Althouse: After the SOTU: Wisconsin!

January 26, 2011

After the SOTU: Wisconsin!

We must be quite important!

105 comments:

traditionalguy said...: Maybe Obama thinks his holy grail of "Clean Energy" comes from cows.; 1/26/11, 10:50 AM
Unknown said...: Considering the speech didn't even make a loud flop, I presume he feels the need to be with people who will love him unconditionally.; 1/26/11, 10:50 AM
Kurt said...: No doubt he's trying to avoid the embarrassment of losing what has been a stalwart state for the Democrats in 2012. Wisconsin hasn't voted for a Republican presidential candidate since Reagan.

wv: iness--what Obama has too much of.; 1/26/11, 10:53 AM
KCFleming said...: Prolly wants to try out your new high speed rail.; 1/26/11, 10:54 AM
garage mahal said...: Maybe Obama wants to see all those stimulus projects Walker said he's against but accepted anyway.; 1/26/11, 11:00 AM
Chip Ahoy said...: This whole thing reminds me of the oddest dream I had last night. The dream was about art and artists, oil specifically. A bird in my building developed a new way to thicken her eyelashes. A confab with retired Leonard Nemoy wearing an old Star Trek shirt except this one was polo. And somebody else's little light brown puppy that whined to go outside to poo. Oh wait, I guess this doesn't remind me of that at all. Apologies. Carry on.; 1/26/11, 11:02 AM
Big Mike said...: Mr. Obama is scheduled to spend the day in Wisconsin touring several clean-energy manufacturing plants

Please, cheeseheads, don't embarrass him the way those Californians did by closing the plants and moving the jobs to China.; 1/26/11, 11:03 AM
FedkaTheConvict said...: Wisconsin is critical to Obama's re-election plan which explains the seven visits, and at least two by Michelle, since 2009.

Unfortunately for him the state is now firmly in the hands of Republicans. No more Jim Doyle to veto commonsense Voter ID laws; the voter fraud in S/E Wisconsin will be significantly reduced in the next election.; 1/26/11, 11:04 AM
Palladian said...: Forward!; 1/26/11, 11:09 AM
Trooper York said...: Well he just wanted to hang out with the Packers. I mean losers like to stick together. Just sayn'; 1/26/11, 11:13 AM
Kurt said...: Palladian's "forward!" reminds me of my reaction (upon reading recaps of the speech which I made a point of not watching) that he said, "we must move forward together or not at all." As soon as I read that, I said, "well, not at all sounds a lot better than forward and over the cliff!"

Still, it doesn't begin to compare to the funniest response to the speech so far: Legal Insurrection's pithy "A million points of trite."; 1/26/11, 11:15 AM
Issob Morocco said...: Obama's list of important things: Obama

Issob's list of important things: Packers, Beer, Cheese, and Sausage; 1/26/11, 11:24 AM
michaele said...: Obama couldn't possibly be going to Wisconsin for political reasons because he told us in his speech, "At stake right now is not who wins the next election – after all, we just had an election."

He just must want to get in a little cross country skiing.; 1/26/11, 11:51 AM
Lucien said...: Someone told President Obama that women in Wisconsin had started cross-country skiing in skirts & he thinks this is a promising tchnology that could benefit from government investment.

(You do BIG THINGS!)

WV: sensom "Sensom a that canarly stone over. I canarly see it from here."; 1/26/11, 11:53 AM
PaulV said...: Garbage Garage, How many dems do you know have sent a check to Traesury in the amount of their Bush tax cuts? Whenyou get free money do you spend it wisely or as your daddy wants?

WV: grapo Garagem grapo of reality sometime; 1/26/11, 11:53 AM
Big Mike said...: I was on a business trip and returned too late in the evening to watch the SOTU. The few clips I've seen suggest that Obama's reputation as a great orator needs careful reexamination.; 1/26/11, 12:00 PM
garage mahal said...: Garbage Garage, How many dems do you know have sent a check to Traesury in the amount of their Bush tax cuts? Whenyou get free money do you spend it wisely or as your daddy wants?

Walker spent about 3/4 of the stimulus money awarded to the state. Which means about 3/4 of the stimulus was a good idea. Contrary of course to what he and almost every other Republican governor says publicly. Criticize, and accept!; 1/26/11, 12:07 PM
Phil 314 said...: Pogo, you beat me to the punch.; 1/26/11, 12:30 PM
Unknown said...: Ann, At the end of his speech, the President in comparing other countries media to the US said,"If they don't want a story in the newspaper, it doesn't get written." If you google search for "Historic cover-up of FBI and police crimes currently taking place" on the Urban 75 message board, you will see those stories do not get written here either. Bill Anderson soxin8@hotmai.com; 1/26/11, 12:52 PM
Automatic_Wing said...: Walker spent about 3/4 of the stimulus money awarded to the state. Which means about 3/4 of the stimulus was a good idea.

Heh. Talk about an epic logic fail.; 1/26/11, 12:55 PM
Big Mike said...: My noon post should have been on the JAltCoh thread. Sorry.; 1/26/11, 12:58 PM
Toad Trend said...: Apparently Zero went to Wisconsin so he could say that a piece of Sputnik crashed there.

What a tool.

wv - laterly; 1/26/11, 12:59 PM
Martin L. Shoemaker said...: He just wants to ride the free bikes!; 1/26/11, 1:00 PM
Unknown said...: Ann, I just notice that you are a law professor. The President also said "We all believe in the rights enshrined in our Constitution." I haven't found anyone who believes in the Constitution. If you read my thread in Urban 75, you will understand.; 1/26/11, 1:01 PM
garage mahal said...: Heh. Talk about an epic logic fail.

You don't have to be logical to be a Republican. Just go with the flow man!; 1/26/11, 1:06 PM
Anonymous said...: Maybe he's looking for his birth certificate, which has as much chance of being found in Wisconsin as it did in Hawaii.; 1/26/11, 1:12 PM
Original Mike said...: "Walker spent about 3/4 of the stimulus money awarded to the state."

How'd he pull that off? He's been governor all of 26 days.; 1/26/11, 1:15 PM
Original Mike said...: Trooper said: "Well he just wanted to hang out with the Packers. I mean losers like to stick together. Just sayn'"

I knew it!; 1/26/11, 1:16 PM
PaulV said...: Garbage Garage, Obama has been talking about cost benefit anaylsis
-You have a clue to that concept.
If every dollar of porkulus spent here was worth 50 cents and it was viewed as free money, spending each dollor would hurt the US 50 cents. Wisconsin would be unfairly enriched by 50 cents. Is the concept too hard for you? if you are too cheap to return your Bush tax cuts to US Treasury, give it to a drunk who needs it.; 1/26/11, 1:25 PM
garage mahal said...: Walker shipping more jobs to Illinois

"That state's favorable regulations make wind power an economic win for Illinois," Reopelle said in the statement. "Walker's bill will immediately kill 11 proposed wind projects in Wisconsin and hundreds of jobs, while Illinois enjoys $3 billion in economic activity from wind."

Excessive regulations. UUUGGGH!; 1/26/11, 1:25 PM
Original Mike said...: Trains we don't need. Wind power that doesn't work. I think I'm seeing a pattern.; 1/26/11, 1:28 PM
BJM said...: Obama has the reverse Midas touch, anything he pitches fails or becomes a hopelessly muddled mess, but he'll keep flogging the green energy horse cuz he's got nothing.; 1/26/11, 1:28 PM
Automatic_Wing said...: Wind farms are the worst kind of boondoggle. Even high speed rail is more useful. As an Illinois resident, I'm appalled but not surprised that the state government is handing out tax breaks to wind farms at the same time they're raising income taxes by 75%.; 1/26/11, 1:34 PM
Original Mike said...: @Maguro: They have to do something with all that new money. {ducks}; 1/26/11, 1:36 PM
Rialby said...: don't tread - sputnik crash in WI

Totally agreed. He then claimed he didn't even know about it crashing there before being told about it. Nonsense. This whole metaphor is as limp-wristed as the "reset button" bullshit.

I think I figured out the Sputnik thing. Obama had to search for some metaphor for what he claims we're up against without offending anyone. He cannot talk about 9/11. He cannot talk about defeating the Soviets in an arms and economic race. His side has been on the wrong side of every issue that's come down the pike for the last 70 years.

He had to pick something - the race into space - that is fucking vanilla enough it doesn't offend the Left. With Sputnik, he can paint it as a friendly competition with the good ole Russians under old Uncle Nick Khrushchev.

Unfortunately, nobody gives two shits about Sputnik in 2011. They wonder 1) whether all promises will be kept and 2) what happens if they are (bankruptcy) or are not (Greece-style riots).; 1/26/11, 1:37 PM
garage mahal said...: Wind farms are the worst kind of boondoggle.

Of course it is.; 1/26/11, 1:37 PM
Calypso Facto said...: OM: you forgot the $251 million switch grass power plant...; 1/26/11, 1:39 PM
Toad Trend said...: @Garage

"That state's favorable regulations make wind power an economic win for Illinois," Reopelle said in the statement. "Walker's bill will immediately kill 11 proposed wind projects in Wisconsin and hundreds of jobs, while Illinois enjoys $3 billion in economic activity from wind."

Excessive regulations. UUUGGGH!"

Heavily subsidized wind power/policy. UUUGGGH!

1. Wind power is a net loss for years to come
2. The country will have to be LITTERED with wind turbines to even come close to meeting energy needs
3. Making 'work' in the form of this inefficient energy push is classic government failure.

Wind 'power' would be rare if not for government coercion.

The left - propping up losing ideas for over 100 years.; 1/26/11, 1:40 PM
Automatic_Wing said...: garage, do you know anything about electricity generation? Base load vs peak load, transmission distribution loss, etc? If you did, you'd understand why wind farms don't work. But you don't, do you?; 1/26/11, 1:41 PM
Original Mike said...: Until someone figures out how to store the power generated when the wind is blowing for times when it is not, wind power is the epitome of a boondoggle.; 1/26/11, 1:42 PM
Original Mike said...: If a Republicans were proposing all this "invetment", garage would call it corporate welfare. And he'd be right. But because it's proposed by Democrats, he's all for it.; 1/26/11, 1:44 PM
Lincolntf said...: Speaking of the "wind farm" idiocy, I was up in MA this weekend and they're (still) planning on building a bunch of turbines smack in the middle of Nantucket Sound. This is the same State that spent 15 billion dollars on a ten-mile road, so I'm dying to see what the price tag for these useless sea-fans ends up being.; 1/26/11, 1:47 PM
garage mahal said...: If a Republicans were proposing all this "invetment", garage would call it corporate welfare

I would call it smart investing.

I drove through southern MN and saw literally thousands of wind farms. Republican governor. There are smart Republican governors out there. Walker is positively not one of them though. Obviously. I don't know what people thought they were getting electing a 43 yr old college dropout.; 1/26/11, 1:50 PM
TosaGuy said...: Here is why Governor Walker wants wind turbine setback legislation.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iyOImGHyJtQ; 1/26/11, 1:52 PM
TosaGuy said...: I grew up in that part of MN garage.

SW MN is not near as densely settled as the parts of WI that they wnt to put these turbines.

Some of the prettiest rolling prairie views in the nation have been completely destroyed by thousands of wind turbines.; 1/26/11, 1:54 PM
Original Mike said...: @Lincoln: At least there's a silver lining; Robert Kennedy will have to look at them while he's out sailing the Sound.; 1/26/11, 1:55 PM
Automatic_Wing said...: The problem with wind turbines is that they have to be backed up 100% by base load power (coal or nuclear) at all times. Because if the wind stops blowing all the sudden you don't want to have power outages all over the place.; 1/26/11, 1:55 PM
coketown said...: He always seems to wander to Wisconsin when he needs a pick-me-up. Remember the Madison speech before the mid-terms?; 1/26/11, 1:55 PM
Lincolntf said...: "Robert Kennedy will have to look at them while he's out sailing the Sound."

Unfortunately, so will I.; 1/26/11, 1:58 PM
BJM said...: @Garage

Read much? The number is $8.3 MILLION.

"Illinois is already outpacing Wisconsin in wind energy development, having an installed wind capacity of 2,146 megawatts compared to the 469-megawatt capacity in Wisconsin."

Perhaps you should go to FERC and have a look at the demand: Dec 31, 2010: 70-gigawatts.

Wind power generation is insignificant, it simply cannot be scaled up enough to meet even a small percentage of ISO demand. The only value is to line the pockets of companies/political cronies responsible for this.

Try googling Palm Springs and windmills image search...and you'll see the reality of the massive numbers of 100' wind turbines needed to power 195,000 homes.

Get real.; 1/26/11, 2:06 PM
Original Mike said...: "Unfortunately, so will I."

Sorry, man.; 1/26/11, 2:09 PM
pfennig said...: Odd placement. Look at the NY Times article about Obama being in Wisconsin and noting that fragments of Sputnik landed in Manitowoc. Adjacent to the article is a tweet in which someone is complaining that Michelle Bachmann thinks the sky is falling.; 1/26/11, 2:09 PM
Original Mike said...: @TosaGuy: Thanks for the link to the video. Yowh.; 1/26/11, 2:19 PM
garage mahal said...: Read much? The number is $8.3 MILLION

yes I read it. I linked to it. I read a lot of business journals around the state, and their stunning silence of Walker job killing initiatives before the election are now starting to get noticed by the business community in the state.

The reason Walker is killing wind is because his real estate donors want it killed. end of story.; 1/26/11, 2:20 PM
Lincolntf said...: "Sorry, man."

It's not all bad. I figure that after the first one collapses, the remaining ones will be abandoned and eventually create some good sportfish habitat.; 1/26/11, 2:20 PM
Original Mike said...: Setback limits = "killing it"?; 1/26/11, 2:22 PM
coketown said...: @BJM: Thank you! The biggest advocates of windmills seem to be people who have never seen them. The only place they are practical is somewhere like Wyoming--sparsely populated with lots of land to put the windmills. It's actually very pretty driving through the windmill fields there. But to scale that to a dense city is preposterous.

Something just isn't clicking between "this is our generation's sputnik moment" and "let's consult the 16th century Dutch for advice on our future energy problems."; 1/26/11, 2:24 PM
David said...: Here's more news from the Obama job creation front from Abbott Labs, one of America's best managed companies:

The maker of drugs and devices said the terminations [of 1900 jobs] involve U.S. marketing and manufacturing positions. The cuts, which represent about 2 percent of the company's work force, are expected to save the company $200 annually million in coming years. Abbott blamed the cuts on new fees and pricing pressures associated with the health reform law and a "challenging regulatory environment" at the Food and Drug Administration, which approves new drugs.; 1/26/11, 3:11 PM
David said...: BJM said...
@Garage

Perhaps you should go to FERC and have a look at the demand: Dec 31, 2010: 70-gigawatts.

Exactly.

The nitwit enviros and Democrats here in South Carolina want to shut down a large coal plant and replace it with "solar." They seem to have no concept whatsoever of the scale of energy needs compared to the puny potential of their proposals.; 1/26/11, 3:16 PM
Automatic_Wing said...: 70 gigawatts is a lot. It only took 1.21 gigawatts to time-travel back to the 50s in a DeLorean.; 1/26/11, 3:28 PM
BJM said...: @garage

I see you chose not to address the inadequate ratio of power generated to turbines required and environmental damage done by wind generation.

Your side is always whining about polar bears and caribou, do you not care about raptors as well? Many that are being killed by turbines are on the endangered list. Eagles, for example, do not recover easily once a decline threshold of females is reached in a habitat. I'm an Audubon member and have participated in the Altamont Christmas count. It's a sickening trade-off for the minuscule amount of power generated and feel goodism.

A 2004 study commissioned by the California Energy Commission found that the 5,400 older turbines operating at Altamont Pass killed an estimated 1,766 to 4,271 birds annually, including between 881 and 1330 raptors such as golden eagles — which are protected under federal law — hawks, falcons and owls. The bird fatalities at Altamont Pass — an important raptor breeding area that lies on a major migratory route — are greater than on any other wind farm in the country.

The kill rate continued for six more years before Atty Gen Brown brokered a deal to shut down and replace turbines.

Apart from raptor kills, raw access roads and transmission line tower installations create erosion that impacts watershed for downstream animals.

btw- have you ever stood under a 100' turbine? I have, they create a strong prop backwash and high decibel noise that impacts ground dwelling wildlife as well.

Ranchers who leased their land at the Altamont soon discovered that their cattle wouldn't graze near them.

I suggest you actually walk out into a wind farm and you might see it in a different light than the cool looking hypnotizing windmill effect from the highway.

I don't think you are going to like what you see.; 1/26/11, 3:32 PM
David said...: Garage:

There is a large wind farm in Northern Indiana. I drive through it on my way to Wisconsin each summer. I decided to learn about who owned it, how it was financed, etc.

Here's what I learned.

1. The company that developed the wind farm, a LLC promoted by Goldman Sachs and sold to its wealthy American investors, was about 3 years old.

2. They were able to finance the project for two principal reasons: (1) The local investor owned utility was required to take all of the production of the farm for 0ver ten years at a very favorable price for the owners of the LLC, far in excess of the cost of the utility's other electricity. (2) The Goldman investors got massive tax credits as part of their participation--a tax subsidy to the very rich.

3. After the farm was largely built out (and after any recapture of tax benefits expired), the project was sold to another company based in Texas. The Texas company was 100% owned by a Portuguese company that develops wind power in Portugal, with the benefit of very generous direct and indirect subsidies.

Summary of scam: Federal tax subsidies to the very rich and artificially high electrical prices paid by Indiana consumers enabled Goldman to finance the project. (Obama's favorite company GE supplied the turbines.) Then the very rich subsidized by the American taxpayer and Indiana consumer made a grand profit on the sale of the business. The buyer was subsidized by the Portuguese government, which is now broke, and which the American and other taxpayers will get to bail out soon.

You can bet that the Portuguese owned Texas company is paying precious little US tax, but that was not part of the public record. Surely there are a bunch of nice other subsidies that are hidden behind the paperwork.

I learned all of this in about two hours of research on the internet. I learned it for myself, because no other "journalist" has bothered to look into this or similar deals.

This is a SCAM. They are playing the ordinary Joes for fools, and then they tell us not to be ANGRY?

Wait until people learn what is really going on. You ain't seen nothing yet.; 1/26/11, 3:41 PM
Original Mike said...: What did you call it, garage? Smart investing?; 1/26/11, 3:52 PM
MadisonMan said...: Wisconsin is a battleground state. So much for kind rhetoric.

I'm surprised the NYTimes didn't take the opportunity to mention -- given that Obama is visiting a wind turbine company -- that the Republican Governor here is behind legislation that will effectively ban turbines in the state.; 1/26/11, 3:57 PM
garage mahal said...: The kill rate continued for six more years before Atty Gen Brown brokered a deal to shut down and replace turbines.

Ok, so they are replacing them with updated turbines? Good on them. The state and NextEra.

This is a SCAM. They are playing the ordinary Joes for fools, and then they tell us not to be ANGRY?

The transactions you cited happen almost every day in America, in probably every industry sector. But only wind turbine company transactions seems to upset you. I can only guess why.; 1/26/11, 4:02 PM
David said...: "the Republican Governor here is behind legislation that will effectively ban turbines in the state."

By the way, under a Democratic governor and a Democratic legislature, a state statute was passed that removed wind generating facilities from the jurisdiction of local planning and zoning authorities in the state. The upshot was that the facilities could be put nearly anywhere, no matter how ugly, no matter how noisy, no matter how many birds slaughtered, no matter what the local residents wanted.

You are seeing state capitalism creep everywhere. The state anoints the winners. The state creates the losers. The state giveth, the state taketh away.

The state is becoming our master, not our servant, and this will ruin our nation over time.; 1/26/11, 4:05 PM
MadisonMan said...: I'm just surprised the NYTimes didn't mention that piece of info -- it seems like a quick way to make a slam against the Gov. They're slipping.; 1/26/11, 4:08 PM
Original Mike said...: "The transactions you cited happen almost every day in America, in probably every industry sector. But only wind turbine company transactions seems to upset you. I can only guess why."

You're wrong. I'm upset about all of them that happen with federal subsidies. You're also exagerating. Special to these "green" energy projects are the requirement that power companies buy their very expensive power.; 1/26/11, 4:10 PM
Calypso Facto said...: Really MadMan? Changing the turbine to residential housing setback from 1,250 feet to 1,800 feet (in line with World Health Organization noise recommendations) "effectively ban[s] wind turbines in the state"?

We're definitely not getting the whole story from either side. I don't doubt there's some truth to garage's theory about land developers, but I'd like to see the financing details and local response too.; 1/26/11, 4:12 PM
David said...: The transactions you cited happen almost every day in America, in probably every industry sector. But only wind turbine company transactions seems to upset you. I can only guess why.

Guess away, Garage. You have to guess because you are so ignorant.

These transactions probably do happen every day these days, but certainly not in every industry sector. The sectors where the rich and powerful have taken over government, and vice versa, are where it happens.

Ask any small business person, or any wage or salary employee, where their subsidy is. They aren't getting any. They are paying for the rich and powerful to get theirs.

Here are hints as to why the wind subsidies particularly annoy me: lying, deception, posturing.; 1/26/11, 4:12 PM
garage mahal said...: You're wrong. I'm upset about all of them that happen with federal subsidies.

Here is a rough tally of federal energy subsidies percentage wise of whole, in case you were interested where to direct your ire:

Oil/gas 60%
Coal 13%
Hydroelectric 11%
Nuclear 9%

Wind, solar, geothermal, and bio-fuels -- combined 6%; 1/26/11, 4:31 PM
Lincolntf said...: How appropriate that the Libs are now in the thrall of Big Wind.; 1/26/11, 4:34 PM
Automatic_Wing said...: Wind power doesn't work for some very mundane technical reasons that do-gooder liberals like garage don't concern themselves with.

The electrical grid has to balance supply and demand to keep the power on the lines constant. As demand draws off more power, supply must be increased. As demand slows, the supply must be decreased.

The base load is the lowest level of power consumption, typically in the middle of the night. Base load generators are mostly coal and nuclear and tend to be highly efficient but take a long time to change their level of output.

Peak load is the maximum level of power consumption. Peak load generators, usually natural gas, can ramp up and down quickly to match fluctuating demand, but they're quite expensive to operate.

Wind power can't provide base load or peak load generation because the power output of a wind farm isn't controlled, it fluctuates with the wind. The essentially random nature of wind-produced electricity is its main problem. Wind power output isn't linked to demand at all.

Wind power adds yet another variable for the power grid operator as he seeks to balance electricity supply and demand. Operators have to adjust their peak load generators even more frequently when wind power is in the mix, lowering the overall efficiency of the grid and raising electricity costs.; 1/26/11, 4:34 PM
Original Mike said...: Yeah, I don't trust your figures farther than I can spit, but for the record, I oppose special deals doled out to industries, be they oil, gas, coal, wind, or whatever. Perhaps someday we'll have a rational tax system.; 1/26/11, 4:36 PM
Original Mike said...: And big corn.; 1/26/11, 4:37 PM
Calypso Facto said...: The age old question of social costs versus private gains, right? The people who live near the proposed wind turbines don't want to deal with the real estate depressing negative externalities of noise, appearance, and safety so that their wind turbine land leasing neighbor can collect rent, and garage, et al, can feel good about watching the Pack on their man-cave big screens knowing the electricity used is 'green'!

While many neighboring landowners are still unhappy with the presence of the wind turbines, [Byron Wisconsin Town Chairman Francis Ferguson] said he has not heard one complaint from a hosting landowner.

“The host doesn’t seem to have a problem with them, but the folks living a half-mile from the turbines seem to,” Ferguson said.; 1/26/11, 4:47 PM
Original Mike said...: [Byron Wisconsin Town Chairman Francis Ferguson] said he has not heard one complaint from a hosting landowner.

“The host doesn’t seem to have a problem with them, but the folks living a half-mile from the turbines seem to,” Ferguson said.

That guy in TosaGuy's video was one hellava lot closer than half a mile. People should go look at that video.; 1/26/11, 4:57 PM
BJM said...: @Maguro

Exactly, wind power-to-load is like trying to fill a swimming pool with a thimble.

We actually bought shares in a Altamont wind company back in the 80's as a tax off-set, then we toured the site. We sold our shares as quickly as possible and paid the recapture.

The left keeps trying to sell wind and solar as some sort of moral good while ignoring reality...but then that's their specialty.; 1/26/11, 5:06 PM
coketown said...: Hey Garage. Why don't you take your subsidy numbers and compare them to energy output for each group. You'll find hydroelectric and wind/solar get a highly disproportionate amount of subsidies compared to oil. For example, solar and wind get 6% of federal subsidies yet account for just .8% of energy production. Hydroelectric gets 11% yet accounts for only 7% of production.; 1/26/11, 5:07 PM
BJM said...: @Garage

Fine, but I don't want to hear another word about endangered species or environmental degradation. Okay?; 1/26/11, 5:09 PM
garage mahal said...: Hey Garage. Why don't you take your subsidy numbers and compare them to energy output for each group. You'll find hydroelectric and wind/solar get a highly disproportionate amount of subsidies compared to oil.

I don't find that surprising as we have been subsidizing petro for closer 100 yrs, and alternative energy less than 20. Not even counting the cost of safeguarding oil reserves in the Middle East - 30-60 billion per year, when we're only importing 10 billion per year. But of course since the technologies are not 100% PERFECT yet, they must be scrapped entirely according to Maguro. I just wonder what his grand energy plan when oil runs out.; 1/26/11, 5:39 PM
Automatic_Wing said...: If you ask any power production guy if he wants random power surges on his grid, he's going to look at you funny and say "Fuck, no!".

But that's exactly what happens when you add a wind farm to the power grid. Only the miniscule size of most wind operations prevents them from being a serious problem.; 1/26/11, 5:40 PM
Automatic_Wing said...: garage - Nukes.; 1/26/11, 5:43 PM
John henry said...: Actually, traditionalguy, Cows do produce a lot of energy.

There have been plants digesting manure from cows, pigs and chickens then using the methane generated to run a fairly standard generator. The waste heat from the generator is used to help the digestion and excess heat can be used for other purposes.

In the 70's we had a large chicken farm in PR that was generating a constant 50KW this way. It supplied all the farm electrical needs.

A year or so ago I sat on a plane next to a farmer from Wisconsin who had, IIRC, 3,000 cows. He used their manure to generate 5 megawatts of power some of which he used and the balance he sold to the power company.

The technology is economically feasible with no tax credits or subsidies.

After digestion, he sells the residue as fertilizer. He used to have to pay to remove the manure.

But I doubt that Obama has any idea what it is or does.

John Henry; 1/26/11, 5:45 PM
garage mahal said...: garage - Nukes.

Talk to Original Mike. He's seems fairly concerned over turbine shadows in peoples yards. How could you win that crowd over with a promise of radioactive waste buried in their back yard instead?; 1/26/11, 5:53 PM
John henry said...: I've been interested in wind, solar and other alternative power (including from manure) since the 70's. Wind power can never pay for itself.

As for potential capacity, regardless of economics think of this:

The very largest wind turbines today, the ones that are 500+ feet to the top of the blades, generate about 2MW. That is, when they are running at optimal speed. On average, they generate about half of that or less.

You need an acre or two for each turbine. If you set them too close they interfere with each other.

The average central power plant, coal, gas or nuclear, is 750-1000MW and can run at that capacity 98% of the time. They might take up 100 acres or so.

John Henry; 1/26/11, 5:53 PM
Revenant said...: I would call it smart investing.

Why do you say things like that when you know nobody's going to believe you?

Honestly -- what's the point?; 1/26/11, 5:54 PM
garage mahal said...: Why do you say things like that when you know nobody's going to believe you?

So, I should lie just to agree with commenters?; 1/26/11, 5:57 PM
Phil 314 said...: Oil/gas 60%
Coal 13%
Hydroelectric 11%
Nuclear 9%

Wind, solar, geothermal, and bio-fuels -- combined 6%

Are you suggesting eliminating all of these subsidies?

I'm ok with that.; 1/26/11, 6:08 PM
Phil 314 said...: Green corporate welfare is still corporate welfare.; 1/26/11, 6:09 PM
Automatic_Wing said...: Talk to Original Mike. He's seems fairly concerned over turbine shadows in peoples yards. How could you win that crowd over with a promise of radioactive waste buried in their back yard instead?

You raise an interesting point. The main obstacle to more nuclear power is politics. NIMBYism, environmental alarism, etc. All that is temporary, though. The politics of nuclear power will change when fossil fuels really become scarce. When faced with a choice between a nuke plant next door and no lights, most people will take the nuke plant.

On the other hand, the problems with wind power are all physics-related. That stuff just isn't going to change.; 1/26/11, 6:19 PM
coketown said...: @Garage: Those subsidies aren't cumulative over the life of the resource; they're typically aggregates of 5-10 year windows. The life of the resource has nothing to do with it.

And that habit you (or whoever's talking points you're regurgitating) have of labeling all costs--direct or indirect--associated with an energy source as a "subsidy" is dishonest, and I think you know that. I'd also love to know your source stating we spend $30 billion a year safeguarding oil production in the Middle East--unless that's some idiotic allusion to the war in Iraq.; 1/26/11, 6:23 PM
Fen said...: Haha! Garage got stuck holding carbon credits. Perfect.; 1/26/11, 6:24 PM
Anonymous said...: Obama didn't learn from his first pronunciation mistake at Orion. Apparently, he also mispronounced "Manitowoc."

http://freedomeden.blogspot.com/2011/01/obama-manitowoc-and-orion.html; 1/26/11, 6:45 PM
Original Mike said...: "Talk to Original Mike. He's seems fairly concerned over turbine shadows in peoples yards."

Absolutely no contest. I'll take the nukes anyday. It. Actually. Produces. Power.; 1/26/11, 7:07 PM
michaele said...: David, I wish your research could be featured in a congressional oversight hearing. Sounds like stuff we, as taxpayers, should know about. Thanks.; 1/26/11, 7:11 PM
Methadras said...: He feels at home in the leftard haven of Wisconsin. It just beats a longer trip out to Berzerkly.; 1/26/11, 7:34 PM
Methadras said...: Well, if your loving God Erkle was smart, he would have promised to build Molten Salt Reactors to deal with the waste. Problem solved, but then again, you're just to stupid to really know much of anything.; 1/26/11, 7:36 PM
DaLawGiver said...: He's probably been feeling badgered.; 1/26/11, 8:09 PM
garage mahal said...: What does "to stupid" mean, Angry Baby?; 1/26/11, 8:11 PM
Original Mike said...: Molten Salt Reactors

People are looking at storing power in molten salt. Heat from solar energy, so it's a little OT, but not really. It may work, or it may not, (and somebody here can probably fill us in on this specific technology), but just like so many other promising breakthroughs, we need to find out. Government annoiting any paticular technology is NOT going do that. But it may make bankrupt us..; 1/26/11, 8:15 PM
AST said...: Duh. Wisconsin is a battle ground peace and friendship state.; 1/26/11, 9:01 PM
Merglers said...: Presidential visits to Wisconsin immediately after the SOTU are nothing new. They have often gone to La Crosse. Clinton went to La Crosse the day after the SOTU that he gave as the Lewinski scandal was breaking. He was late because AF1 ran off the runway taxiing in Illinois on their way to La Crosse. In 2003, Bush went to La Crosse after the SOTU. My Dad was a Fire Chief at the time, and had to be at the airport in case something happened. Dad is a union democrat through-and-through, but thought it was kind of cool that Bush saluted him as he drove by my Dad at the airport.; 1/26/11, 10:20 PM
X said...: Solar and wind are hundreds of times less efficient than hydrocarbons. Hydrocarbons are thousands of times less efficient than nuclear.; 1/27/11, 8:51 AM
John henry said...: Someone mentioned Molten Salt for storage of solar power.

The Dept of Energy built such a system in the late 70's. I remember reading about it at the time in a journal that had a photo of the solar plant (10MW iirc) next to a photo of a coal plant (600MW iirc)

Both were about the same size.

The Solar plant had a tower on which a large number (hundreds?) of parabolic mirrors focused sunlight.

I drove from LV to Denver in 2001 and it was still there. I tried to drive into it but could not get very close. It is about 10-20 miles past the Las Vegas MotorSpeedway on the south side of the road.

John Henry; 1/27/11, 6:34 PM