Hey WV – I will continue to write my a-hole reps. They’re both in the bag so I think all they understand is cash money. I need to put myself into a certain mindset to write them. Otherwise it comes out as a huge f y to them from me.
I do agree with this articles premise but that’s based on the current technology.
It’s hard for me to imagine that a Wind-Solar-hydro-nuclear combination will ever completely displace fossil fuel entirely for electrical production. But, I think that’s based on the current energy storage technology among other things. If there would be a significant technological advance in terms of mass electrical storage or toxic emission free electrical production, I think the idea that wind and solar along with the new technology could possibly displace fossil fuels is at least closer to being a viable reality. One of the analysts that work for the SD Public Utilities Commission told me 5 years ago that he could realistically see upwards of 10 to 15 and maybe even 20 percent by a combination of wind and solar with our current technology. Another factor in this issue is that electrical demand continues to increase with population and development of world wide infrastructure.
To me, one over-looked thing is that in our home we use a geothermal heat pump which was expensive to install 10 years ago when we built this palace. But it uses much less energy of a normal home in Central South Dakota. The unit paid for the difference between a normal air based heat pump system after about 5 years by my calculations. It’s not everything I want but it’s something that could really help reduce ff energy consumption. Plus there are other benefits: it’s paying me every day – air conditioning is very little cost in the summer and our summers are extremely warm from June to September. My heat bills run about 30% of my neighbors who use either propane or standard heat pump(all-electric). My home is worth more when I go to resell because of this.
So, what I’m trying to say here is that there are other things to do to help impact this.
My wife told me yesterday that the last couple of proposed wind farms for South Dakota were opposed by groups that didn’t like the noise, aesthetics, and harm to birds that might fly into them. Subsequently, they never got off the drawing board. The issues are there aren’t enough optimal transmission systems in the best locations for wind farms so the start up costs are enormous and the payoff takes years to materialize.
From an economic standpoint, I think the Obama administration encouraged them with tax breaks and loans. And so they’ve flourished. Not sure what the Donald might do going forward. Maybe he could ask Putin what he should do about it?