Air Quality Keeps Getting Better, But Wind Turbines Do Have Drawbacks

Remember how smelly diesel trucks used to be and how loudly their engines clattered? Remember those photos of the Pittsburg skyline with smokestacks belching black smoke from the steel mills and the dense black clouds that hovered over the hills of the city? Do you recall the firehouses on the Cuyahoga River that runs though Cleveland, firehouses built because the river was in the habit of catching fire four times a year?

These were a few of the memories that came to mind as I read yesterday's Energy Bad Boys' column titled Harvard Study Finds Wind Turbines Will Cause More Warming Than Emissions Reductions Would Avert. And the clever subhead: Hot air from the wind indusry.

The column begins, "A few weeks ago, we wrote about how Gallup polling found 66 percent of Americans think the environment is getting worse despite the fact that air quality in the United States has improved dramatically since the 1970’s. This improvement was due in large part to the Clean Air Act and its subsequent amendments, as a reader noted."

The authors argue that if the goal is to avoid harmful warming, why build something that causes immediate, noticeable local warming for people, animals, and plants living near the turbines today — especially when the climate benefit is small and far in the future?

They estimate the extra warming from all those turbines could cost the U.S. economy $72–75 billion per year in damages (based on earlier studies of warming costs).

Here's another consideration when discussing wind and solar. The size of their physical "footprint" compared to the energy they produce.

Click chart to enlarge

Bottom Line

Wind (and solar) are often hyped as planet-saving technologies, but they come with their own real, immediate temperature impacts. Instead of spending trillions on wind, the authors strongly suggest we should choose nuclear power instead, because it produces reliable electricity with almost no emissions and no local air-mixing warming effect.

I mention these things because our current Minnesota energy policies include a moratorium on nuclear (based on fear driven by misinformation) and a mandate to be "Net Zero" by 2040. [Fwiw, "Net Zero" in environmental law and policy refers to a state where the amount of greenhouse gases (GHGs) emitted into the atmosphere by human activities is balanced by an equivalent amount removed from the atmosphere over a specified period.]  

And however you slice it, wind and solar still have that major issue of intermittency so that it may not be there in the moments you need it most.

Related Links

Harvard Study Finds Wind Turbines Will Cause More Warming Than Emissions Reductions Would Avert

Groups align to lift Minnesota's nuclear energy ban

Is Our Energy Grid at Risk?

Wind farms pictured: Northern Iowa, Southern California, West Texas, San Gorgonia Pass

The Biggest Drawbacks of Solar Panels

Photo by American Public Power Association on Unsplash

According to the MISO Dashboard, Solar produced one Mw of the 66.828 Mw in the 14 state upper midwest region today. Two thirds of the energy we relied on today came from coal and natural gas. A little less than a quarter was wind, and the rest primarily nuclear

Despite the emphasis on renewable energy sources, it's apparent we are long ways from satisfying current Net Zero targets or expectations. I decided to ask ChatGPT what the biggest drawback of solar energy were, and received this detailed reply: 

While solar panels are a clean and renewable source of energy, there are some drawbacks and challenges associated with their use. Here are some of the main drawbacks:

• Intermittency and Variability: Solar power generation is dependent on sunlight, making it intermittent and variable. Cloud cover, time of day, and seasonal changes can affect the efficiency of solar panels. Energy storage solutions or alternative power sources may be required to address this intermittency issue.
• High Initial Costs: The upfront cost of purchasing and installing solar panels can be relatively high. While the costs have been decreasing over the years, the initial investment can still be a barrier for some individuals or businesses. Government incentives and subsidies can help mitigate this issue.
• Land Use Concerns: Large-scale solar installations may require significant land area. This can raise concerns about land use, especially in densely populated areas or regions with limited available space. Balancing the need for renewable energy with land conservation and other land uses can be a challenge.
• Energy Storage Challenges: Storing solar energy for use during periods of low sunlight can be challenging and may require additional technologies, such as batteries. Current energy storage solutions, while improving, may have limitations in terms of efficiency, cost, and environmental impact.
• Resource and Environmental Impact: The production of solar panels involves the extraction and processing of raw materials, some of which are non-renewable. Additionally, the manufacturing process and disposal of solar panels can have environmental impacts. Efforts are being made to improve the sustainability of solar panel production and recycling processes.
• Aesthetic Concerns: Some people find the appearance of solar panels on buildings or landscapes unappealing. Aesthetic considerations can be a factor in the adoption of solar technology, particularly in residential areas.
• Geographic Limitations: Solar energy generation is more efficient in regions with abundant sunlight. Areas with frequent cloud cover or long periods of darkness may not benefit as much from solar power without additional support from other energy sources.

One other concern regarding solar panels is their lifespan. I'm currently trying to confirm this, but solar panels become increasingly inefficient over time and need to be replaced every twenty years. Which means they will create rather mountainous garbage dumps around the country and around the world wherever they are utilized and discarded. By way of contrast, I was told (all these facts need to be confirmed) that all the nuclear waste of the past sixty years could be stored in an Olympic sized swimming pool.  

Leave a comment and identify your sources if you have more accurate numbers. 

The topic of energy creation and use is an important one. I hope to continue providing information that is useful, insightful and thought provoking on this topic going forward.

Meantime, life goes on all around you. Engage it.