• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

How Texas became a pioneer in wind energy

Dave Watkins oversees a wind farm on Route 66 exactly halfway between Los Angeles and Chicago. Bikers taking road trips on the historic highway rumble past one new wind farm after another.

"I heard someone in town say once that this particular area doesn't have a lot of oil, doesn't have a lot of water. But the one thing it does have is wind," Watkins said.
Just a few years ago, it was impractical to generate power in that remote spot. Texas has since spent $7 billion on power lines connecting windy north and west Texas with cities south and east. It happened under then-governor and now-Energy Secretary Rick Perry.
Watkins said they can deliver power to places like San Antonio, Dallas, Houston and a city 501 miles away that uses almost entirely renewable power: Georgetown, Texas.

People there say coal plants kept the lights on for generations. Then, Republican Mayor Dale Ross concluded the market was changing.
Unlike many Republicans, Ross accepts climate science. He supports clean power so much he bought an electric motorcycle. But Ross said he approved wind and solar because it's affordable.

"This was first and foremost a business decision and if you win the business argument, then you're gonna win the environmental argument," Ross said.
"It's a totally different landscape out there," he said. "And let me tell you, in the state of Texas, since January 1, four coal plants have closed. This is the economics of the matter. You buy wind and solar for, say, $18 a megawatt. You buy coal for $25. You have that choice. Which one are you gonna buy?"
"The art of the deal?" Inskeep asked.
"The art of the deal. I might be able to teach Mr. Trump something when it comes to renewable energy. All he has to do is invite me and I'll come to the White House. We can have a great discussion," Ross said.

The president has hailed a few new coal jobs, but has not erased coal's disadvantage against natural gas and renewables.
Former Vice President Al Gore featured Georgetown's mayor in one of his climate documentaries.
"My overall impression is that President Trump has been able to do less damage than I feared that he would," Gore said. "Market forces are moving the entire energy marketplace toward renewable energy. … I'm hoping they'll follow the lead of Dale Ross rather than Donald Trump."

Renewable energy has continued growing since Mr. Trump's election. Even in Texas, the conservative home of Mr. Trump's energy secretary.
"Without his leadership, we wouldn't be having renewable energy here. Now he's shying away from that and I need to be his PR guy but maybe he doesn't wanna take credit for it, 'cause his boss is a big coal guy," Ross said.

CBS News reached out to Perry's office, which said Perry does take credit for promoting wind in Texas -- and still promotes it as energy secretary.
But earlier this month, President Trump directed Secretary Perry to prepare immediate steps to stop the loss of "fuel secure power facilities," which appear to include both coal and nuclear power.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/texas-leader-in-renewable-energy-wind-turbines/

Link the whole thing in case "they" won't let you open up the link
 
That's amazing. Imagine how much electricity the southern US could generate just by using wind and solar? Hell, maybe they send it to states near them. Trump is wrong to bet put all on black for coal and oil(imo). At the very least solar and wind is much safer than coal and oil. A worker won't get black lung disease or have to use some dangerous machinery on oil fields. Don't want those workers to lose jobs? Provide them a program and educated to work with solar panels or wind turbines.
 
That's amazing. Imagine how much electricity the southern US could generate just by using wind and solar? Hell, maybe they send it to states near them. Trump is wrong to bet put all on black for coal and oil(imo). At the very least solar and wind is much safer than coal and oil. A worker won't get black lung disease or have to use some dangerous machinery on oil fields. Don't want those workers to lose jobs? Provide them a program and educated to work with solar panels or wind turbines.

The problem is wind still provides too little energy comparative to other alternative fossil fuel sources. Yes it is cheaper than coal, but most power comes from natural gas which is the dominant source of energy consumption in Texas.

Natural Gas will not be replaced for a while. As a whole in the United States, coal and natural gas provide about the same amount of energy percentage wise to the country.


https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=427&t=3
https://www.eia.gov/state/?sid=TX#tabs-1

If you look at the statistics from 2017 in the billion kWh, wind still hasn't even surpassed hydroelectric supply. It still has a looooongggg way to go. There's a pretty good article a while back from a Canadian energy company comparing the pros-cons to each of the power sources.

http://blog.foothills.ca/natural-gas-vs.-wind-electricity

One thing I really don't like about wind is it's effects on local wildlife, it's been well known that bats are attracted to turbines and often get killed by the blades. Which of course bats play a significant role in keeping insect populations in check in the ecosystem. Birds are also another huge victim from wind turbines.

https://earther.gizmodo.com/this-may-be-why-so-many-bats-are-getting-killed-by-wind-1820593662
https://www.fws.gov/birds/bird-enthusiasts/threats-to-birds/collisions/wind-turbines.php

Honestly, with some of the negative consequences of turbines on wildlife, I would rather just develop solar and stay with natural gas until solar catches up. Turbines just aren't worth the consequences.
 

pramod

Banned
Awesome. Wind, solar, coal, oil, why not use all of them? America has so many natural resources for energy.
 
Awesome. Wind, solar, coal, oil, why not use all of them? America has so many natural resources for energy.

Wind is basically killing off native bird populations.

Don't even get me started on how much solar is sucking the rays. Peak sun is right around the corner.
 
Last edited:

gohepcat

Banned
Awesome. Wind, solar, coal, oil, why not use all of them? America has so many natural resources for energy.

Because we need to rapidly transition away from releasing millions of years of sequestered carbon back into the atmosphere?

Because my daughter will be in her 40s when we are expected to pass 500ppm of CO2?
 

C4lukin2

Banned
Texas is also number 3 in oil production behind Russia and Saudi Arabia.

We have a lot of empty space, and a lot of wind, so it is cool that the state has invested so much into it.

It kills a lot of birds, but if you fly into a giant fan, maybe you are not meant for this modern world.
 
Last edited:
Sorta, but I prefer solar when possible because some types of wind turbines are bird murder machines.

A household or a feral cat is more of a bird murder machine cause they actually seek them out, toy with them, and kill bird more than wind turbines per year.
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/moral-cost-of-cats-180960505/
When they extrapolated the data to reflect national trends, they were stunned. According to their calculations, outdoor cats killed somewhere in the ballpark of 2.4 billion birds and 12.3 billion small mammals in the U.S. per year—far exceeding any other human-influenced cause of avian death, such as pesticides or collisions with windows.

https://www.fws.gov/birds/bird-enthusiasts/threats-to-birds/collisions/wind-turbines.php
Estimates of bird/turbine collision range widely and all of the studies attempting to quantify this contain some level of bias and uncertainty. The most comprehensive and statistically sound estimates show that bird deaths from turbine collisions are between 140,000 and 500,000 birds per year. As wind energy capacity increases under the DOE’s mandate (a six-fold increase from current levels), statistical models predict that mean bird deaths resulting in collisions with turbines could reach 1.4 million birds/year.
 

Rentahamster

Rodent Whores
A household or a feral cat is more of a bird murder machine cause they actually seek them out, toy with them, and kill bird more than wind turbines per year.
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/moral-cost-of-cats-180960505/
When they extrapolated the data to reflect national trends, they were stunned. According to their calculations, outdoor cats killed somewhere in the ballpark of 2.4 billion birds and 12.3 billion small mammals in the U.S. per year—far exceeding any other human-influenced cause of avian death, such as pesticides or collisions with windows.

https://www.fws.gov/birds/bird-enthusiasts/threats-to-birds/collisions/wind-turbines.php
Estimates of bird/turbine collision range widely and all of the studies attempting to quantify this contain some level of bias and uncertainty. The most comprehensive and statistically sound estimates show that bird deaths from turbine collisions are between 140,000 and 500,000 birds per year. As wind energy capacity increases under the DOE’s mandate (a six-fold increase from current levels), statistical models predict that mean bird deaths resulting in collisions with turbines could reach 1.4 million birds/year.
Um, yes, I know that cats are little critter murder machines too.
 

Teletraan1

Banned
The government put up a bunch of wind turbines about a half hour from my house and a bunch of the local fatties complained about unrelated health problems after they went up. Some even blamed them for cardiovascular issues and diabetes. I shit you not. My province has the highest energy rates in NA and sells excess power to the US at a fraction of the price we pay because they wouldn't. In a big empty field I could see them being a nice addition to your power grid but they have ruined the skyline around the lake with them here.
 
Top Bottom