Driven by wildly exaggerated claims about global warming, there has been a massive movement in many countries to so-called renewable energy sources and these must be “carbon-free”, since CO2 is the primary villain in the hysterics’ climate model. This use of renewable energy, almost exclusively wind and solar, has been claimed to be environmentally friendly and cheaper than coal, natural gas, hydro power, nuclear, etc. All of those supposedly “dirty” sources of electricity are readily available 24 hours a day, seven days a week. They are abundant and highly reliable.
The renewable energy sources have the following characteristics:
They are very, very unreliable. If the wind doesn’t blow and when the sun doesn’t shine, which in winter occurs for 16 hours a day in Minnesota, you have to have a backup source. This requires massive and expensive battery storage facilities.
They are very, very expensive. Notwithstanding the hysterics lies, the true cost of renewable energy when all subsidies and all lifecycle costs and all backup costs are included is well-above that of natural gas or nuclear or other traditional power sources. Just look at California’s electicity costs.
They are very, very environmentally unfriendly. Thousands, tens of thousands, of acres of generally productive land is being taken out of use for wind and solar farms. These facilities have deleterious effects on the local and regional environment, including weather effects. Wind farms kill birds and bats and damage other wildlife. Offshore wind affects sea life. Solar plants also kill birds and disrupt other wildlife. The manufacturer of renewable energy equipment involves destructive mining, polluting factories and environmental harms. Solar and wind farms are easily damaged, leaving environmental toxins, ask the people on Martha’s vineyard or those near a solar plant destroyed by a hail or wind storm. When the equipment has to be replaced, where does the old equipment go, given that it has high levels of hazardous materials?
The renewable energy nonsense is driven solely by rich people using subsidies to get richer. And consumers are paying the price. A review of electricity costs by state reveals that the state’s using the most renewable energy for generation have the highest prices and the highest price increases. The study has one major flaw–it ignores subsidies in saying that while renewable mandates have raised prices, new large solar and wind plants haven’t. Pretending like consumers, most of whom are also taxpayers, haven’t paid for these subsidies ignores the true cost of renewables. (SD Article)
The study identifies fluctuation in natural gas prices over recent years as a major cost driver for consumer electricity prices. Based on the new administration’s energy policy, those costs are coming down rapidly. The same is not occurring for wind or solar. In general from 2019 to 2024, electricity prices tracked general inflation. However, in the last couple of years those prices have risen more sharply, as renewables share of generation has risen. Look at the charts on state costs and price trends. California is nutso on renewables and has by far the highest electricity costs in the country, followed by the almost equally nutso Northeast states. Minnesota is in the middle for now but creeping up there. After inflation price trends follow a similar pattern, but again, the last two years tell a different story.
Here is Minnesota the average consumer electricity bill has begun to increase sharply and this is directly associated with the costs of the shift to wind and solar as basically exclusive sources of new generation, while coal and gas is being forced out. Consumers here know the truth about the cost of renewable energy.
My take on these windmills and solar panels is that they are possibly responsible for the “strange” weather. I think the blades spinning is creating slight wind movement that is not meant to be. With the air moving that has to change weather patterns around these windmills. I have not seen any reports to what the windmills do besides kill birds. Maybe you have.
I agree that wind and solar do impact the total cost of electricity with increases in W&S resulting in increase retail prices to the residential and commercial customers. Very apparent in Germany, Denmark, UK, etc. However, there seems to be a few anomalies, for example, Texas electric rates which are are on the relatively low side while Texas has one of the higher percentages of electric generation from wind. Same with South Dakota and a few other states. I havent seen any comprehensive explanation , other than advocates talking points
Its worth noting that the LCOE costs that are heavily promoted as proving that wind and solar are cheaper than fossil fuel generation costs only include the cost of generation and do not include all the costs of providing electricity 24/7/365. Wind and solar can not provide electricity 24/7/365 due to the very nature of the fluctuations in generation. Effectively, Fossil fuel electric generation heavily subsidizes wind and solar since wind and solar bear none of the costs maintaining electricity on a full time basis, ie stability , etc.