Alberta Electricity Consumers to Reduce Consumption

January 17, 2012 by Walter Schneider.

Today is is fairly cold but not extremely cold in Alberta.  Around Fort McMurray it was about -44°C this morning, and here in Bruderheim it was -30.9°C.

Presently, at 4:00 p.m., it warmed up a bit in Bruderheim to -27.9°C.

That is cold, but those temperatures are not record-cold temperatures. Still, on account of the cold weather, of which we have had fairly little this winter, the Alberta electric power industry experienced record-high consumption rates yesterday and appealed through the media to the public, especially to residential consumers, to limit their electricity consumption by not using major appliances during the peak hours of the day (during noon and supper hours).

Roughly 15 percent of electric power consumed in Alberta is being used by residential consumers.  It was not explained why the inconvenience of saving on electric energy use was placed on residential consumers and whether industrial and commercial consumers are expected to follow suit.  It is a nice thought to press the urgency of the situation home with residential consumers, to prepare them for what will quite possibly follow soon, another rate hike for residential consumers.

There would be no shortage of electric power generation in Alberta if all of the money spend on installing wind-power generation, that without fail fails to put out on cold days, would have been used instead to construct power generating capacity from conventional energy sources, either coal, or, perhaps better yet, from the surplus of natural gas with which we are blessed.  That was not done, and we now have to pay for wind-power generation that is not available when it is needed and, to boot, costs many times per unit of production what power generation construction and production from conventional fuel sources cost.

Have a look at the table “Generation”, at this link: http://ets.aeso.ca/ets_web/ip/Market/Reports/CSDReportServlet

The following table has been created from the data shown there for 2012 01 17  4:30 p.m..  Columns have been inserted to identify the percentage for each group of the energy total shown shown in the bottom line for each category.

(Link to source)

MC = rated maximum generation (Maximum Capacity)
TNG = actual generation (Total Net Generation)
DCR = Dispatched (and Accepted) Contingency Reserve

Note that of the total wind-power maximum generating capacity that can be produced under ideal conditions (865MW), at the time when it is needed most only 2.2 percent or 18MW are being generated.  That will happen every time when it gets very cold in Alberta, because then the wind doesn’t blow.

It adds insult to injury that when that little bit of wind energy, in this case 0.2 percent of the total energy produced in Alberta, gets fed into the transmission grid, it is by far and many times more expensive than what the price of electric energy usually is.

Usually energy that is being fed into the transmission grid will cost about $23.00 per MWh, but the wind power that is being fed into the grid when it is needed during very cold weather costs around $1,000 per MWh or $1.00 per kWh.  That is the cost that everyone else involved in the industry will escalate by adding their costs for transmission, distribution and distribution services.  The end consumers will have to pay for all of it but will not notice much of that, because the price to them will be averaged out, but it will still be paid by them.

Even under the best of circumstances Alberta’s wind turbines only feed about one-third of the energy they are theoretically capable of producing into the transmission grid.  When the wind blows too strong, wind turbines are shut off (they are supposed to do that automatically) to prevent having tear themselves to shreds.

Posted in Electric Energy Prices, Energy Issues, Weather, Alternative Energy Sources | Print | No Comments »

Energy & Environmental News - 6/6/11

June 13, 2011 by Walter Schneider.

Some recent energy articles of interest

By John Droz, Jr.

An interesting article appeared in a wind industry trade journal: “Is Wind Energy The New Wedge Issue For Conservatives?”
( http://www.nawindpower.com/e107_plugins/content/content.php?content.7757 ).

Some of the comments are: “The acrimony is being powered by a combination of small-government conservatives who see wind and other renewables as a waste of money and by others who consider wind a technology that will never be as effective as oil, coal or natural gas.” In other words people are objecting to wind energy as it is expensive and ineffective. Imagine that!

And there is this from the comptroller of Texas (a very pro-wind state): “wind is an expensive boondoggle that does not produce jobs”.

Note that the industry does not respond with proof that these positions are wrong, but rather tries to dismiss them as being political…
—————————–

A wonderful assessment of wind energy by an energy expert http://ansnuclearcafe.org/2011/05/26/fitting-wind-onto-the-electricity-grid-part-2/ .

A VERY promising development where New Jersey is dropping out of the RGGI program http://www.atinstitute.org/ati-statement-on-gov-chris-christies-plans-to-remove-new-jersey-from-rggi/ . Hopefully this will be a wake-up call to the other member states.

Renewables Laws Changing is a positive development compared to the prior RPS mandates
http://www.renewablesbiz.com/article/11/05/renewables-laws-changing .

Some good comments by the governor of Maine about a more sensible position on renewables
http://waldo.villagesoup.com/column/columnpost/weekly-radio-address/400386 .

A new MIT study has some unique perspectives on the economics of wind energy http://econ-www.mit.edu/files/6317 .

“Oil ‘subsidy’ and ‘tax breaks’ nonsense” gives a superior overview to this contentious issue:
http://familysecuritymatters.org/publications/id.9598/pub_detail.asp

“The Politics of Alternative Energy 1: The Myth of Viable Industrial-scale Renewable Energy”:
“‘Success is going from failure to failure without losing enthusiasm.’ Winston Churchill’s dictum could have been coined for the green advocates of the renewable energy revolution; a revolution that demonstrates a thorough-going disconnect between the political rhetoric and a grasp of the physics and economics vital to energy realism.” http://www.energytribune.com/articles.cfm/7616/The-Politics-of-Alternative-Energy-1–The-Myth-of-Viable-Industrial-scale-Renewable-Energy

“Inconvenient Truths about Renewable Energy”
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703421204576327410322365714.html?KEYWORDS=energy#printMode .

Another Real Estate professional speaks out saying that wind projects can bring down home values 25 to 40 percent — for as much as 2 miles away: http://www.bayshorebroadcasting.ca/news_item.php?NewsID=35521 .

In a fascinating development a Spanish judge orders a wind project to be dismantled
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/05/18/wind-farm-ordered-dismantled/ .

“NY Wind: Much Ado About So Little” http://www.windaction.org/faqs/31912 .

One of the key facts to focus on is that there is no such thing as wind energy by itself. This article makes that very point
http://canadianenergyissues.com/2010/12/11/wind-power-is-gas-power-and-comes-with-pollution/ .

The Australian government is revisiting the wind acoustic issue. The good news is that some of the presenters at their discussion are actually qualified scientists who contend that there are serious human consequences to wind development. See http://www.windturbinesyndrome.com/news/2011/june-6-2011-645-pm-ny-city-time/ .

Green Energy costs 1500 jobs http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/247946/EU-push-for-green-energy-costs-another-1-500-jobs .

Why do we need to choose between nuclear and renewables — we don’t:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/georgemonbiot/2011/may/27/why-choose-nuclear-renewable-energy .

“Everything you’ve heard about fossil fuels may be wrong” talks extensively about wind energy
http://www.salon.com/news/env/energy/?story=/politics/war_room/2011/05/31/linbd_fossil_fuels .

A good letter about Yucca mountain and the US economic benefits of nuclear energy http://tinyurl.com/3pcmyrk .

Some recent global warming articles of interest —

“Former ‘alarmist’ scientist says Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) based in false science”
http://hotair.com/archives/2011/05/15/former-alarmist-scientist-says-anthropogenic-global-warming-agw-based-on-false-science/ .

“Germany’s green government advisors admit frankly that decarbonization can only be achieved by the limitation of democracy - both nationally and internationally.” http://www.welt.de/debatte/kommentare/article13396336/Wir-rutschen-Hals-ueber-Kopf-in-die-Oekodiktatur.html .

A fine discussion of Patrick Moore and the religion of environmentalism
http://www.quadrant.org.au/magazine/issue/2011/5/the-personal-costs-of-spurning-green-misanthropy .

“The Global Warming Doctrine is Not a Science” (Vaclav Klaus): http://www.klaus.cz/clanky/2830 .

Thank you for your support.

john droz jr.,
physicist & environmental advocate

Posted in Electric Energy Prices, The New World Order, Energy Newsletter, Energy Issues, Alternative Energy Sources, Fines & Penalties, Climate Change, Community & Industry | Print | No Comments »

Energy & Environmental News-5/17/11

May 20, 2011 by Walter Schneider.

Some recent energy articles of interest

By John Droz, Jr.

In a shockingly honest assessment, the head of the NYS agency promoting offshore wind, now publicly admits that it’s a bad idea:

http://www.democratandchronicle.com/article/20110503/NEWS01/105030346/Michael-Townsend-doubts-viability-offshore-wind-farms

A fine list that dispels the myths about the “anti-wind” campaign http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/print-friendly/33662

An extremely pertinent report is this worldwide study comparing energy use to several other important matters (e.g. infant mortality rate, GDP, literacy rate, etc.) http://www.aeaiinc.com/reports/Energy_and_Country_Instability.pdf

A Spanish community voted to pass a “visual impact” tax on wind turbines (1.6% of their generated income) http://www.windpowermonthly.com/News/MostRead/1061498/Spanish-region-imposes-visual-impact-tax-turbines/

Wind Power’s Promises Gone Awry, written by a NY physicist http://www.empirepage.com/2011/4/26/promises-and-predictions-gone-awry

A new book “The False Promise of Green Energy” http://www.cato.org/store/books/false-promise-green-energy

Obama on Energy: Inconsistent, Incoherent http://www.energytribune.com/articles.cfm/7290/Obama-on-Energy-Inconsistent-Incoherent

Very promising news: government financial support of Cape Wind project now in doubt
http://www.capecodonline.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20110513/NEWS11/110519876

The official UK’s government’s climate advisory panel (made up mostly of environmental activists) recently concluded that building nuclear was the way to go: http://tinyurl.com/3s6ydep

A reasonable discussion of nuclear radiation, written by an environmentalist
http://www.marklynas.org/2011/03/the-dangers-of-nuclear-power-in-light-of-fukushima/

A good article, with graphics, about Small Modular Reactors http://www.climatecentral.org/blogs/small-modular-reactors-smaller-and-cheaper/.

Other worthwhile discussions of the same topic

• http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2011/03/the-new-debate-fukushima-and-small-modular-nuclear-reactors/73084/
• http://alfin2300.blogspot.com/2011/04/can-small-modular-nuclear-reactors-save.html
• http://oilprice.com/Alternative-Energy/Nuclear-Power/The-Future-of-Nuclear-Energy-Small-Modular-Nuclear-Reactors.html

“Lots of Dirty Things Have To  Happen to Make Clean Energy” touches on some of the environmental downsides of wind energy
http://washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/columnists/2011/05/ron-arnold-lots-dirty-things-have-happen-make-clean-energy

Some recent global warming articles of interest

George Manbiot is one of the leading environmentalists on the planet. Recently he wrote two introspective columns about the environmental movement, and how it has gone wrong. For an environmentalist, he makes some amazingly candid observations:

part 1 http://www.monbiot.com/2011/05/02/the-lost-world/

part 2 http://www.monbiot.com/2011/05/05/our-crushing-dilemmas/

In my view, the main failing of his commentaries is that he doesn’t see the solution. It’s this:

Any and all environmental solutions must be truly SCIENCE-based. To date they have instead been POLITICAL agendas.  If the environmental movement adopted real science (not things like consensus science) then environmental progress would happen.

A fine article about AGW and the Scientific Method http://www.quadrant.org.au/blogs/doomed-planet/2011/04/scientific-method

All you need to know about AGW http://www.theblogofrecord.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/global-warming-cartoon-the-rent-seekers-dream-come-true1.jpg

“The Ten Major Failures of Consensus Science” http://scienceandpublicpolicy.org/images/stories/papers/originals/10_major_consensus_failures.pdf

A new good website about the fallacy of AGW  http://www.galileomovement.com.au

Thank you for your support.

john droz jr.,

physicist & environmental advocate

Posted in Energy Newsletter, Propaganda debunked, Energy Issues, Alternative Energy Sources, Climate Change | Print | No Comments »

Some recent energy articles of interest

April 27, 2011 by Walter Schneider.

The Stuart Young wind report, partly funded by the environmental organization  John Muir Trust, is another item you should add as an objective source of information that is critical of wind energy ( http://www.jmt.org/news.asp?s=2&nid=JMT-N10561 ). It shows, yet again, that wind energy is a high cost, low benefit option, and that industry claims are rarely met. Kudos to the John Muir Trust which has been a rare voice of reason in the cacophony of self-serving political noise coming from the environmental community.

_________________
Note by folc.ca: The cited report states: “At the end of the period studied, the connected capacity of wind power was over 2500MW so the expectation is that the wind network will produce, on average, 750MW of energy. In fact, it’s delivering far less than everyone’s expectations. The total wind capacity metered now is 3226MW but at 3a.m. on Monday 28th March, the total output was 9MW.”

That is born out by similar observations in Alberta.  For instance, during much of the cold spell during the week of Feb. 27 - Mar. 5, 2011, a week during which record cold temperature occurred in Alberta, of the nominal wind-power generating capacity of 777MW in Alberta, 0MW to 2MW were being produced.

You can observe current wind power generation in Alberta.

“A Reality Check for Wind Energy Investors” is a good article written by an energy experienced attorney and CPA. Read through the comments and his good responses to those: http://seekingalpha.com/article/262050-a-reality-check-for-wind-power-investors.

“Major wind farm canceled over FWS bird strike concerns”

http://minnesota.publicradio.org/display/web/2011/04/06/xcel-windpower-dispute/

A good (very short) New Scientist video about how turbines kill bats http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KRqu4WiLQfk&hd=1. Combine that with this http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthnews/8419796/Wind-turbines-hit-bat-populations.html.

What happens when fantasies like wind energy collide with reality? http://tinyurl.com/3ua72xe.

Two more states’ RPS mandates have been studied and found seriously wanting:

1 - Ohio http://www.atinstitute.org/study-ohio’s-alternative-energy-mandates-will-keep-its-economy-in-a-slump/, and

2 - Minnesota http://www.atinstitute.org/study-minnesota’s-renewable-energy-mandate-will-damage-state-economy-with-little-to-no-benefit-to-environment/.

A very worthwhile radio interview with activists in Minnesota http://tinyurl.com/3u494h7.

An interesting article about how wind turbines are no longer all the rage in [the Netherlands] http://www.dutchnews.nl/features/2011/04/trouw_wind_turbines_unpopular.php.

This is very good news, from a credible source: “The US Will Build Five Nuclear Reactors by 2020”  http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2011-04-04/u-s-may-build-five-new-nuclear-reactors-by-2020-new-energy-finance-says.html.

Some recent global warming articles of interest —

900+ Peer Reviewed Papers Supporting Skepticism about AGW http://www.populartechnology.net/2009/10/peer-reviewed-papers-supporting.html.

An organization’s commendable efforts to have constructive, non-partisan solutions to global warming and energy issues http://www.climatescienceinternational.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=380&Itemid=108.

“Research on Forecasting for the Manmade Global Warming Alarm” http://www.forecastingprinciples.com/images/stories/pdf/ags2011congress.pdf

Bill O’Reilly talks about proposed US government cuts, especially the money for “Climate Control” http://tinyurl.com/3rowyg3.

Supreme Court Hears the extremely important CO2 Emission Case http://tinyurl.com/3rwcdjw.

A recent article of general interest —

A short video talking about the debt situation with the US government http://www.youtube.com/embed/VtVbUmcQSuk

Thank you for your support.

john droz jr.,

physicist & environmental advocate

Posted in Energy Newsletter, Wildlife, Energy Issues, Alternative Energy Sources, Community & Industry | Print | No Comments »

AltaLink’s 2011 Report to Communities

April 8, 2011 by Walter Schneider.

Yesterday, when we picked up our mail, we found a copy of an expensive brochure “ALTALINK : Report to communities,” 14 pages, on high-quality, non-recyclable, heavy-weight paper, with many colour photos. Five of the photos feature wind turbines, while a few portions of the report identify the growth and proliferation of wind turbines, collectively called “wind farms” by ALTALINK.  It remains up to anyone’s imagination how it is possible to farm the wind, but the brochure must have cost a fair bundle.  AltaLink could have saved the effort and built a few miles of transmission line instead.

It is not clear what that brochure — apparently distributed to all Alberta households — is intended to achieve, other than to make people believe that everything is good about ALTALINK and their endeavors, e. g.: to connect wind turbine installations to the electricity grid.  ALTALINK does not involve itself in electricity generation.  It only installs and maintains the high-voltage transmission network used to connect all of Alberta’s electricity distributors to sources of electricity generation.

ALTALINK is Ralph Klein’s brainchild, an offspring that is the product of his party’s imagination in search of increased revenues, the deregulation of the utility industry that immediately brought much higher electricity rates to all consumers of electricity in Alberta, especially to residential and small-business consumers, after all of the large electric energy consumers and retailers had already secured long-term energy contracts. (It is in the news today that Ralph Klein is suffering from a serious, rapidly-progressing, incurable form of dementia.)

I will not discuss in detail all of the claims presented in “ALTALINK : Report to communities,” but I will discuss only some of the claims that misrepresent facts of wind-power generation and pricing of electricity rates.  A much abridged version of the brochure is accessible on the Internet.

Wind-Power Generation

Page 3 of “ALTALINK : Report to communities” states:

Connecting wind power — Albertans now have access to twice as much wind power as a result of AltaLink’s Southwest 240 kV Project. Energized in October 2010, this 90-kilometre transmission line between Pincher Creek and Lethbridge allows for 1,000 megawatts of wind‐generated electricity to reach homes and businesses throughout the province. That’s equal to powering 1,600 homes each month.

Participation of the local First Nations communities, the Piikani and Blood, was essential to the success of the project. Significant employment was created by this project and more than 80 Alberta businesses supplied services or materials.
(Source URL)

How wonderful!  Still, that claim suffers from a few problems.  According to AESO (Alberta Electric System Operator), the total wind-power generating capacity in Alberta is 777MW, of which often as little as 0MW and hardly ever even close to its maximum generating capacity is being produced and put on the grid. At the time I am writing this, the grand total of 67MW out of the total nominal and much-advertised 777MW wind-power generating capacity is being produced.  You can verify what the wind-power generated in Alberta is at any time you wish to look it up.

However, only a fraction of the wind-power generated in Alberta and put on the grid comes from the Pincher Creek area at any time.  The total wind-power generated in the Pincher Creek area is currently 0MW,  and the 67MW generated through wind power in Alberta come from a single source that is not in the Pincher Creek area.  It is the Ghost Pine Wind “Farm” in Kneehill County, in the Drumheller area.  The Ghost Pine Wind “Farm” has a maximum generating capacity of 82MW, and the construction of a 140kV transmission line to connect it to the grid was completed not all that long ago.

A lot more of Alberta’s wind power generated does not come from the Pincher Creek area.  That means that perhaps at some point in the future there may be a total of a 1,000MW generating capacity installed in the Pincher Creek area, but, unless a lot more Wind-Power generating capacity will be installed in the Pincher Creek area in the future, it will not be required.  The “90-kilometre transmission line between Pincher Creek and Lethbridge” that “allows for 1,000 megawatts of wind‐generated electricity to reach homes and businesses throughout the province” will not be required until the power it is intended to transmit can and will actually be generated.  The transmission line is most definitely not required right now.

I wonder why ALTALINK did not say so in their promotional brochure.  What the heck, it is only money that we consumers pay for right now through our power bills, and there is no shortage of that money coming in, right?

Talking about money, the lower-left-hand corner of page 5 of  “ALTALINK : Report to communities” contains a pie chart that breaks down the price of the good deal Ralph Klein gave us on the electricity rates we must now pay. I will translate that chart into plain English.

Breaking Down an Average Electricity Bill

Generation
The cost you pay for the electric energy you have used in a given time period: 56%

Administration
Cost that you pay for administration charges such as fees related to billing and customer service: 7%

Distribution
The cost your distribution company charges you to build, operate and maintain the local distribution system: 27%

Transmission
Cost that TFOs, such as AltaLink, charge to build, operate and maintain the provincial power system: 10%

I know, you don’t pay your electric energy bill in percent, you pay for it in dollars.  So, let’s make those figures a bit more meaningful.  The total electricity cost in terms of percent is quite useful for that.

56% of what you pay for electric energy consumption pays for the cost of electricity generated and put on the grid.  That is roughly 2.4 cent or $0.024 per kWh you consumed and includes a reasonable margin of profit for the generating companies.

46% of what you pay for electric energy consumption is for AltaLink and the distribution company that bring the electric energy from the generating companies to your house.  That is roughly 1.9 cent or $0.019 per kWh of electric energy you consumed and includes the cost of all of the overhead and a reasonable margin of profit for those services.

The total cost of the electric energy you consume and of the services required to bring it to your home is about 4.3 cents or $0.043 per kWh consumed, including a reasonable margin of profit for all involved in doing it and billing you for it.  That is it!  No more and no less.  That is all there is.

You probably pay a substantial amount over and above that for each kWh you consume.  That is money that will not go to waste.  It will provide a clear profit over and above all who are feeding on your wallet, including the Government of Alberta.  If you pay 8.6 cents or more per kWh consumed, you pay an extra 100 percent or more over and above what is required to provide for the costs and a reasonable margin of profit for all who so generously bring you your portion of the lifeblood of the nation: electric energy.

However, in all of that, remember that included in what you pay for electric energy is something the powers never tell you about. Electric energy generated from wind power is not free.  It is one of the most expensive forms of energy imaginable.

The electricity grid has no spare capacity at any time.  When the wind does not blow, and when the beautiful wind turbines that spoil the skylines in increasingly more Alberta locations turn, just idling away to keep themselves from seizing up, without producing any power for the grid at all, and often consuming power just to stay healthy, something must take up the demand, and spare capacity must be put on line.  If not, then there will be brown-outs and even black-outs.

Other than generating more hydro power (which we don’t have much of), a natural-gas-fired power generating plant is easiest to put into operation.  It takes up to about three hours to be on full production.  Coal-fired power plants take a lot longer, up to three days to be on full generating capacity, which is why they are being kept on spinning standby, consuming fuel all the while when not required to produce electric energy, so that they can be put into full production on short notice, which is still too long for comfort.

Spare capacity that can be put on the grid instantaneously when the wind does not blow constitutes unscheduled demand and drives up the price of electric energy into the lofty neighbourhood of $1000 per MWh, which means a cost of up to a full dollar per kWh to bring it on the grid.  With the convenient percentage figures that AltaLink provided on page 5 of their promotional brochure, it is not hard to figure what the consumers must pay for that, namely two or more dollars per kWh.  However, the pain of paying for that is made easier to bear by making you pay for every kWh you consume a good portion more than it is worth.  A $1000 per MWh spread over all of the kWh you consume during the year works out to just a few cents per kWh consumed but can be a substantial portion of all of the cost of the electric energy you consume throughout the year.  It just depends on when, how often and for how long the wind does not blow.

Yes, when it comes to electric energy generated by wind, the wind does not come free of charge.  The only thing that is free is death, and we all must pay for that with our lives.  However, we can do something about paying the enormous profits made by many from wind power generation.  We can begin to ask the powers to stop pulling the wool over our eyes.

Posted in Propaganda debunked, Electric Energy Prices, Energy Issues, Alternative Energy Sources | Print | No Comments »

Radiation fears: Update

March 17, 2011 by Walter Schneider.

I made a few entries at facebook:

Walter H. Schneider Radiation jumped significantly from the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant on Tuesday during a fire near reactor No. 4, but dropped quickly after the fire was extinguished.  http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2011/03/16/world/asia/20110316-japan-quake-radiation.html

Walter H. Schneider There is evidence of a lot of irrational fear of the radiation that is emanated by the Japanese nuclear power plants. In a nutshell, those fears are largely baseless, but don’t take my word for it. Go straight to what the experts have to say, and what they say is not hard to understand.

Introduction to Radiation Health Effects and Radiation Status at Fukushima | MIT NSE Nuclear Science and Engineering

Radiation is energy that propagates through matter or space. Radiation energy can be electromagnetic or particulate. Radiation is usually classified into non-ionizing (visible light, TV, radio wave) and ionizing radiation. Ionizing radiation has the ability to knock electrons off of atoms, changing its chemical properties….

For anyone whose life is presently dominated and controlled by fears of radiation, and that includes all governments who issue orders for their staff to evacuate Japan, you should not let yourself be ruled by irrational fears and superstitions fueled by sensationalist media hype. Go instead to the experts: http://mitnse.com/

–Walter

Posted in Propaganda debunked, Alternative Energy Sources, Explosions & Fires | Print | No Comments »

Radiationphobia and hysterics

March 15, 2011 by Walter Schneider.

Do you fear serious health problems due to being exposed to radiation from the Japanese nuclear plants?

You are not alone.  There is now a run on potassium-iodate in the land of the fearful and many pharmacies have run out of it.  What is that hysteria all about?

There is little to fear.  The situation in Japan is a far cry from being as harmful as other nuclear accidents were, and the dangers from those, too, were blown out of all proportions.  Here is a very informative account of that:

From the Summer 2010 Issue
of 21st Century of Science and Technology

Observations on Chernobyl after 25 Years of Radiophobia
Zbigniew Jaworowski, M.D., Ph.D., D.Sc.

The worst possible nuclear plant accident produced no scientifically confirmed fatalities in the general population. But there was enormous political and psychological damage, mainly the result of belief in the lie that any amount of radiation is bad.

Here is another item that will do much to allay hysterics, specifically with respect to the nuclear energy plant in Fukushima, that presently and increasingly raise fears of nuclear-energy-induced radiation impacts to heights that have not been seen since the tidal wave of fear about the consequences of the Chernobyl incident was set into motion.

Why I am not worried about Japan’s nuclear reactors. | Morgsatlarge – blogorific.

There exists a copy of this post on Barry Brooks excellent blog, where you can still use the discussion function: http://bravenewclimate.com

Last but not least, see this:

MIT NSE Nuclear Information Hub

Information about the incident at the Fukushima Nuclear Plants in Japan hosted by http://web.mit.edu/nse/ :: Maintained by the students of the Department of Nuclear Science and Engineering at MIT

It is extremely difficult not to become influenced by the fear mongering promulgated by the media. The sad reality is that “The News” are vehicles by which to bring advertising to the people.  One must make a deliberate effort to avoid becoming influenced by the media.  After all, their primary purpose for existence is to influence people and thereby to make a profit.  The media employ professionals schooled and trained in influencing people, all for the sake of profit.

The best news of all to accomplish that with are bad news, better yet, alarming news, and, if the news are not bad enough to achieve that with, then news that have been invented or have been made alarming when they were not and should not have been presented as alarming news in the first place will do better than all others.  “Dog bites man” is not news, “Man bites dog!!” is.

Randolph Hurst was someone who had the reputation of being ruthless in inventing and presenting alarming news for boosting the circulation of his newspapers.  I believe that it was he who once said: “There is no such thing as bad News,” meaning that, for the purpose of increasing circulation, the more alarming the news are, the better, because the greater the circulation numbers, the larger the advertising revenues.

Newspapers derive the vast majority of their revenues from advertising.  The prices charged for copies of their newspapers pay for nothing more than just the paper they are printed on and perhaps putting them into circulation.  The reporting, the editorializing, the writing, the composing, the typesetting, the wages and salaries of their staff, and all of the capital and operating expenses of newspapers are paid through advertising revenues.

Of course, very similar considerations apply to other branches of the media, such as broadcasting.

Increasing the circulation (or the size of a listening or viewing audience) increases the advertising revenues.

I believe that the recognition of that reality is one of the most important things any activists should engage themselves in.

There is an enormous media bias regarding feminism and men’s issues.  I admired many of the human rights activists whom I met throughout my life for being fully aware of that.

Now get this.  That bias in the media is not driven by an evil conspiracy.  It is driven by greed for media profits.  It just so happens that some ideological opportunists exploit the greed of the media for their own purposes.

That happens not only with respect to vilifying men and fathers for the purpose of creating and enlarging a rift between the sexes and to aid the systematic deconstruction of the traditional nuclear family.  The same principle creates opportunities for other fanatical ideologists or pain alarmists such as those who wish to promote their agenda for world domination or perhaps nothing more than their greed for power and wealth by creating unfounded fears about specific environmental issues.

One little aspect of the manufacturing of fears for profit is the creation and intensification of fears regarding nuclear energy.  Accidents such as those at Three-Mile Island, Chernobyl and Fukushima are god-sends for environmental-alarmism opportunists and carpetbaggers.

__________
Note: Dr. Jaworowski’s report on radiophobia may seem at first to be difficult reading, but get into it and become fascinated.

By understanding what Dr. Jaworowski stated about radiophobia and in reading his explanation of how it was created and exploited in connection with Chernobyl you may be making the most important contribution you could ever have imagined to becoming enlightened in your career as a human rights activist.

There is no shame in being duped once…

Posted in Alarmist Insanity, Propaganda debunked, Health issues, Alternative Energy Sources, Pollution: Health Issues, Explosions & Fires, Emission Incidents & Issues | Print | No Comments »

The wind-power scam

March 6, 2011 by Walter Schneider.

Daily Mail
28th February 2011

Why the £250bn wind power industry could be the greatest scam of our age - and here are the three ‘lies’ that prove it

By Christopher Booker

1. The first is the pretence that turbines are anything other than ludicrously inefficient.
2. The second great lie about wind power is the pretence that it is not a preposterously expensive way to produce electricity. No one would dream of building wind turbines unless they were guaranteed a huge government subsidy.
3. The third great lie is that this industry is somehow making a vital contribution to ’saving the planet’ by cutting our emissions of CO2 - it is not.

(Read more)

Posted in Propaganda debunked, Alternative Energy Sources | Print | No Comments »

Wind Turbine Syndrome

March 5, 2011 by Walter Schneider.

Thanks to John Droz, an interesting read from Wind Turbine Syndrome News:

“Infrasound: The hidden annoyance of Industrial Wind Turbines” (France)

—Professor Claude Renard (retired)
Naval College & Military School of the Fleet (France)

Posted in Health issues, Alternative Energy Sources | Print | No Comments »

Availability of electric power “blowing in the wind”

March 5, 2011 by Walter Schneider.

Walter H. Schneider

‎”The days of permanently available electricity may be coming to an end, the head of the power network said yesterday.”
You can see the whole article if signing on for free 1-day trial subscription and searching for “electricity” after clicking on the link for the article.

Telegraph e-paper

dailytelegraph.newspaperdirect.com

Walter H. Schneider Oops, should have stated that the power network of concern is that of the U.K. and that the routine and frequent outages are to be expected because of the vagaries of the weather. In other words, the availability of electric power in the U.K. is blowing in the wind.

Let there be no mistake that what is being shoved down people’s throat is nothing less than a planned, deliberate downgrading of living standards in the U.K. to make them comparable to those in under-developed nations.  Only in under-developed nations is it to be expected that the availability of electric power is unreliable, at best.We had that sort of standard in Germany, after WWII, when electric power and city gas were routinely available only for about a couple of hours a day, at noon and at around 6 pm.In the U.K. now, the lowering of the standard of service for electric power is the result of a deliberate policy to increase wind-power generation, rather than to use thermal power plants with their constant, reliable availability of generating capacity.

Only in the U.K., far from here and not a problem where we live, you think?  Well, think again!

You have not been paying attention:  Have you not seen ENMAX’s full page ads in the local papers?  Related ads by ENMAX have been shown on the local TV channels.  I have even been inundated with those ads when using google.  Have a look and see what those ads show!

“Welcome to the age of the low-carbon diet” my foot!  Only someone who wishes to have his standard of living lowered to that of an under-developed nation would welcome such a diet.  To promote such a thing and even have it supported and enforced through taxpayer-funded subsidies and government policies is insanity at its worst.

This insane policy is not only being promoted by ENMAX.  All of the energy industry is in cahoots on this, and our governments are happy to help them along with that.  You wonder what is in it for the governments?

It is a fallacy to believe the hype that wind power is cheap.  The truth is that it is very expensive, in addition to making the power grid unstable and unreliable.  The more we try to increase wind power generating capacity, the more will the costs of electricity to the consumers go through the roof.  Increased electricity costs will bring increased tax revenues for the governments.  We are being fleeced!  Any consumer who buys into this wind power insanity is having the wool pulled over his eyes, to boot.

Last Tuesday was a very cold day, and the total wind power generated on that day in Alberta was between one and two Mega Watt, between one and two one-hundreds of one percent of the total electric power generated in Alberta.

Yesterday, around supper time, wind-power generated in Alberta was ZERO Watt.  You can check at any time what it is.  That web page is updated every two minutes.  Right now, Mar 05, 2011 09:44, it tells me that 31MW of wind-power are being generated.  That amounts to four tenth of one percent of all electric power being generated in Alberta, while 572MW or 6.5 per cent of the total consumption in Alberta are being imported from B.C. and Saskatchewan.

Posted in Propaganda debunked, Alarmist Insanity, Alternative Energy Sources | Print | No Comments »