Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Facebook | Twitter | All Access E-Edition | Home RSS
 
 
 
Latest Post:
Started By:
Rank:
Category
15 days ago.
by absolem
BeRight
#1

CLEAN... ENERGY

Offshore wind farms from New Jersey to Virginia took a big step closer to reality with the completion of a review that showed the renewable energy source would not cause major environmental damage, officials said today. Wind projects off the coasts of Maryland, Delaware, Virginia, and New Jersey are being studied. The Mid-Atlantic lease proposal follows the Cape Wind project in Massachusetts that was given the go-ahead in 2010 after 9 years of federal review."No developer should have to wait nine or 10 years," for approval, Salazar said. The response from the developers was "DAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA"

 
 

Member Comments

absolem

Beright...how many miles offshore were the turbines to be placed?

Posted 33 days ago.

absolem

OWO...actually that was one of the hallmarks of the lefts "not in my backyard" mentality. it is approximately 10 miles from shore to horizon. so unless you are out on your boat, you will never see them under normal circumstances.

Posted 33 days ago.

Ohwiseone

OMG , digging a little deep arent we ? Run Trump Run !!! LOLOL!!! Time for all you republinutz to dry your undies !

Posted 33 days ago.

BeRight

And then there was yesterday….From 2007: The Cape Cod Commission in Massachusetts Thursday denied Cape Wind's application to bury electric cables needed to connect its proposed 420-megawatt offshore wind farm in the Nantucket Sound to the state power grid. Sen. Ted Kennedy and many residents who own coastal property from where they could see the wind turbines on a clear day oppose the project.

A good liberal: Kennedy: I am for clean energy wind farms just put them somewhere else where it doesn't spoil my view of my expensive property

Posted 33 days ago.

BeRight

And then there was yesterday….From 2007: The Cape Cod Commission in Massachusetts Thursday denied Cape Wind's application to bury electric cables needed to connect its proposed 420-megawatt offshore wind farm in the Nantucket Sound to the state power grid. Sen. Ted Kennedy and many residents who own coastal property from where they could see the wind turbines on a clear day oppose the project.

A good liberal: Kennedy: I am for clean energy wind farms just put them somewhere else where it doesn't spoil my view of my expensive property

Posted 33 days ago.

BeRight

Today: Construction has begun off Rhode Island's coast on the nation's first offshore wind farm, a milestone that federal and state officials say will help the fledgling U.S. industry surge ahead..

U.S. Secretary of the Interior Sally Jewell said Monday that lenders, regulators and stakeholders can now see a path forward.

"It's great to witness a pioneering moment in U.S. history," she said during a boat tour of the site. "We are learning from this in what we do elsewhere. I think it will help the country understand the potential that exists here."

Posted 33 days ago.

BeRight

Who has the authority over transmission is also equally convoluted. Individual states control some aspects of the lines on their soil, but the rules are implemented by the operators. And others are managed by the North American Reliability Council, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, and the Department of Energy.

In today’s market, some states are deregulated and some are not. Even in non-deregulated states, different companies own the power plants and the utilities to which you write your monthly checks.

Posted 41 days ago.

BeRight

The vertically-integrated utilities didn’t want competition and found ways to prevent outsiders from using their transmission lines, so the government stepped in and created rules to force open access to the lines, and set the stage for Independent System Operators, not-for-profit entities that managed the transmission of electricity in different regions.

Today’s electricity grid – actually three separate grids – is extraordinarily complex as a result. From the very beginning of electricity in America, systems were varied and regionally-adapted, and it is no different today. Some states have their own independent electricity grid operators, like California and Texas. Other states are part of regional operators, like the Midwest Independent System Operator or the New England Independent System Operator. Not all regions use a system operator, and there are still municipalities that provide all aspects of electricity.

Posted 41 days ago.

BeRight

By the 1930s regulated electric utilities became well-established, providing all three major aspects of electricity, the power plants, transmission lines, and distribution. This type of electricity system, a regulated monopoly, is called a vertically-integrated utility. Bigger transmission lines and more remote power plants were built, and transmission systems became significantly larger, crossing many miles of land and even state lines.

As electricity became more widespread, larger plants were constructed to provide more electricity, and bigger transmission lines were used to transmit electricity from farther away. In 1978 the Public Utilities Regulatory Policies Act was passed, making it possible for power plants owned by non-utilities to sell electricity too, opening the door to privatization.

By the 1990s, the Federal government was completely in support of opening access to the electricity grid to everyone, not only the vertically-integrated utilities.

Posted 41 days ago.

Ohwiseone

Do you suppose those that built our current (no pun intended) power grid did so with no thought as to how they would recoup their costs !

Posted 41 days ago.

absolem

A viable solution has to be cost effective or so necessary that cost is no object...fiat cash should cover it. Actually it would be interesting to actually match the need with the cost and method (s) required to equal or offer reduced cost. A municipality of roughly 15,000 would be a beaker size example of the challenge.

Posted 43 days ago.

moderation

I think the cost is already quite apparent,don't you?

Posted 43 days ago.

absolem

OWO..good morning. Have you started crunching those green numbers yet?

Posted 43 days ago.

absolem

OWO...i also agree that the cost would be astronomical and someone has to pay. if it were mandated and the energy companies had first dibs...so to speak, then i would prefer that route. it gives them a way to change the flow of revenue while maintaining service. additionally, the government would need to be invested without choice. aquisition of property as well as placating the American public for the eventual discourse to ensue.

Posted 44 days ago.

absolem

OWO....thanks for your thoughtful reply. perhaps an exercise to check for viability on a small scale would give one an appreciation for the task at hand of going "Green". maybe using marietta as an example of figuring out the cost to go "green".

Posted 44 days ago.

absolem

hi Kendall....long time no write. it appears from the article you lifted the story from we should be happy that they did not develop their main interest which unfortunately had a bit too much of the CO2 gas. it would be of interest to see whom was invested in exxon/mobil at the time politically and monetarily to get the full picture of the intent behind the actions.

Posted 44 days ago.

Kendall78

Exxon knew about how their industry were effecting the climate back in 1981 but then spent millions to deny it.

Guess it is all about the cash and not about facts.

Posted 44 days ago.

Ohwiseone

I think solar , wind and thermal all look promising ! First we have to update our aging transmission system ! Gonna cost us , one way or the other !

Posted 45 days ago.

absolem

OWO...let's move past the coal plants and look at the real needs in terms of consumption verses the "clean" methods in which to provide for our demand now and in the future. balancing regional needs and resources will be the key as well as efficient distribution. i would hope that somewhere in the deep dark reccesses of the Department of Energy there exists just the plan for clean fuel to either work or not....that of course depending on any recent innovations or change in resource(s). my question to you is what do you think would be the "way" to go? there is no realright or wrong...but more a work or won't work. the real problem after solving the generation and distribution issues is to sell the inevitable changes to the surrounding and environment that would have to occur. naturally politics will screw it up for several decades and then it is back to square one with a new set of issues.

Posted 45 days ago.

Ohwiseone

I have no idea of our energy needs abby but the fact remains , these old power plants were due to be shut down some years ago and only when our government found that they could make money selling " pollution credits" were they allowed to continue ! Time just ran out on them and eventually these employees were going to have to find other means for their livelihood !

Posted 46 days ago.
 
 
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or