Danielle Kreutter:
"GRAND JUNCTION, Colo.- This week U.S. Interior Secretary Ken Salazar announced the approval of a major natural gas drilling project in Eastern Utah.
The plan will allow Anadarko Petroleum to develop more than 3,600 gas wells in Eastern Utah, but local gas and oil officials say that plan will have indirect benefits to service companies on the Western Slope.
"It's no question," said David Ludlam, the executive director of the Western Slope Colorado Oil and Gas Association. "There will be an indirect benefit to our community when you have specialized service companies out of Western Colorado going out and getting work done in Eastern Utah...."
(Read more? Click title)
"Unapologetically pursuing and tracking patterns within the news others make since 2010."
Showing posts with label common sense energy development. Show all posts
Showing posts with label common sense energy development. Show all posts
May 12, 2012
May 10, 2012
SandBoxBlogs: Aspen Times "Take a common-sense approach toward energy"
(Read one of Sturm's 'local's fav' columns on the green industry here)
Melanie Sturm:
".....After “investing” $110 billion since 2009, the sector is littered with taxpayer-backed, bankrupt companies like Solyndra, Beacon Power and Ener1, all of which paid bonuses before going under. Reuters reported last month that “the wind industry … has shed 10,000 jobs since 2009 even as the energy capacity of wind farms has nearly doubled” … while the demonized “oil and gas industry added 75,000 jobs.”
The truth is that industries that aren't economically viable don't create real jobs, and those that are viable don't need subsidies. Plagued by competitive disadvantages like sun and wind intermittence, and expensive land, capital, transmission and backup capacity, these technologies are uncompetitive small-market players and remain subsidy-dependent.
Despite receiving 53.5 percent of federal financial support for the electric-power sector, wind and solar supply only 4 percent of U.S. power at a cost 100 to 300 percent more than conventional sources, according to the Energy Information Administration. A University of Wyoming study noted that because green policies increase prices, the “economic benefits derived from building renewable energy facilities in the short run are more than offset by losses in economic output and employment,” thus hurting the poorest and most vulnerable.
Additionally, given renewables' green patina, many don't appreciate their adverse environmental impacts beyond the eyesore, noise, water usage and wildlife destruction. Called “energy sprawl” by the Nature Conservancy, renewable energies require vastly more land while producing significantly less energy than conventional energy. Most disconcerting, their incurable intermittence requires utilities to rely on conventional power to cycle up when there's no wind or sun and power down when there is, thus diminishing carbon-reduction advantages...." (Read more? Click title)
"Unapologetically pursuing and tracking patterns within the news others make since 2010."
Melanie Sturm:
".....After “investing” $110 billion since 2009, the sector is littered with taxpayer-backed, bankrupt companies like Solyndra, Beacon Power and Ener1, all of which paid bonuses before going under. Reuters reported last month that “the wind industry … has shed 10,000 jobs since 2009 even as the energy capacity of wind farms has nearly doubled” … while the demonized “oil and gas industry added 75,000 jobs.”
The truth is that industries that aren't economically viable don't create real jobs, and those that are viable don't need subsidies. Plagued by competitive disadvantages like sun and wind intermittence, and expensive land, capital, transmission and backup capacity, these technologies are uncompetitive small-market players and remain subsidy-dependent.
Despite receiving 53.5 percent of federal financial support for the electric-power sector, wind and solar supply only 4 percent of U.S. power at a cost 100 to 300 percent more than conventional sources, according to the Energy Information Administration. A University of Wyoming study noted that because green policies increase prices, the “economic benefits derived from building renewable energy facilities in the short run are more than offset by losses in economic output and employment,” thus hurting the poorest and most vulnerable.
Additionally, given renewables' green patina, many don't appreciate their adverse environmental impacts beyond the eyesore, noise, water usage and wildlife destruction. Called “energy sprawl” by the Nature Conservancy, renewable energies require vastly more land while producing significantly less energy than conventional energy. Most disconcerting, their incurable intermittence requires utilities to rely on conventional power to cycle up when there's no wind or sun and power down when there is, thus diminishing carbon-reduction advantages...." (Read more? Click title)
"Unapologetically pursuing and tracking patterns within the news others make since 2010."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)