think). Well, I could be wrong, but let me use the 2.5. Oops! The model for GE is not available in the U.S. till 2010 (as noted in the Web site for GE Energy). Suzlon has the S88-2.1 megahertz wind turbine. It has a rotor diameter of 88 meters (or about 289 feet). 253 divided by 2.1 is about 120. Using that model of turbine, I would need 120 turbines. So, let me go with ten rows of 12 2.1-megawatts wind turbines. The area for the wind farm would have to be at a minimum 10,143 feet by 26,494 feet, or it would be about two miles about five miles. That would be about 10 square miles, which is 6,490 square acres. So, I have a "nameplate output" for my wind farm of about 204 megawatts. As an average, my wind farm would only provide 30 percent of what is needed over a month or a year, so, maybe, I should make three wind farms. I had better set up three locations, in case one location gets hit by a tornado, which causes damage. So, I have 30 square miles of wind turbines. By the way, Detroit has a population of about 900,000 and an area of about 143 square miles. If my city/country had an area of 143 square miles, then twenty percent of my city/country would be devoted to the wind farms. What a waste of land! This is getting hellish! If the wind is calm and if the wind turbines are barely turning or not turning, where will the electricity for my city/country come? I guess my city/country could have the electricity distribution system linked to a circuit from Canada or a circuit from some other place (and then I would have to buy that electricity and I would be behold to Canada or another place for electricity, which is a bad idea). I do hope the other places do not have wind farms, too, since they could have calm winds at the same time. Yes, this is getting hellish! Hold it! If my city/country were to have increase in population, I would need more space for wind farms, which means I would have to find more land for turbines and there would be less and less land for other things--office buildings, factories, apartments, houses, parking lots, streets, parks, golf courses, bowling alleys, baseball diamonds, footballs stadiums, skate parks, grocery stores, hair salons, tattoo shops, et cetera. Let me think this calculation over.
Michigan is one state in which snow falls and can fall heavily (and there are many more states of the United States of America where snow falls). If four inches or more of snow falls in a few hours, electric cars are going to use more energy to get from place to place; for example, a vehicle that normally is able to go 100 miles before it needs to be recharged might only get 80 miles or might get less than 80 miles, since wheels can lose traction or vehicles can get stuck. Maybe, everyone who owns an electric car will have to have a backup vehicles--a non-electric vehicle.
A country should not rely heavily on one main type of energy-particularly--wind energy. Today, the United States of America uses energy related to oil, coal, nuclear reaction, water, wind, solar, et cetera, but Barack Obama and a few others want the country to focus mostly on wind power and solar power. If the United States of America were to rely heavily to wind energy, the country would have many problems and could have many problems.
One problem is the country would not have a good oil production and distribution systems already set up for times of war. In time of war, you would want the country to be able to get cruel oil from its territory and would want the country to have oil refineries on its own territory, because it takes a lot of energy to move tanks and armored vehicles and such. If the country were attacked, such as from places in Central America, the country would have a hard time fighting back, because the country would have a hard time moving vehicles, such as tanks and armored cars and such--there would not be a good established distributing system for fuel. If the country relied on wind distribution and had vehicles dependent on electricity to move, and the movement of military equipment, men, and such would be hindered if the electricity distribution system were damaged or destroyed, and the United States of America is a big country, and it takes a lot of energy to move things
Another problem can happen in times of no war. Big storm system regularly cross the contiguous United States from west to east, affecting numerous states at the same time. If the country were dependent on wind farms, big sections of the country could end up with brown out and black outs while the bad storms cross from east to west across the country. Bad weather could shut down a lot of wind farms at one time.
On December 23, 2009, the Detroit Free Press published two stories about a proposed wind farm that Scandia Wind (or, really, the unit called Scandia Wind Offshore, which is a company based in Minnesota) and Havgul Clean Energy (which is a company based in Norway) in Lake Michigan sort of over a 100-square-mile area that is between Silver Lake State Park and Pentwater, which is a popular tourism area used by swimmers and "bikini gals," boaters, and sightseers. Elsewhere in this document, I report that Fermi 2 is a nuclear power plant that is rated at about 1,250-megawatts, and it exists on a plot of land that is rated at about two-square miles (the plant is on land that less than two-square miles, because one portion of that two-square miles is being developed for Fermi 3). Fermi 2 has a maximum output rate of 1,250 megawatts, and that is a sustained rate, and the operators can control the output of Fermi 2. The wind farm, which is called the Aegir Project, that is being proposed will have a maximum output of about 1,000 megawatts (related to a collection of five-megawatt wind turbines and ten-megawatt wind turbines), but remember there is the one-third rule about efficiency, so the wind farm would not continually offer 1,000 megawatts of power, and the output would always be dependent on the wind and not the operators (so backup systems will always be needed to cover for this ugly tourist attraction). One purpose of the wind farm is to provide power--at night--to the Ludington Pumped Storage Power Plant (a hydroelectric plant) so that water can be pumped up to a reservoir, and, during the day, the water can be used to run the Ludington Pumped Storage Power Plant. (Lam, Tina. "Neighbors make waves over turbines." Detroit Free Press, 23 December 2009, p. 10A.; Lam, Tina. "Turbines stir storm of protest." Detroit Free Press, 23 December 2009, p. 1A.)
It was on February 26, 2010, the Detroit Free Press published two stories about a proposed wind-turbine project for Lake St. Clair and Lake Erie, and the project, which SouthPoint Wind would be instrumental in setting up, would exist in Canadian water, set up as a collection of thirteen wind farms (Lam, Tina. "Storm brews over Ontario winds." Detroit Free Press, 26 February 2010, p. 14A; Lam, Tina. "WILL CANADA'S WIND TURBINES INVADE LAKES? Plan would put 700 towers, each 40 stories tall, along St. Clair, Erie shores." Detroit Free Press, 2 February 2010, p. 1A.). In one of the stories--"WILL CANADA'S WIND TURBINES INVADE LAKES? Plan would put 700 towers, each 40 stories tall, along St. Clair, Erie shores"--it was stated that "The providence of Ontario [Canada], which recently lifted a moratorium on offshore wind projects, is aggressively pursuing green energy under a new law because it hopes to close its coal plants within five years." On February 26, 2010, I went to the Web site for SouthPoint Wind to learn more about SouthPoint Wind, which is a company based in Leamington, Ontario, Canada, and which is a division of 1037193 Ontario Ltd, which is owned by the Louis Group Of Companies, and I found more information about the wind-turbine project. The project is really two projects (one of which is a two-phase project). One project is a 30MW Offshore Wind Energy Project, and it will have three wind farms, each of which will have five 2MW wind turbines. The other wind project is a 1400MW Offshore Wind Energy Project, which will have, when the two phases of it are completed, ten wind farms, and the total number of wind turbines will be 100 turbines. By the way, much information for this section came from a document available at the Web site for SouthPoint Wind called "Application for the Issuance of Renewable Energy Approval (REA) (Draft)," which was dated February 2010. In February 2010, the wind turbines that were expected to be used were DeWind D8-2 models made by DeWind Co., and the hub height of each wind turbine is 80 meters (or 262.48 feet), and when a tip of the blade of such as unit is straight up, the distance between the tip of the blade and the surface of the water is 125 meters (or 410.125 feet), and the distance between wind turbines is expected to be 300 meters (or 984.3 feet), and the wind turbines will be from about one kilometer (or point-six-two of a mile) to 2.5 kilometers (or one-point-five-five miles), and the wind turbines will be about one mile or two miles offshore. Now, you know about this Canadian project.
So, if Ontario gets rid of the "coal plants" in five years, what will happen when the wind dies at the wind farms or when the weather gets really cold (cold weather can cause trouble for wind turbines)?
Calculation #10 (made on March 12, 2011):
Here, it is time to talk about the ugliness of the United States of America and the growing ugliness of the United States of America, and it is ugliness that is being pushed along by people with ugly minds, some of which are those of Barack Obama and Michelle Obama. On February 20, 2011, the first episode of a series entitled The Amazing Race: Unfinished Business was shown on CBS-TV, and during the opening minutes, viewers saw shot after shot after shot on their television screens the many, many wind turbines at Palm Springs, California, and it was as if the producers of the episode could not help but show the wind turbines, since it looked as if the wind turbines were everywhere, or it was as if the producers of the episode were purposely trying to show all the turbines so show the wonderfulness of Palm Springs, California--a place that has gone "green" with what looked like hundreds of wind turbines. I say that Palm Springs, California, once a pretty place, is now an ugly place in the United States of America. After I saw the episode, I knew I had to spend time making an informal calculation for this document. On March 12, 2011, I used the Internet and Wikipedia.com to gather research about the number of wind turbines that there are in the country. I first discovered through Wikipedia.com that wind energy makes up about three percent of the electricity used every day in the United States of America. So how many turbines are used to make that electricity? I am not exactly sure. However, I used Wikipedia.com and added up all the wind turbines that were listed. I came up with 17,092 wind turbines, and that number does not include all the wind turbines that exist in the country; for example, my calculation did not include the thirty-two wind turbines that exited on my date of calculation at the Harvest Wind Farm of Elkton and Pigeon, Michigan, which I talked about earlier in this document. But to continue on with my purpose, I say that the country has 17,092 wind turbines, and if the country has 17,092 wind turbines and if those 17,092 wind turbines produce three percent of the electricity used in the country every day, I can determine how many wind turbines must exist--at a minimum--to produce one-hundred percent of the electricity used every day in the United States of America. The calculation is easy to do--you simply multiply 17,092 by 100 (percent), and that answer that you get, you divide by three (percent), and the answer is 569,733 wind turbines. Try to imagine 569,733 wind turbines--those tall wind turbines--set up all over the country. As I have said, that figure is a bare minimum, since I have not used in my calculation the real total number of wind turbines set up in the country today, which produced that three percent of the electricity that is used in the country every day. If I were to add the thirty-two wind turbines at the Harvest Wind Farm into a calculation to find the total number of wind turbines that would be needed to provide one-hundred percent of the electricity used in the country every day, I would come up with this number--570,800. You should understand the higher number of wind turbines that I know about in the country currently and used in my calculation to figure how many wind turbines would be needed to provide one-hundred percent of the electrify used in the United States of America each day, the higher the my calculated number goes.
Let me take a break here and report what wind-turbine farms were used in my calculation (and the information was found at Wikipedia.com. I used information about--Allegheny River Wind Farm, Altament Pass Wind Farm, AMP Wind Farm, Armenia Mountain Wind Farm, Bear Creek Wind Power Project, Benton County Wind Farm, Bigelow Canyon Wind Farm, Big Horn Wind Farm, Bliss Wind Farm, Blue Canyon Wind Farm, Blue Sky Green Field Wind Farm, Brazos Wind Farm, Buffalo Gap Wind Farm, Buffalo Ridge, Capricorn Ridge Wind Farm, Casselman Wind Power Project, Cedar Creek Wind Farm, Centennial Wind Farm, Desert Sky Wind Farm, Dutch Hill/Cococton Wind Farm, Elbow Creek Wind Project, Fenton Wind Farm, Fowler Ridge Wind Farm, Green Mountain Wind Energy Center, Hackberry Wind Project, Highland Wind Project, Hoosier Wind Farm, Horse Hollow Wind Energy Center, Intrepid Wind Farm, Jersey-Atlantic Wind Farm, King Mountain Wind Farm, Kondike Wind Farm, Lempster Mountain Wind Power Project, Lone Star Wind Farm, Locust Ridge Wind Farm, Lower Snake River Wind Project, Maple Ridge Wind Farm, Mars Hill (Maine), Meadow Gap Wind Farm, Meadow Lake Wind Farm, Meyersdale Wind Farm, Milford Wind Corridor Project, Mill Run Wind Energy Center, Mount Storm Wind Farm, Mountaineer Wind Energy Center, Meadow Lake Wind Farm, New Mexico Wind Energy Center, Papaiote Creek Wind Farm, Peetz Table Wind Energy Center, Pensascal Wind Power Project, Red Hills Wind Farm, Rock Port (Missouri), Roscoe Wind Farm, San Gorgonio Pass Wind Farm, Sherbino Wind Farm, Shiloh Wind Power Plant, Smoky Hills Wind Farm, Somerset Wind Farm, Stateline Wind Farm, Stetson Mountain, Sweetwater Wind Farm, Trent Wind Farm, Twin Groves Wind Farm, Vansycle Wind Project, Waymart Wind Farm, Whispering Willow Wind Farm East, Wild Horse Wind Farm, Wildorado Wind Ranch, and Windy Point/Windy Flats. In relation to anything wind-turbine existing by March 12, 2011, you if do not see a wind farm that you know about in my list, you can always add the number of wind turbines in that farm to my 17,092 figure or my 17,124 figure (made up of 17,092 plus the 32 wind turbines in the Harvest Wind Farm) to find how many wind turbines--at a minimum--would be needed to produce one-hundred percent of the electricity used in the United States of America each day.
The real problem is to figure out how much land is used by 17,092 wind turbines or would be used by 569,733 wind turbines. I have not spent any time and plan not to spend any time to make the calculations. Earlier in this document, I show how much land is used by a number of wind turbines or how to figure out how much land is used by a given number of wind turbines. I can report that Red Hills Wind Farm devotes about one acre to each wind turbine, and there are eighty-two turbines at the Red Hills Wind Farm, and the Horse Hollow Wind Energy Center has 421 wind turbines and uses 47,000 acres. Okay! I have changed my mind. Let me make one rough calculation. If I have 569,733 wind turbines in a wind farm and if one acre of land is use for each wind turbine, then my wind farm would use 569,773 acres. Early in this document, I note that "one square mile is equal to 649 square acres." So, 569,773 acres fit in to 887 square miles. Rhode Island (land and water) covers 1,545 square miles. Surely, the 569,773 acres underestimates the amount of land that would be used.
Welcome to the ugly of the United States of America.
On Tuesday, February 15, 2011, the Detroit Free Press published an article entitled "Ontario delays plans for offshore wind farms" (Lam, Tina. "Ontario delays plans for offshore wind farms." Detroit Free Press, 15 February 2011, p. 4A.). The article noted that the wind-turbine projects for Lake St. Clair and Lake Erie have been put on hold. In additon, the story noted that the government may being giving up on wind-turbine projects for the two Great Lakes but not for the main land of Canada.
You may wonder why this report contains information about the terms of U.S. Presidents and information about the U.S. Congress. I have provided the information so that you can begin to determine what main political party has been in control of the U.S. Presidency and the U.S. Congress at a given moment in time. Then, you will know who to begin to blame for stopping the creation of nuclear power plants and coal-fired power plants and who to blame when you and the country have brown outs and black outs in the future.
Generally speaking, since 1970s, I have driven cars and have worked on cars--my cars, my father's cars, and cars of a few friends, and when I talk about cars, I am talking about cars and pickup trucks (I have worked on motorcycles), and since the 1970s, I have lived in Michigan, particularly mostly the Detroit area. Only once since the 1970s has one of my cars never started because of really cold weather, and that happened one evening in the late 1970s or very early 1980s when I got off work from AAA Michigan--as a traffic reporter--at about 11:00 p.m. and the outside temperate was way below zero and the wind-chill temperate was 78 degrees below zero. Then, I had a blue 1972 Chevy Nova, which on that cold day, I had parked butt to the wind, and yet I could not get it to start. Over the years, I have been aware that temperature can adversely affect batteries--that is, while it gets colder and colder, batteries lose more and more power or the ability to give up electricity goes down and down. I have known for years, in climates where cold weather or really cold weather shows up every year, electric cars will have trouble, if not a lot of trouble, and then more trouble comes when it is a really snowy day. This winter has been one of the snowiest over the last one-hundred years or so for the Detroit area, and the snowy weather has caused people to get stuck in snow, such as on side streets, and the snowy weather has forced people to drive slower and spin tires on roads, which uses more energy to get to places than it does when roads are dry. So, on Tuesday, March 1, 2011, I saw a story in The Detroit News entitled "GM Volt 'doesn't really make a lot of sense" that had been published the day previously, which had information from David Champion (the director of the auto testing center at Consumer Reports magazine) (Shepardson, David. "GM Volt 'doesn't make a lot of sense.'" The Detroit News, 28 February 2011, 5:22 p.m.), and on Tuesday, March 1, 2011, I heard an interview done by Frank Beckmann (of The Frank Beckmann Program) of WJR-AM, Detroit, of David Champion. The theme of the article and the interview was about the results of testing done with the Chevy Volt by staffers of Consumer Reports (the April 2011 edition was scheduled to have the actual Consumer Reports review). Generally speaking, David Champion noted that the Volt is not cost effective, and it has a bunch of problems. David Champion noted that, in Connecticut, where it gets really wintery and the vehicle was tested, the Chevy Volt only would go on electric power for only about twenty-five miles and the heater system was weak, and he said that it took about five hours to charge the vehicle with a regular 240-volt power-charging system, and it took about fifteen kilowatts to charge up the Volt. The staffers of Consumer Reports did not use one of those special charging systems, which cost a lot of money. The cost of the Chevy Volt to Consumer Reports was $48,700, $5,000 of which was a dealer markup cost, tacked on because there is a lack of Volts for purchase in the marketplace so a markup gets added on--it is that old supply-and-demand idea of economics. David Champion did not note other problems with the Chevy Volt has that I know about--the Volt has two different power plants (one is gas-based and one is electric-based), and that means there are more parts to break down, and there can be more things that will wear and have to be replaced over time, and if a Volt gets in an accident, more parts can be damaged and then have to be replaced.
I think those who are pushing for the country to depend on wind farms have ulterior motives. I contend Barack Obama and his associates are purposely working to restrict the movement of goods and services and people in the United States of America, especially in the years to come, so that they Barack Obama can control the United States of America; when you control the movement of citizens in a country, you make it hard for them to revolt and fight back against a bad government. I content the reason some people are pushing hard to get the country to switch to wind turbines is they can make big money by being involved in companies that sell wind turbines--at least for a short time; the push will not last too long, since the push to wind turbines will finally be learned as something that is a failure for the long run by enough people in the country, but the people who had investments in wind turbines will have already made their big money. I contend Barack Obama and his associates are pushing electric vehicles for the country since electric cars will be failures in the long run, and that will lead to restricted travel for the people of the United States of America, and people will have a bigger percentage of their income on cars--such as those made by government-run automakers--and that will lead to them not being able to buy as much other things, and, also, it will keep some people out of the marketplace for cars, since they will not have enough money to buy electric cars. I contend Barack Obama and his associates want the country to be dependent on wind energy so that the country will have fewer factories and hurt factory production--companies will not be able to depend on enough electricity being available when they want it and when they need it, and that will lead to lower production output, which will hurt GDP and the private sector of the country.
Things that the federal government does can make a person gag, especially when what is done has ties to Barack Obama, an "enslavist" (a communist and more). In 2011 and early 2012, at least, I heard a truly disgusting public service announcement from the federal government on radio from time to time, such as through WJR-AM (Detroit, Michigan). The public service announcement came from the U.S. Department of Energy (which at the time was headed Stephen Chu), and the commercial had a man talking to a boy (Billy) (of course, the voices were those of actors). The commercial opens with a man asking a boy if he wants to go to the state fair, and look at what is said in the latter part of the commercial:
The Man: "...Well, you can't."
Billy (the boy): "Huh?"
The Man: "You see, Billy, when you throw away money on wasted electricity, you throw away everything you could have done with it, including going to the state fair."
Billy (sounding dejected): "Oh, man."
The Man: "Cheer up. This year, your parents will make it right. They're going to visit 'energysavers.gov,' where they'll get tips on how to save energy and money. Then, they'll add extra insulation and get a few of those energy-star appliances. They could save hundreds of dollars a year. And you know what, Billy?"
The Man: "They'll take you to the state fair..."
The Man: "Next year!"
Billy (whining): "But I want to go this year."
The Man: "I know you do, Billy. I know you do."
Announcer's copy: "Saving energy saves you money. Learn more at energysavers.gov. Brought to you by the U.S. Department of Energy and the Ad Council."
I say that this presentation to listeners, some of whom could be children, is crap! Crap is not unexpected from Stephen Chu, who is a very close radical associate of Barack Obama's. On Tuesday, February 28, 2012, Stephen Chu was testifying before a subcommittee of the U.S. House of Representatives, and some things that Stephen Chu (a Noble Prize winner) said are: "...Well, I, I, I think, I, eh, ee, absolutely, we should be judged on what we're trying, what we are doing, ah, and I should be judged on my track record when I became Secretary of Energy...." and "...I mean, we, we will do everything in, in our powers to and we agree that there is great suffering when the price of gasoline increases in the United States, and so we are very concerned about this, and, ah, as, ah, I've repeatedly said, um, in the Department of Energy, the, what we're trying to do is diversify our energy supply of transportation so that we have cost-effective means." and "No, the overall goal is to, ah, decrease on dependency on oil...."
The topic of the quoted material from Stephen Chu is tied to the topic of gasoline prices, but can you not see why such a commercial about electricity could show up and did show up?
The commercial is propaganda, especially given that manmade global warming is a hoax!
On Wednesday, September 13, 2011, Mark R. Levin--the host of the nationally syndicated radio show called The Mark Levin Show--interviewed a woman that he called "Jenny," who worked for a company that had been involved in making the Solyndra solar-energy planet in California, which had received about 535-billion dollars in federal loans from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, which Barack Obama had visited and used in 2010 as a showpiece for "green energy," and which had filed for bankruptcy on September 2, 2011. The woman gave information that showed that the Solyndra enterprise was an enterprise that people knew was not going to work, and, in essence, she gave information that hinted that the Solyndra enterprise was a fraud or a scam. On Thursday, September 14, 2011, an FBI team raided the offices of, for one, Solyndra, and on Friday, two executives of the the former company took part in a U.S. House of Representatives committee hearing, though they gave no testimony (using their right not to answer questions under the Fifth Amendment feature of The United States Constitution).
Note: To learn more, you should see the document entitled "CAP AND TRADE" and Carbon Dioxide Facts and Nonsense, which can be reached by using this link: Carbon.
In January 2012, Germany and Spain were some of the European countries that were cutting back on handing out subsidies for "green energy" systems. For instance, Spain suspended subsidies for new renewable-energy power plants, and Germany was speeding up cuts to subsidies for solar energy and was going to phase out the subsidies by 2017. Some reasons for the cutbacks are European countries could not sustain the subsidies, having big budget deficits, and more and more people were coming to understand the manmade-global-warming idea was a hoax so countries need not kill their energy production systems for so-called cures based on a hoax.
Comedy from an idiot man (a U.S. Senator):
On April 17, 2012, a U.S. Senator showed himself to be a high-level idiot, and I have the evidence here, and it fits in well in this document about electricity. Tom Carper (a Democrat) was one of the two U.S. Senators for Delaware on April 17, 2012, and on that day, Tom Carper made a speech on the floor of the U.S. Senate, which was shown on C-SPAN2, and here is a portion of the speech: "...Ah, five, six years from now, we're gonna have windmill farms off the coast of the United States--the East Coast--from North Carolina, Virginia all the way up to Maine. They're going be harvesting the wind, turning that wind into electricity, and--you know what?--the electricity, the wind didn't always blow. But there's sometimes when blows a lot more than were gonna generate more electricity than we can actually use on a particular day or particular hour. What are we going do with that electricity? Well, we're gonna store it. You know where we're gonna store it? One of the places to store it is in the batteries of fleets of vehicles. Who has one of the biggest fleets in America? The Postal Service! And a lot of the vehicles in their fleet that are like twenty-five, even thirty years old. And we have all these new vehicles coming to the market where far more energy efficient to replace those old, some cases dilapidated, ah, fleet vehicles in the Postal Service. And they ca...new vehicles with their batteries can really be a place to receive the electricity generated on a windy day in the Atlantic, out in the outer Continental Shelf to store the electricity, and when needed put out back on the grid, the electri, the electric grid to provide energy as needed across, ah, the Northeast, Mid-Atlantic part of our nation. That's, that, that's an idea that's sort of out there. But, dah, we need to be thinking boldly. An the Postal Service needs to be doing that...." Besides the problems with Tom Carper's sentence structure at times, there are so many problems with his set of words related to logic and commonsense, and one of the problems is that it is very unlikely there will ever be enough electric cars with batteries to store enough so-called extra electricity that might be used later by cities and such of the East Coast, and another problem is the idea that it is very unlikely there will be any excess electricity from batteries in the electric cars to put back on the grid (since the electric cars will use up all the electricity that they get). I say that Tom Carper, who may be thought of as a high-level thinker by some persons, is an idiot of the first degree, and he is worth laughing at. [Oh, think about enemies, such as in submarines, attacking all those windmills out in the Atlantic Ocean and wiping out a lot of the electricity generating capability, and think about how many more cutters and planes and jets and helicopters and dinghies (tiny little blow-up inflatable boats) the U.S. will have to have to protect all the thousands and thousands of windmills.
Remember: Barack Obama is a socialist, communist, fascist, Marxist, and Islamic radical, as is shown through what he has done in life, what he has said, what friends and associates he has had and currently has around him, and what governmental policies he has pushed through the U.S. Congress and has signed into law, and Barack Obama has put down the United States of America while he was in other countries of the world, and Barack Obama has shown he does not like the United States of America as it was founded, and that that makes Barack Obama one of the "power" killers in the United States of America.
* * * Bibliography * * *
"Acre." Wikipedia.com, 11 November 2009.
"Advantages and Disadvantages of of Wind Energy Reviewed." Wind Turbines Now, no date noted. (http://www.windturbinesnow.com....)
"Detroit." Wikipedia.com, 15 November 2009.
"Earth Day." Wikipedia.com, 13 November 2009.
"Enercon." Wikipedia.com, 23 December 2009 (the date visited).
"Energy Policy Act of 2005." Wikipedia.com, 30 October 2009.
"Enrico Fermi Nuclear Generating Station." Wikipedia.com, 28 October 2009.
"Germany Inaugurates 5 MW Wind Turbine Prototype." RenewableEnergyWorld.com, 4 February 2005. (http://www.renewableenergyworld.com....)
"Horse Hollow Wind Energy Center." Wikipedia.com, 18 October 2009.
"Jim Jeffords." Wikipedia.com, 5 November 2009.
"Kansas Governor Again Vetoes Coal-Fired Power Plants." Environment News Service, 13 April 2009. (http://www.ens-newswire.com....)
"Kathleen Sebelius." Wikipedia.com, 13 November 2009.
"Kilowatt hour." Wikipedia.com, 29 October 2009.
"List of the U.S. Presidents." Wikipedia.com, 8 November 2009.
"Ludington Pumped Storage Power Plant." Wikipedia.com, 16 October 2009.
"Michigan." Wikipedia.com, 16 November 2009.
"Nuclear power in the United States." Wikipedia.com, 16 November 2009.
"Offshore drilling." Wikipedia.com, 10 November 2009.
"Q. How many kilometers equals one mile?" WikiAnswers, copyright 2009 Answers Corporation. (http://www.wiki.answers.com....)
"Q. How many single families homes are there in the United States?" WikiAnswers, copyright 2009 Answers Corporation. (http://www.wiki.answers.com....)
"Pampa Wind Project." Wikipedia.com, 8 October 2009.
"REpower." Wikipedia.com, 13 December 2009.
"Suzlon Wind gets $240-m order." The Hindu Business Line, 4 April 2008. (http://www.thehindubusinessline.com....)
"Tornado Alley." Wikipedia.com, 15 November 2009.
"United States Congress." Wikipedia.com, 15 November 2009.
"U.S. World Population Clocks." U.S. Census Bureau, 15 November 2009.
"Watt." Wikipedia.com, 13 November 2009.
"Who killed the electric grid? Fast-charging electric cars." Low-tech Magazine, 10 March 2009. (http://www.lowtechmagazine.com....)
"Wind Farm." Wikipedia.com, 9 November 2009.
Altenber, Jacquin. "How Much Wind Power Can Be Generated From a Section of Land." ArticleSnatch.com. No date given. (http://www.articlesnatch.com....)
Bauer, Susan. "Mileage from Megawatts: Study Finds Enough Electric Capacity to 'Fill Up' Plug-In Vehicles Across Much of the Nation." AScribe: The Public Interest Newswire, 11 December 2006, 12:01:41 Pacific Time. (http://newswire.ascribe.com....)
Casselman, Ben, and Rebecca Smith. "Chinese Made Turbines to Fill U.S. Wind Farm." The Wall Street Journal, 30 October 2009, (it was printed in the paper edition on page A7). (http://online.wjs.com....))
Chakrabarty, Gargi. "Wind farms dying on the vine: Holdups in building transmission lines retard new plants." Rocky Mountain News, 15 December 2006, midnight. (http://www.rockymountainnews.com....)
Daily, Matt. "Pickens' Mesa Power orders GE wind turbines." Reuters, 15 May 2008, 9:02 a.m. EDT. (http:/www.reuters.com....)
Dini, Jack. "Unequalities About Coal-Fired Power Plants." Hawaii Reporter, 19 October 2009, 8:46:48 a.m. (http://www.hawaiireporter.com....)
Doggett, Tom. "U.S. law to spur new oil refineries a bust so far." Reuters, 15 June 2007, 2:01 p.m. EDT. (http://www.reuters.com....)
Doggett, Tom. "U.S. OKs early site permit for nuclear power plant." Reuters, 8 March 2007, 2:06 p.m. EST.
Dreeszen, Dave. "South Dakota approves air permit for controversial oil refinery." JournalStar.com, 21 August 2009, 9:40 a.m., updated 11:39 a.m. (http://www.journalstar.com....)
Fairly, Peter. "Electric-Car Maker Touts 10-Minute Fill-up: Skeptics say substation-scale power levels needed are unrealistic." ieee spectrum, November 2007. (http://www.ieeespectrum.com....)
Fontova, Humbert. "Offshore Oil Drilling: An Environmental Bonanza." American Thinker, 28 April 2009. (http://www.americanthinker.com....)
Gertz, Emily. "Can Offshore Drilling Really Make the U.S. Oil Independent?" Scientific American, 12 September 2008. (http://www.scientificamerican.com....)
Justin. "New Record: World's Largest Wind Turbine (7+ Megawatts)." Megaefficient.com, 3 February 2008. (http://www.megaefficient.com....)
Kramer, Andrew E. "Power for U.S. From Russia's Old Nuclear Weapons." The New York Times, 9 November 2009. (http://www.nyt.com....) [Note: The version that I saw had a correction, and it was posted on November 11, 2009, and the original article appeared in The New York Times on November 11, 2009, on page B1 of the New York edition.]
Lam, Tina. "Neighbors make waves over turbines." Detroit Free Press, 23 December 2009, p. 10A.
Lam, Tina. "Ontario delays plans for offshore wind farms." Detroit Free Press, 15 February 2011, p. 4A.
Lam, Tina. "Storm brews over Ontario winds." Detroit Free Press, 26 February 2010, p. 14A.
Lam, Tina. "Turbines stir storm of protest." Detroit Free Press, 23 December 2009, p. 1A.
Lam, Tina. "WILL CANADA'S WIND TURBINES INVADE LAKES? Plan would put 700 towers, each 40 stories tall, along St. Clair, Erie shores." Detroit Free Press, 2 February 2010, p. 1A.
LaMonica, Martin. "Winds shifting for Pickens' wind farm plan." Cnet News, 7 July 2009, 7:13 a.m. PDT. (http://news.cnet.com....)
Lane, Amy, and Tom Henderson. "Biz, labor rally for coal plants: Permits take too long, groups say." Crain's Detroit Business, 4 October 2009, 8:00 p.m. (last modified 8:22 p.m.) (http://wwwcrainsdetroit.com....)
MacAyeal, John. "Germans to End Subsidies for Solar Power." Bizmology, 23 January 2012, 2:24 p.m.
Northcott, Kaye. "Electric Highways in the Sky." Texas Electric Cooperatives, August 2008. (http://www.texas-ec.org....)
O'Dell, John. "GM's 230 MPG Estimate For Volt Works, Or Not, Depending on the Drive: We Deconstruct the Claim; Remember - Your Mileage May Vary." edmunds.com, 11 August 2009, 5:33 p.m. (http://blogs.edmunds.com....)
O'Dell, John. "Toyota Lowers Price on Prius Replacement Batteries, Says Business Slow - For Now." edmunds.com, 24 September 2008, 4:00 a.m. (http://blogs.edmunds.com....)
Pilkington, Ed. "US gives Shell green light for offshore drilling in the Arctic." Guardian (UK), 20 October 2009, 12:52 BST. (http://www.guardian.co.uk....)
Preusch, Matthew. "Wind energy's success creates a power grid challenge." Oregon Environmental News, 29 October 2009, 8:40 p.m. (http://www.oregonlive.com....)
Randazzo, Randy. "Mohave Generation Station to be demolished." azcentral.com, 11 June 2009, 12:00 a.m. (http://www.azcentral.com....)
Rascoe, Ayesha, and Eileen O'Grady. "UPDATE 2--Pickens delays wind farm on finance, grid issues." Reuters, 8 July 2009, 2:52 p.m. EDT. (http://www.reuters.com....)
Reuters. "U.S. TAKES LOSS OVER 3 WINDMILLS." The New York Times, 29 November 1987. (http://www.nytimes.com....) (Note: This article appeared in paper form in the New York edition on The New York Times on November 29, 1987, page 37 of section one.)
Roca, Marc, and Natalie Obiko Pearson. "Solar Stocks Plunge as Germany Vows to Quicken Subsidry Cuts." Bloomberg, 20 January 2012, 11;43 a.m. EST.
Schoen, John W. "U.S. refiners stretch to meet demand." MSNBC.com, 22 November 2004, 4:44 p.m. ET. (http://www.msnbc.com....)
Sills, Ben. "Spain Suspends Subsidies for New Renewable Energy Power Plants." Bloomberg, 27 January 2012, 11:37 a.m. ET.
Stolberg, Sheryl Gay, and Carl Hulse, Elisabeth Bumiler, Jeff Zeleny, Jad Mouawad, and David M. Herszenhorn. "Bush Will Seek to End Offshore OIl Drilling Ban." The New York Times, 18 June 2008. (http://www.nytimes.com....)
Swain, D. "Five Disadvantages of Wind Power." Associated Content, 28 June 2007/ (http://www.associatedcontent.com....)
Talley, Ian. "3rd UPDATE: EPA Objects To BP Whiting Oil Refinery's Permit." The Wall Street Journal, 19 October 2009, 4:22 p.m. ET. (http://online.wsj.com....)
Taylor, Alex. "Taking the charge out of Chevy's Volt." CNNMoney.com, 3 March 2009, 9:02 p.m.ET. (http://money.cnn.com....)
Trefis Team. "German Solar Subsidy Cut Not Good For Yingli, Solar Industry." Forbes, 25 January 2012, 3:46 p.m.
Trebilcock, Michael J. "Wind power is a complete disaster." Financial Post, 8 April 2009, 7:29 p.m. (http://network.nationapost.com....)
Vidal, John. "UK wind farm plans on brink of failure." Guardian (UK), 19 October 2008. (http://www.guardian.co.uk....)
Vlasic, Bill, and Nick Bunkley. "G.M. Puts Electric Car's City Mileage in Triple Digits." The New York Times, 11 August 2009 (Note: The article appeared on page B5 of the New York edition on August 12, 2009). (http://www.nytimes.com....)
The Wall Street Journal. "Plasma TV the new energy hog of the home." Daily Herald, 9 February 2009, 4:01 p.m., update 11 February 2009, 8;28 a.m. (http://www.dailyherald.com....)
Wenzel, Elsa. "Wind power outlook weak in Europe, report says." Cnet, 29 May 2008, 11:06 a.m. PDT. (http://news.cnet.com....)
Willis, Gerri. "What do hybrid car batteries really cost?" CNNMoney.com, 4 June 2007, 9:11 a.m. EDT. (http://money.cnn.com....)
WIMS. "State of New Jersey v. EPA Vacates Agency Mercury Rules." eNewsUSA, 8 February 2008. (http://enewsusa.blogspot.com....)
Young, Eric. "32 Coal-Fired Power Plants in 13 States Now Up in the Air After Major Court Ruling on Mercury." Natural Resources Defense Council, 28 February 2008. (http://www.nrdc.com....)
Note: I used "Table 8.1 Nuclear Energy Overview" of Energy Information Administration/Monthly Energy Review October 2009 of the Energy Information Administration of the U.S. government to determine roughly how many nuclear power plants there were or are in the United States of America and other information.
Note: I used information from WIND POWER PROJECT SITE: Identification and Land Requirements of the NYS Energy Research & Development Authority (17 Columbia Circle, Albany, NY 12203-6399), which was prepared by Global Energy Concepts and was dated October 2005.
Note: I used information from Heritage Sustainable Energy (based in Traverse City, Michigan), and it was on a Web page (noted on Sunday, November 15, 2009) listed as "http://www.heritagewindenergy.com/faq.html".
Note: I used information from a Web site related to the South Texas Project Electric Generation Station, which is associated with STP Nuclear Operating Company and Austin Energy, Texas (information acquired on Sunday, November 15, 2009), and the Web page was "http://www.stpnoc.com/About.htm".
Note: I used information from "U.S. Household Energy Report" for July 14, 2005, from the Energy Information Administration, which I obtained on the Internet on Sunday, November 15, 2009.
Note: I used information entitled "Fort Calhoun Nuclear Power Plant" from the Energy Information Administration of the federal government, and the information was found on the Internet on Sunday, November 15, 2009.
Note: I used information from "Annual Energy Outlook 2009 with Projections to 2030" from the Energy Information Agency of the federal government, and the report was released on March 2009 (and the next report would be released in February 2010).
Note: I saw the table labeled "Table US-1. Electricity Consumption by End Use in U.S. Households, 2001" from the Energy Information Administration of the federal government, which was available on the Internet.
Note: I saw a Web site for children the seemed to be labeled "Nonrenewable Oil (petroleum)" under what seemed to be a program for children called "Energy Kids" from the Energy Information Administration, and the page had no date, but I saw it one Sunday, November 15, 2009.
Note: I used information from a table produced by the Research and Innovation Technology Administration of the federal government, and that table was entitled "Table 1-11: Number of U.S. Aircraft, Vehicles, Vessels, and Other Conveyances" (which had no date), and I saw the information on Sunday, November 15, 2009.
Note: I used information from the Internet entitled "Cooper Nuclear Power Plant, Nebraska" from the Energy Information Administration of the federal government, and the material was dated September 10, 2009.
Note: I used information from the Internet entitled "(Enrico) Fermi Nuclear Power Plant, Michigan" from the Energy Information Administration of the federal government, and the material was dated September 10, 2009.
Note: I used information from the Internet entitled "Columbia Generating Station, Washington" from the Energy Information Administration of the federal government, and the material was dated September 10, 2009.
Note: I used information from the Web site for Horizon Wind Energy and got information about the Top of Iowa Wind Farm, Rattlesnake Road Wind Farm, the Wheat Field Wind Farm, and one of the pages that I used was "DEVELOPED AND SOLD PROJECTS," and the Web site had a main address of "http://www.horizonwind.com".
Note: I used information from the Web site for Suzlon Energy Limited, which is located in India.
Note: I used information from a document entitled "Ranking of U.S. Refineries: U.S. Refineries* Operational Capacity" (* = Only Refineries with Atmospheric Crude Oil Distillation Capacity) of the Energy Information Department of the federal government for July 2009, which I found on the Internet on Sunday, November 15, 2009.
Note: On December 23, 2009, I visited the Web site for REpower Systems, which as a company based in Germany, that makes wind turbines, such as, at the times, five-megawatt wind turbines for offshort use, and the main address was "http://www.repower.de".
Note: On December 23, 2009, I visited the Web site for Enercon Services, and the general Web address was "http://www.enercon.com".
Note: On December 23, 2009, I visited theWeb site for Scandia Wind, and the general Web site address was "http://www.scandiawind.com".
Note: On December 23, 2009, I visited the Web site for Havgul Clean Energy, and the general Web site address was "http://www.havgul".
Note: On February 26, 2010, I visited the Web site for SouthPoint Wind, which is a Canadian company that is involved in constructing wind farms, and the main address for the Web site was "http://southpointwind.com".
Press release. "Largest Wind Project in Missouri to Feature GE 1.5 Megawatt Technology." GE, 11 November 2009, 10:18 a.m. ET.
Press release. "GE 1.5-Megawatt Wind Turbine Commissioned for DOE Program Designed to Move US Wind Energy Technology Forward." GE, 10 November 2009, 02:57 p.m. Eastern Time.
Press release (of sorts on the Internet). "Nuclear Generation: DTE Energy's nuclear generating facilities are located in Newport, Michigan, on the shores of Lake Erie." DTE Energy, copyright 2009 DTE Energy Company. (http://benefits.dteenergy.com/nuclear/aboutUs.html)
Press release (contact: Jeff Sheldon). "U.S. RENEWABLE ENERGY GROUP, CHINA'S SHENYANG POWER GROUP, AND CIELO WIND POWER TO DEVELOP A 600 MW WIND FARM IN TEXAS." Cielo Wind Power, 29 October 2009. (http://www.cielowind.com....)
Note: This document was originally posted on the Internet on November 18, 2009.
Note: This document is known on the Internet as www.hologlobepress.com/power.htm.
For further reading, you should see the
document entitled "CAP AND TRADE"
and Carbon Dioxide Facts and
Nonsense, which can be reached by
using this link: Carbon.
For further reading, you should see the
document entitled World Tyranny:
Warnings about the Insane Who are
Trying to Create a Communist World
Country, which can be reached by using
this link: World.
For further reading, you should see the
document entitled Conservatism for
Children and What Conservatism Means,
which can be reached by using this link:
For further reading, you should see the
document entitled Madness in a President
and Other Matters of a Defective Mind,
which can be reached by using this link:
For further reading, you should see my
document entitled Nonsense Statements
and Quotations of Barack Obama, which
can be reached by using this link: Quotes.
For further reading, you should see the
document entitled Never Forget These
Media "Darlings" ?: A Guide for the
Individual in the United States of
America, which can be reached by
using this link: Media.
For further reading, you should see the
document entitled A Little History of
Barack Obama Events: A Show of
Deconstruction, which can be reached by
using this link: History.
For further reading, you should see the
document entitled Lessons for Children
about Politics and Dangerous People,
which can be reached by using this
For further reading, you should see the
document entitled The Next Elections:
What Has to be Done to Protect the
United States of America, which can
be reached by using this link: Elections.
For further reading, you should see the
document entitled World Tyranny:
Warnings about the Insane Who are
Trying to Create a Communist World
Country, which can be reached by
using this link: World.
Note: Many other documents exist at the
Web site for The Hologlobe Press that will
give you information about the bad that Barack
Obama and his associates are doing to the
United States of America, such as the Michigan
Travel Tips documents and the T.H.A.T.
documents that have been published since
the fall of 2008.
To get to the Site-Summary Page for The
Site-Summary Page for The Hologlobe
Press, you may use this link: Summary.
To get to the main page for The Hologlobe
Press, you may click on this link now: