We need to keep these wind power subsidies, says… Karl Rove?

posted at 4:01 pm on June 10, 2012 by Jazz Shaw

I had to double check to be sure, but Backwards Day was on on January 31st, so that doesn’t explain this. Nor do I see any reports of the web site of Business Week being hacked. And as far as I know, Rove doesn’t even have a Linkedin account to phish, so I’m thinking this story is legit. Let’s hear from the man himself.

Renewal of federal tax credits for wind energy can save U.S. jobs and reduce dependence on foreign oil, according to Karl Rove, an adviser to former President George W. Bush.

“We’ve got a growing economy that’s increasing energy consumption and wind energy should be part of the solution,” Rove said today on a panel at a wind conference in Atlanta. Extending the so-called production tax credit “should be a priority.”

A bill to extend through 2016 the 2.2-cent-a-kilowatt-hour credit for electricity produced by wind turbines, biomass, geothermal and landfill-gas plants has stalled in congress along with about 100 other expiring tax-related incentives.

It seems an odd time to take a stand like this, particularly given all the coverage on this subject in recent days. As Paul Driessen discovered, tens of billions in subsidies have still not resulted in wind power contributing more than 3% of the nations demands on the electrical grid. Further, wind farms tend to produce the most energy when demand is lowest and the least when demand maxes out.

Further, the more we look into this, the more it looks like a huge cash cow and boondoggle, as Goldman Sachs has set up an entire investment plan to cash in on the government largesse. Some people have a nose for taxpayer dollars when the spigots are opened up and this should be a warning sign at a minimum.

Nobody is saying we can’t have wind energy, but the development phase of this technology should be over by now. If you can put up a wind farm, produce useful power and make money doing so, then God bless. Have at it! But if it’s not profitable by now, I’m not sure what huge breakthrough we’re waiting for which justifies continuing to prop up development on the taxpayer’s dime.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2 3

NOW do you all see why Karl has been bit*hing about Palin?

All of Karl’s paid cronies are threatened by her kind of politics. The last thing the Hog Trough Crowd, which is what Karl (and Mitt Romney) represents, is the Tea Party crowd (Palin and those like her) to actually get it in their heads that controlling spending is something that we do in Republican Administrations.

No, silly people, we spend uncounted billions on REPUBLICAN clients.

So, the message to the Tea Party from Rove and Romney is Sit Down, Shut Up, and hand over your tax receipts or else that Kenyan Imposter will put William Ayers on the Supreme Court.

victor82 on June 10, 2012 at 8:36 PM

so you really think there’s no difference between ROmney and Obama on environmental policy??

LevinFan on June 10, 2012 at 8:31 PM

What is Romney’s actual environmental policy? He supports cap and trade, but lies about it. He supports AGW, but then back tracks on the issue. He’s opposed to coal power because it’s too dirty and kills people, but then he lies about his record on coal. He supports subsidizing solar, wind, and ethanol industries, and sometimes pretends he doesn’t, depending on who he’s talking to. So, what is Romney’s actual environmental policy?

Buckshot Bill on June 10, 2012 at 8:38 PM

Never forget that Karl Rove is an establishment politics mercenary.

He messed up Delaware in 2010 simply because he wanted to and as already mentioned his trash-talk on Palin is mostly about keeping elitist country clubbers running DC.

viking01 on June 10, 2012 at 8:41 PM

Why hasn’t someone figured out how configure all those wind farms to face Obama’s headwinds?

de rigueur on June 10, 2012 at 8:42 PM

Here we have Rove sounding like a lib and even indirectly backing up Obama’s “private sector” gaffe. Rove’s a voice of the GOPe, Romney’s a GOPe darling, and yet those of us who criticize either are the “libtard concern trolls”.

ddrintn on June 10, 2012 at 7:19 PM

Ah, you get it, don’t you?

By the way, the last place Romney will ever put Sarah Palin is in his Department of Energy. Romney is probably as much in on the Green Energy/Carbon Trading scam as Karl is. It wouldn’t surprise me one bit if he were.

This much I do know: someone is paying Karl off, big time. And the Bushies are in the background somewhere, somehow.

What Palin is going to be doing over the summer in regard to energy issues should be interesting to watch on the Right. I think she’s probably decided to try and keep Romney honest.

Not that it will work. Romney isn’t a conservative.

victor82 on June 10, 2012 at 8:44 PM

Why hasn’t someone figured out how configure all those wind farms to face Obama’s headwinds?

de rigueur on June 10, 2012 at 8:42 PM

+1

The Rogue Tomato on June 10, 2012 at 8:47 PM

victor82 on June 10, 2012 at 8:44 PM

Romney organized the first Cap and Trade system in United States history, and is heavily funded by major carbon-trading supporters. So yes, he’s at least as in bed with the carbon scam as Rove or Pickens is.

Buckshot Bill on June 10, 2012 at 8:48 PM

( s i g h )

Et tu Karl? Et tu?

I don’t care if this does “sound like a broken record” . . . RINO . . .

RINO . . .

RINO . . .

RINO . . .

RINO . . .

RINO . . .

RINO . . .

RINO . . .

listens2glenn on June 10, 2012 at 8:56 PM

You think $1.5t in debt is huge, mitLord will tripple that in 4 years by the time he is done fighting every war imaginable.

Uppereastside on June 10, 2012 at 5:10 PM

1. Which countries is Mitt going to invade? And why?

2. Don’t forget, O’bama gave Halliburton a no-bid contract in Iraq. I’m sure that made George Soros, who is now a part-owner of Halliburton, quite happy. You must be so proud of them both.

3. Aren’t Mormons pretty much anti-war to begin with? I mean, after all Mormon Democrat Senate Leader Harry Reid actively cheered for our defeat in Iraq.

D+

Del Dolemonte on June 10, 2012 at 8:57 PM

A4W Reactor, Nimitz Class Carrier powerplant: 180 Megawatts output, 200 tons (numbers are approximate)

Enercon E-126, worlds largest production wind turbine, 7.5 megawatts output (25% of the time), 6,000 tons.

To match the peak output of the 200ish ton A4W reactor with Enercon turbines, you would need more than 140,000 tons of concrete and steel. And that’s not considering the differences in uptime (90+% for the reactor, 25% for the turbine).

There is no bloody way in hell that 140,000 tons of raw materials is more economical than two hundred. And there’s no way under Thermodynamics and The Law of Conservation to close the gap.

The fossil fuel age will come to an end in time (when, exactly, is a topic for another thread). After that, it’s nuclear or nothing. There’s just no way under the conditions needed to support life on a planet like ours and the physical laws of this universe for wind and solar to be able to fill in the void left by fossil fuels.

Alberta_Patriot on June 10, 2012 at 5:04 PM

You sound like someone with a clue….I’ve often wondered why wind turbines aren’t placed next to highways/trains to capture the wind generated by large trucks and trains….

Fossil fuels will be running out eventually even with all the new technologies and discoveries…

smylatu on June 10, 2012 at 8:59 PM

So if you support Romney in the General election that makes you a Mittbot!

Guess that makes Mark Levin, Rush, Beck, Sarah Palin, Santorum, and Rand Paul all Mittbots!!

LevinFan on June 10, 2012 at 7:33 PM

No, no, but Sarah Palin doesn’t really support Romney because I could tell from her last interview by her expression, eye movements and voice tone that she doesn’t really like him blah blah blah. She says she does, but that’s just a front blah blah blah.

And Rand Paul is a sellout.

(Or something like that. I can’t really understand the argument at this point.)

Burke on June 10, 2012 at 9:04 PM

You sound like someone with a clue….I’ve often wondered why wind turbines aren’t placed next to highways/trains to capture the wind generated by large trucks and trains….

Fossil fuels will be running out eventually even with all the new technologies and discoveries…

smylatu on June 10, 2012 at 8:59 PM

A few seconds of wind isn’t much energy actually, even on a busy highway. Also, you have to remember that a windmill can’t be more than at most about 65% efficient, and that’s a theoretical limit. In reality, most windmills are less than 35% efficient and even then only when the wind is the right speed. The big multi-million dollar 300 foot-tall windmills can’t operate in winds less than about 25 miles per hour and because they are poorly engineered, if the wind speed during a storm is over 100 mph they can tear themselves apart. The speed of the rotor will actually exceed the speed of sound at the outer tip, and the sonic boom will rip the fiberglass blade apart. Also, the generator can overheat and catch on fire if the turbine turns too quickly. And the tower itself can cause a dangerous drop in pressure every time a rotor blade crosses it, which can cause the rotor to shake itself apart. They are high maintenance, and can be very dangerous to live around.

A well-built savonious rotor will work in winds as little as 1 mph or well in excess of 100 mph, but these typically only have about 10% efficiency or less. If you build a shroud around the rotor, then the efficiency can reach the same 35% levels seen in the massive expensive windmills. Most savonious rotors are built out of recycled oil drums, and are small-scale, domestic power systems. They might put out a few kilowatt-hours a day, but you’d need several to power a single American home.

Buckshot Bill on June 10, 2012 at 9:11 PM

Karl Rove……..the face of the BUSH DYNASTY on Fox News!!!

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO
NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO.

X 1,000,000,000,000

PappyD61 on June 10, 2012 at 9:15 PM

No, no, but Sarah Palin doesn’t really support Romney because I could tell from her last interview by her expression, eye movements and voice tone that she doesn’t really like him blah blah blah. She says she does, but that’s just a front blah blah blah.

Burke on June 10, 2012 at 9:04 PM

True, but she did say that any of the Republican candidates would be, IIRC, “infinitely” better than Obama. I think she’s holding out on full support until she gets a couple of reassurances from Mitt. I also sincerely hope that Mitt isn’t trying to keep her away from campaigning for him because he thinks that she’s too “controversial.”

Aardvark on June 10, 2012 at 9:19 PM

Ruling Class dirty little secret……….

Psssssstttt, both parties are political CULTS.

And they BOTH want to grow power and get their lips on the Federal sows’ teats and suck it dry.

THAT is why we NEVER get smaller government.

PappyD61 on June 10, 2012 at 9:20 PM

Buckshot Bill on June 10, 2012 at 9:11 PM

Moreover, the real problem with wind and solar power systems is that you can’t cheaply store electrical energy. Solar panels are really quite cheap today, compared to a few years ago, but deep-cycle lead-acid batteries are now very expensive. Many more recent domestic solar and wind power systems produce a good amount of power cheaply, but can’t store it long-term.

To power an American home for 24 hours you need to generate and store at least 12 kilowatt-hours per day, and most people want a backup supply of power for those times when bad weather means your system doesn’t generate much power.

So, if you live in the Midwest you need at least 3 days worth of power storage, and in the Northeast you want at least 4-5 days worth of storage. That might cost you more than $15,000 by itself, and batteries are fairly high maintenance if you want them to last for more than a few years. Typically, the more batteries you have, the longer they will collectively last. Unfortunately, you can’t just buy a few batteries this year, and add a few more next year. If you do that, you will damage all of your very expensive batteries, and they won’t last very long.

Realistically, solar and wind power will never be economical on a community level until someone devises a means of long-term energy storage that can handle those levels of capacity, something on the order of several dozen megawatt-hours for a small town.

But wind and solar systems might be economical at the domestic level, if a cheap reliable storage system can be found with capacity in the hundred kilowatt-hour range.

My guess is that storage will not be in battery technology, but some variety of advanced-material flywheel, carbon nanotubes perhaps.

Buckshot Bill on June 10, 2012 at 9:23 PM

Not a nickle’s worth of difference between the Pubs and the Dems. It’s time to let the two parties merge, and the tea party needs to form a new party to oppose the two progressive/socialist parties. I want all of you to bookmark this post and in four years if Oromney is elected, I bet you will not see a reduction in the size of the fed. gov’t. EPA regs., spending on entitlements, and Obamacare will be alive and well, unless the Supreme Court strikes it down. Romney will not appoint conservatives to the Supreme Court. Amnesty will be implemented under Oromney and crony capitalism will be flourishing. We need to form a third party or we need to bend over and grab our ankles.

And I am sick of Rove and the Bushes.

they lie on June 10, 2012 at 9:25 PM

Ruling Class dirty little secret……….

Psssssstttt, both parties are political CULTS.

And they BOTH want to grow power and get their lips on the Federal sows’ teats and suck it dry.

THAT is why we NEVER get smaller government.

PappyD61 on June 10, 2012 at 9:20 PM

You better be careful, someone might start calling you an O-bot for not worshiping his Mittness. Oh well, at least they seem to have stopped calling him the new Reagan or accusing us conservatives of being anti-Mormon bigots, like they did when South Carolina voted for Newt.

Buckshot Bill on June 10, 2012 at 9:26 PM

Romney will have no authority as to the outcome of Obamacare other than to sign it into law if it comes to him as president. Don’t you understand that the office of the POTUS is not a monarchy?

Rio Linda Refugee on June 10, 2012 at 8:07 PM

But in order to make Mitt seem at least a little Reaganesque you have to make Obama out to be an amalgam of Lenin and Che and Fidel and Ho Chi Minh and Mao and Stalin and oh my God we have to get rid of him now or the universe will implode !!!!elevntyone!!! Good grief, you ‘bots old and new are such ****ing idiots. Here’s another moron who can’t see his own contradiction.

ddrintn on June 10, 2012 at 9:34 PM

I also sincerely hope that Mitt isn’t trying to keep her away from campaigning for him because he thinks that she’s too “controversial.”

Aardvark on June 10, 2012 at 9:19 PM

Oh, hell no. Team Mitt doesn’t want Palin anywhere around because she’d overshadow Romney.

ddrintn on June 10, 2012 at 9:36 PM

ddrintn on June 10, 2012 at 9:34 PM

Just don’t ever criticize Obama again. You’ve lost those privileges for doing nothing to stop him!

LevinFan on June 10, 2012 at 9:40 PM

Oh, hell no. Team Mitt doesn’t want Palin anywhere around because she’d overshadow Romney.

ddrintn on June 10, 2012 at 9:36 PM

It would be fun to watch Romney have another speech with a crowd of a hundred or so, then have a joint rally with Palin the same day, and have a few thousand show up.

And there would be a sea of signs saying Palin 2016: Even if Mittens Does Beat Obama!

Buckshot Bill on June 10, 2012 at 9:41 PM

Just don’t ever criticize Obama again. You’ve lost those privileges for doing nothing to stop him!

LevinFan on June 10, 2012 at 9:40 PM

So have you figured out Romney’s actual environmental policy yet?

Buckshot Bill on June 10, 2012 at 9:43 PM

Just don’t ever criticize Obama again. You’ve lost those privileges for doing nothing to stop him!

LevinFan on June 10, 2012 at 9:40 PM

I just have a little bit of ideological integrity. I voted against Obama in ’08 and will again. If Romney’s elected and governs like a McCain on steroids, be sure not to b1tch and whine about squishiness and the like, OK?

ddrintn on June 10, 2012 at 9:48 PM

No more freaking subsidies.

AshleyTKing on June 10, 2012 at 9:50 PM

I just have a little bit of ideological integrity. I voted against Obama in ’08 and will again. If Romney’s elected and governs like a McCain on steroids, be sure not to b1tch and whine about squishiness and the like, OK?

ddrintn on June 10, 2012 at 9:48 PM

Me too. Write-in, all the way! :)

Buckshot Bill on June 10, 2012 at 9:53 PM

Look, as someone that lives on a Island with these Eyesores, they are useless! You don’t want them. They are the worse form of pollution ever. Read more here.

Kini on June 10, 2012 at 9:54 PM

So Palin leads the politicking Republicans? Yay.

MeatHeadinCA on June 10, 2012 at 9:54 PM

Look, as someone that lives on a Island with these Eyesores, they are useless! You don’t want them. They are the worse form of pollution ever. Read more here.

Kini on June 10, 2012 at 9:54 PM

That is horrible!

tom daschle concerned on June 10, 2012 at 9:58 PM

My guess is that storage will not be in battery technology, but some variety of advanced-material flywheel, carbon nanotubes perhaps.

Buckshot Bill on June 10, 2012 at 9:23 PM

Thank you for the quick review. I appreciate the information!

smylatu on June 10, 2012 at 10:16 PM

Concern trolls talking like they “know” the real truth. LOL, they behave and sound like truthers.

ray on June 10, 2012 at 10:20 PM

Thank you for the quick review. I appreciate the information!

smylatu on June 10, 2012 at 10:16 PM

Glad to help. If you have any more questions about solar or wind power, I’ll try to answer them.

Buckshot Bill on June 10, 2012 at 10:25 PM

3. Aren’t Mormons pretty much anti-war to begin with? I mean, after all Mormon Democrat Senate Leader Harry Reid actively cheered for our defeat in Iraq.

Oh, heavens no. Mormons (like me) are pro American and pro Defense.
We also find Harry Reid to be a major embarrassment to the church.

Mormons,like any sane person, like peace and only support going to war when it is absolutely necessary. I happen to think we needed to go to war and take out Saddam and Afghanistan. I would have preferred different tactics.

The Rock on June 10, 2012 at 10:42 PM

Rove is so yesterday.

Christian Conservative on June 10, 2012 at 10:55 PM

I don’t like Rove, I don’t trust Rove, and I hope he goes away and shuts up. He is another inside the beltway RINO establishment type.
HE IS what is wrong with the Republican party. Git rid of him and those like him who care more about power, than the country, and we’ll be better off.

p51d007 on June 10, 2012 at 11:06 PM

Mr. Rove would you please just take your little white board and your enormous forehead and retire to making lots of money for you and your family and just leave us be? The age of the RINO has passed.

minnesoter on June 10, 2012 at 11:10 PM

Rove often struck me as not necessarily brighter than most, but very slick. This position confirms that impression.

Over50 on June 10, 2012 at 11:19 PM

No we don’t.

john.frank on June 10, 2012 at 11:29 PM

The Karl Rove Republican establishment is no good. Not on small government. Not in immigration. Not on enviro-hoaxes. Not in general.

David Blue on June 10, 2012 at 11:34 PM

Renewal of federal tax credits for wind energy can save U.S. jobs and reduce dependence on foreign oil

Rove is 100% correct if you apply some Clintonesque interpretation to this.

Pretty sure that there will be a remote location on the US where the production cost can be better than the alternative to develop an electrical grid to. And building that at that remote location will result in some jobs and because it will reduce oil with a few gallon, it will reduce dependency.

as always, read the little fine print in those useless statements. Not sure why Rove made this statement but it must have polled good somewhere with someone.

huntingmoose on June 10, 2012 at 11:55 PM

3. Aren’t Mormons pretty much anti-war to begin with? I mean, after all Mormon Democrat Senate Leader Harry Reid actively cheered for our defeat in Iraq.

Oh, heavens no. Mormons (like me) are pro American and pro Defense.
We also find Harry Reid to be a major embarrassment to the church.

Mormons,like any sane person, like peace and only support going to war when it is absolutely necessary. I happen to think we needed to go to war and take out Saddam and Afghanistan. I would have preferred different tactics.

The Rock on June 10, 2012 at 10:42 PM

I’m no expert (not a Mormon, to start with) but isn’t there a specific part of the Book of Mormon that addresses war? As I understand it, their position was and is no different than the Christian one-fight back only when attacked.

Sad to say, our other Hot Gas Poster from Riker’s Island claimed that a President Romney will start wars solely for fun and profit. I had to call him on that.

Factoid-if you go to opensecrets.org, and do a little digging, you will find that in 2008 many Halliburton folks, including a Senior Counsel, donated heavily to O’bama. This came a year after The Missing Koch Brother (Georgie Boy Soros) sunk $61 million into the Industrial War Complex Corporation that Democrats made famous.

Del Dolemonte on June 11, 2012 at 12:17 AM

Factoid-if you go to opensecrets.org, and do a little digging, you will find that in 2008 many Halliburton folks, including a Senior Counsel, donated heavily to O’bama. This came a year after The Missing Koch Brother (Georgie Boy Soros) sunk $61 million into the Industrial War Complex Corporation that Democrats made famous.

Del Dolemonte on June 11, 2012 at 12:17 AM

And this election year, opensecrets.org says that Romney’s top donations are coming from Goldman Sachs employees and PACS, Bank of America, JPMorgan, Morgan Stanley, etc. Romney’s support is coming from the same people that supported Obama in 2008, predominately.

Buckshot Bill on June 11, 2012 at 12:21 AM

Wow, Opensecrets.org also says that only 12% of Romney’s donations are coming from small donors, but Obama’s small donor percentage is around 44%, about the same as Paul, Newt, and Santorum.

If this is accurate, it says a lot about Mitt’s campaign team. It is from last quarter though, so maybe a lot has changed.

It also puts Obama’s cash on hand at over $100 million, and Romney a distant second with around $9 million. That’s interesting.

Buckshot Bill on June 11, 2012 at 12:28 AM

You sound like someone with a clue….I’ve often wondered why wind turbines aren’t placed next to highways/trains to capture the wind generated by large trucks and trains….

Fossil fuels will be running out eventually even with all the new technologies and discoveries…

smylatu on June 10, 2012 at 8:59 PM

There’s a little something I like to call the rule of cubes.

One cubic metre of moving air = enough to push a childs toy boat across a pond.

One cubic metre of oil = enough to drive a truck from New York to Chicago

One cubic metre of uranium or thorium = enough to run New York City for a month.

Denser is always cheaper. And moving air just doesn’t have the density to compete. that’s why it takes a giant 6,000 ton wind turbine to squeeze out even just a piddling fraction of the power output of the smallest nuclear reactors in common use.

When you start getting into big reactors like Palao Verde New Mexico (3,900 MW) or Bruce Ontario (7,000 MW) we are in the realm of paving Rhode Island… the whole damn state… just to make up the difference with wind turbines.

Alberta_Patriot on June 11, 2012 at 12:49 AM

So do you agree to NEVER criticize Obama on here again??

You’ve lost those privileges.

LevinFan on June 10, 2012 at 8:17 PM

Just who the flying !@#* do you think you are, that you have the power to “revoke” someone’s criticism “privileges”? Language like that proves to me that not only do you not listen to The Great One (as your name would otherwise imply), but you are just what you accuse those of us who will stand upon our principles in November of being: a moonbat MOBY troll.

Dunedainn on June 11, 2012 at 1:47 AM

Rove is 100% correct if you apply some Clintonesque interpretation to this.

Pretty sure that there will be a remote location on the US where the production cost can be better than the alternative to develop an electrical grid to. And building that at that remote location will result in some jobs and because it will reduce oil with a few gallon, it will reduce dependency.

as always, read the little fine print in those useless statements. Not sure why Rove made this statement but it must have polled good somewhere with someone.

huntingmoose on June 10, 2012 at 11:55 PM

That depends on what the definition of stupid is, since subsidizing wind is just stupid.

Wind energy is only practical for generating government subsidies and overall economic losses, not baseload power. The power density is too low, so the equipment has to be too large.

Small modular nuclear reactors are being developed for remote locations. http://www.gen4energy.com/ is one of several suppliers in this market.

WhatNot on June 11, 2012 at 1:58 AM

Karl Rove is a RINO.

Him, the Bushies, and related ilk have always been RINO.

As with RINOs, he will continue to sell out principle and victory for his own access to the Beltway. Despite that they will never, ever fully accept him.

This is why we fight.

smiley on June 11, 2012 at 2:09 AM

When you start getting into big reactors like Palao Verde New Mexico (3,900 MW) or Bruce Ontario (7,000 MW) we are in the realm of paving Rhode Island… the whole damn state… just to make up the difference with wind turbines.

Alberta_Patriot on June 11, 2012 at 12:49 AM

Agreed, except Palo Verde is in Arizona, all three reactors at the largest generating station in the country.

That depends on what the definition of stupid is, since subsidizing wind is just stupid.

Wind energy is only practical for generating government subsidies and overall economic losses, not baseload power. The power density is too low, so the equipment has to be too large.

Small modular nuclear reactors are being developed for remote locations. http://www.gen4energy.com/ is one of several suppliers in this market.

WhatNot on June 11, 2012 at 1:58 AM

Exactly, the energy density is just too damn low. I’ve worked on massive solar projects, and the amount of land used, not to mention the amount of water and energy in the manufacturing process is staggering in comparison to the number of homes that will actually receive delivered power. One project will require 3 years to build, 30+ years to pay for itself at less than 28% efficiency, and will serve a grand total of 2,500 homes while taking 640 acres of formerly public recreation ground and permanently removing it from public access.

Difficultas_Est_Imperium on June 11, 2012 at 2:20 AM

It’s 100% scam, with Texas billionaire T. Boone Pickens among the leading proponents, which might explain Rove’s connection.

When all costs of producing and installing wind farms are figured, they are neither economically viable nor environmentally beneficial. Same thing with solar. Total boondoggles to abscond with taxpayer subsidies.

Adjoran on June 11, 2012 at 2:36 AM

The latest eyesore from the lovely land of wind turbines I have experienced in the Tehachapi area of SOCAL. Here’s a story from the LA Times about them. They only tickle on a new problem.

The newest batch of wind turbines in the area have very prominent flashing red lights – probably for aviation anti-collision is my guess – and they all flash in synch.

You can see the flashing red sea of lights from about 30 miles away, in synch, all of them. There are about 300 so far, I’d guess. I can’t imagine what it is to live within 5 miles of these.

They are hideous. Worse than the daytime eyesore.

I can’t wait for Cape Cod to get theirs.

Jimmy Doolittle on June 11, 2012 at 3:05 AM

When all costs of producing and installing wind farms are figured, they are neither economically viable nor environmentally beneficial. Same thing with solar. Total boondoggles to abscond with taxpayer subsidies.

Adjoran on June 11, 2012 at 2:36 AM

Go out to West Texas and you’ll see tens of thousands of windmills …

On oil drilling property.

My guess? Oil companies using the tax subsidies from wind to augment profits. In any case – the subsidies are being abused.

Tokyo Rove and Megan McCain control this party now – and the GOP can kiss my ass.

HondaV65 on June 11, 2012 at 5:04 AM

Tokyo Rove and Megan McCain control this party now – and the GOP can kiss my ass.

HondaV65 on June 11, 2012 at 5:04 AM

Considering that you, like ddrintn, said that Hilary Rosen would win the War on Women against the Romneys, haven’t you used up all of your credibility already?

Toxic, humorless, moronic, know-it-all pontificators like you never learn their lessons properly, do they? LOL :)

Bizarro No. 1 on June 11, 2012 at 6:07 AM

It’s 100% scam, with Texas billionaire T. Boone Pickens among the leading proponents, which might explain Rove’s connection.

When all costs of producing and installing wind farms are figured, they are neither economically viable nor environmentally beneficial. Same thing with solar. Total boondoggles to abscond with taxpayer subsidies.

Adjoran on June 11, 2012 at 2:36 AM

Rove sounds to me like he’s channeling Pawlenty from a few years back, to his detriment.

T. Boone Pickens, from an article 2 months ago at HA: “I’m in the wind business…I’ve lost my @ss in the business.”

T. Boone is not exactly on the wind power bandwagon at the moment lol

Bizarro No. 1 on June 11, 2012 at 6:19 AM

The law of subsidies: if you subsidize something it goes up in price, down in quantity and quality.

The only counter-argument is in agriculture, and that is now a federal polyglot of price supports because we do not allow competition to weed out the unfit actors and encroach upon Big Ag. You and I would have a lower tax bill and a competitive market for food without federal ‘help’, which might but massive agribusiness at peril from small and nimble competitors who can’t get in on the gravy train from DC.

Solar and wind power have been the ‘energy sources of the future’ for over 30 years and subsidized by tax kickbacks, subsidies and price supports and they still can’t compete. Karl Rove can go take a hike – subsidies are what you apply to something you want to hurt not help.

The sources of power for the future are: nuclear fission, nuclear fusion and space based solar. If you are an ‘environmentalist’ you want these sources to expand like all get-out. Space based solar becomes very economical with an orbiting factory system and lunar mining operation, the latter probably done by automated systems at this point. Square kilometers of space are available for harvesting energy and changing it to diffuse microwaves to be beamed to earth-based rectenna arrays which could have crops growing under them as the arrays are spread out far enough to allow sunlight to the surface. Those arrays would get the equivalent of 2x the amount of sunlight per given area 24 hours a day, unvarying and constant. Plus you get the two-fer of moving heavy industry off planet, as well, which also protects the environment. All that lunar mining also protects the environment. Ditto using asteroids pulled into orbit for mining.

Don’t subsidize this stuff. Put up prize awards and guarantee purchase contracts of space based solar power to incentivize space industry to get its butt in gear. Do the same with gen 3 and 4 reactors, push a close examination of e-stat fusion as well. Some nice awards for room temp. super-conductors and super-conductive transmission lines and storage facilities would be a huge help in distributing energy and revolutionize the world of electronics. Prize awards for temp and stability goals, awards for miles of superconductive wire that takes known amounts of power at certain densities continuously, electrical storage densities to create passive storage systems to help the grid with power during peak periods that can be recharged over night….

The prize award systems helped with aviation and the airmail contracts got us safe, reliable and plentiful aircraft. The government didn’t create that industry, the industry grew to get contracts and then expanded beyond those… way beyond those. The X-Prize system works as does the DARPA Challenge Prize system. Cash money to reach goals that are above and beyond what can be done, not subsidizing what is known and killing off development and competition is the answer. You really want something to work to known quantities that just might be able to be done but no one has spent hard time to figure it out? Rewards with set goals does it. Subsidies to cronies does not.

Go away, Karl. What you want has screwed up the system no end by turning it INTO a system. You aren’t leading, you aren’t following so now is the time to get out of the way.

Oh, noticed the thing on Mormons and warfare.

One name.

John Moses Browning.

Why Mormons don’t hold a week of celebrations featuring his works and holding contests I will never, ever figure out.

ajacksonian on June 11, 2012 at 7:21 AM

Richard Nixon didn’t do as much to damage the GOP and conservative movement as has K. Rove and his former boss. When will people finally realize this? DD

Darvin Dowdy on June 11, 2012 at 7:57 AM

now and always…NOMITTNOBAMA 2012! [IF you love America.]

Pragmatic on June 11, 2012 at 8:21 AM

If you can put up a wind farm, produce useful power and make money doing so, then God bless.

If you bankrupt the coal producers and generators, wind will be profitable. Your bill will triple. But wind will be profitable.

Karl Rove…..I trust Dick Morris a lot more than this guy. Even the last couple of years of the GWB administration this guy would get airtime and spout….and I would always have to change the channel – couldn’t take his ridiculous drivel.

oldroy on June 11, 2012 at 8:33 AM

Considering that you, like ddrintn, said that Hilary Rosen would win the War on Women against the Romneys, haven’t you used up all of your credibility already?

Toxic, humorless, moronic, know-it-all pontificators like you never learn their lessons properly, do they? LOL :)

Bizarro No. 1 on June 11, 2012 at 6:07 AM

So, did Hilary Rosen lose her job? I haven’t seen Ann Romney anywhere lately. How many points did it gain Romney in those precious polls?

ddrintn on June 11, 2012 at 8:33 AM

Follow the money. It was the same with ethonol. You know these politicians have money invested when they endorse government subsidies.

lea on June 11, 2012 at 8:34 AM

“We’ve got a growing economy that’s increasing energy consumption and wind energy should be part of the solution,” Rove said today on a panel at a wind conference in Atlanta. Extending the so-called production tax credit “should be a priority.”

I think that quote explains everything. He was paid to be there by the wind-power lobby. Of course he is going to tell them what they want to hear. Rove isn’t part of any GOP team anymore. He’s not on any campaign and not part of the “in crowd” any longer. He is a lobbyist at best.

Let’s not worry too much about what he says. And, let’s not forget, Karl Rove was never a conservative. He was and is always a republican. He leans right, but is no solid, rock-ribbed conservative. He never was and never will be. He is old-school establishment.

Monkeytoe on June 11, 2012 at 8:40 AM

Monkeytoe on June 11, 2012 at 8:40 AM

To take it a step further, Karl Rove is a political guy. He likes playing the game of politics, but he is not ideological. Everything I have read about him points to this. Such people can be useful in terms of the tactics and strategy to win elections, but we can’t look to them for policy.

Monkeytoe on June 11, 2012 at 8:43 AM

Rove isn’t part of any GOP team anymore. He’s not on any campaign and not part of the “in crowd” any longer. He is a lobbyist at best.

Let’s not worry too much about what he says. And, let’s not forget, Karl Rove was never a conservative. He was and is always a republican. He leans right, but is no solid, rock-ribbed conservative. He never was and never will be. He is old-school establishment.

Monkeytoe on June 11, 2012 at 8:40 AM

Oh, come on. It’s not like Rove has wandered off the GOP reservation and gone rogue. Rove is GOP all the way. He’s a good reflection of the GOP establishment, and has been acceptably pro-Romney.

ddrintn on June 11, 2012 at 8:47 AM

So, did Hilary Rosen lose her job? I haven’t seen Ann Romney anywhere lately. How many points did it gain Romney in those precious polls?

ddrintn on June 11, 2012 at 8:33 AM

Now the criteria for winning is whether or not Rosen lost her job? LOL talk about goalpost-moving!

Considering that it never hurt Mitt, and that he’s been steadily closing the gap between himself and 0bamessiah with regards to women since then, how does it make any sense to say that Rosen won that war?

It’s hard to for some people to admit defeat, isn’t it? You don’t know just how funny you and HondaV65 look to the rest of us as you obliviously run around with your dunce caps on while calling us stupid, do you? :)

Bizarro No. 1 on June 11, 2012 at 8:52 AM

To take it a step further, Karl Rove is a political guy. He likes playing the game of politics, but he is not ideological. Everything I have read about him points to this. Such people can be useful in terms of the tactics and strategy to win elections, but we can’t look to them for policy.

Monkeytoe on June 11, 2012 at 8:43 AM

I don’t completely agree with this – I’ve listened to Rove quite a bit, and I think He’s more of a Conservative than you give him credit for – he’s not like Charley Crist, for instance (Rove was one of the first people on the Right to support Rubio against him.)

Obviously, he’s not a perfectly consistent Conservative, but, who in the political world on the Right can you name as being one?

Bizarro No. 1 on June 11, 2012 at 9:04 AM

Now the criteria for winning is whether or not Rosen lost her job? LOL talk about goalpost-moving!

Bizarro No. 1 on June 11, 2012 at 8:52 AM

All the phony outrage was a waste of time and energy, an effort to help out a weak candidate with the only weapons at hand. It was as much a waste as all the dog-eating tomfoolery. Any such waste is a victory for Rosen or Obama or whoever. Romney is still trailing Obama overall even with all these bad bad baaaaaaaaad things.

Obviously, he’s not a perfectly consistent Conservative, but, who in the political world on the Right can you name as being one?

Bizarro No. 1 on June 11, 2012 at 9:04 AM

Rove talks a good game, like Romney. But where the rubber hits the road…

I can name lots of excellent rhetorical conservatives.

ddrintn on June 11, 2012 at 9:17 AM

Nobody is saying we can’t have wind energy, but the development phase of this technology should be over by now. If you can put up a wind farm, produce useful power and make money doing so, then God bless.

A big reason the development phase is not over, particularly for offshore wind, is foot dragging by the federal government. Big shocker, I know. But Department of The Interior is slow playing the process of leasing offshore tracts. And EPA (yes, another big shocker) has tons of onerous regulations and permitting processes that make installing offshore turbines a much more lengthy and costly process than it need be.

Thanks, Ken Salazar. Thanks Lisa Jackson. Big heroes of clean energy with your foot dragging and NEPA bullcrap.

dczombie on June 11, 2012 at 9:25 AM

Yeah, right – there are still a few bats and birds left in the sky, let’s keep those lib-meat-grinders chopping away. WIND energy is just another make-work, false, liberal industry – not cost effective, and completely unnecessary – without tax dollars, the wind industry would not exist.

Pork-Chop on June 11, 2012 at 9:28 AM

My guess is that storage will not be in battery technology, but some variety of advanced-material flywheel, carbon nanotubes perhaps.

Buckshot Bill on June 10, 2012 at 9:23 PM

.
Thank you for the quick review. I appreciate the information!

smylatu on June 10, 2012 at 10:16 PM

.
I agree. Our current battery technology is NOT conducive to the degree of mass storage that would be required.

I’ll admit I’m not familiar with either of the two “potential replacements” you’ve identified there.

With our current technology, I believe electrical power generation is most efficiently produced by nuclear power.

listens2glenn on June 11, 2012 at 9:37 AM

Not a nickle’s worth of difference between the Pubs and the Dems. It’s time to let the two parties merge, and the tea party needs to form a new party to oppose the two progressive/socialist parties. I want all of you to bookmark this post and in four years if Oromney is elected, I bet you will not see a reduction in the size of the fed. gov’t. EPA regs., spending on entitlements, and Obamacare will be alive and well, unless the Supreme Court strikes it down. Romney will not appoint conservatives to the Supreme Court. Amnesty will be implemented under Oromney and crony capitalism will be flourishing. We need to form a third party or we need to bend over and grab our ankles.

And I am sick of Rove and the Bushes.

they lie on June 10, 2012 at 9:25 PM

Now there’s a happy little fellow. Mixing up some Koolaid for you and the missus, are you?

applebutter on June 11, 2012 at 9:58 AM

All the phony outrage was a waste of time and energy, an effort to help out a weak candidate with the only weapons at hand. It was as much a waste as all the dog-eating tomfoolery. Any such waste is a victory for Rosen or Obama or whoever. Romney is still trailing Obama overall even with all these bad bad baaaaaaaaad things.

You’re too stupid to stay on point and directly address all of the nonsensical and idiotic comments you’ve made about Hilary Rosen vs. the Romneys because it’s impossible for you to humbly admit when you’ve been wrong, and thus your only value here in this discussion is cheap entertainment! :)

Rove talks a good game, like Romney. But where the rubber hits the road…

I can name lots of excellent rhetorical conservatives.

ddrintn on June 11, 2012 at 9:17 AM

LOL “rhetorical conservatives” – boy, that’s persuasive! Don’t you recall me asking monkeytoe to name a “perfectly consistent” Conservative? )

For all of Rove’s faults, at least I know he’s not afraid to say exactly what’s on his mind, unlike some of the “rhetorical conservatives” (ROFL!) you‘re referencing…

Bizarro No. 1 on June 11, 2012 at 10:13 AM

I don’t completely agree with this – I’ve listened to Rove quite a bit, and I think He’s more of a Conservative than you give him credit for – he’s not like Charley Crist, for instance (Rove was one of the first people on the Right to support Rubio against him.)

Obviously, he’s not a perfectly consistent Conservative, but, who in the political world on the Right can you name as being one?

Bizarro No. 1 on June 11, 2012 at 9:04 AM

Perhaps. I would say that Rove puts winning ahead of conservatism every time. In other words, if it required adopting a truly bad liberal policy to win (a la, cap and trade, or wind power subsidies), he would be all in.

Now, to some extent one can argue that without winning, conservatism can’t make any advances. Of course that is true. But, it also depends on what compromises are made. I think Rove is a little too flexible in that arena. His natural instincts might be to the right, but he is, after all, the guy behind the guy who gave us massive new spending, NCLB, Medicare Part D, attempts at amnesty and Harriet Meiers. And, I think he would have been more than happy to see W go even farther left if W could have gotten away with it (i.e., if the base didn’t revolt).

I appreciate Karl Rove for what he is and am glad he is generally on our team (meaning GOP). But, I don’t mistake him for someone that is really that strongly behind conservatism.

Monkeytoe on June 11, 2012 at 10:26 AM

so you really think there’s no difference between ROmney and Obama on environmental policy??

LevinFan on June 10, 2012 at 8:31 PM

What is Romney’s actual environmental policy? He supports cap and trade, but lies about it. He supports AGW, but then back tracks on the issue. He’s opposed to coal power because it’s too dirty and kills people, but then he lies about his record on coal. He supports subsidizing solar, wind, and ethanol industries, and sometimes pretends he doesn’t, depending on who he’s talking to. So, what is Romney’s actual environmental policy?

Buckshot Bill on June 10, 2012 at 8:38 PM

One big difference.

Romney actually got Cap and Trade into law where Obama failed.

Makes no difference if we do Coal as China is adding so much so dirty that ours would do nothing. Besides the current Coal Plants are so clean that the EPA has to set standards so stupid that Human Breath would set off alarms if it came from a Coal Plant.

Coal is the biggest contributor to the Electricity that we use.

I know a lot about Wind Power my Brother in Law won an award teaching it. It is far more costly and very unreliable. Wind does not blow no power wind blows too hard no power. What are we supposed to do when it is not on? Gas and Coal plants take a long time to start. So you only get 5% or less of the power from Wind unless you have a system that only turns things on when the wind blows.

Steveangell on June 11, 2012 at 10:29 AM

Obamney 2012! The choice is yours….BwaaHaaaaHaa

dom89031 on June 11, 2012 at 10:38 AM

Next from Obama,”even Karl Rove supports Dutch windmills.” The remark will be used by leftists and Rove will stll be held in contempt by them.

arand on June 11, 2012 at 10:48 AM

The obvious question is . . . who benefits from the wind subsidies? And, which of Karl Rove’s contributers is high up on the wind farm food chain? Please, we don’t need the Republican version of Solyndra!

joecollins on June 11, 2012 at 10:48 AM

Rove has always been a progressive. I guess I’m more surprised that this shocks anybody

Redglen on June 11, 2012 at 11:04 AM

Eh, Rove is dead to me.

neyney on June 11, 2012 at 11:24 AM

By the way, the last place Romney will ever put Sarah Palin is in his Department of Energy. Romney is probably as much in on the Green Energy/Carbon Trading scam as Karl is. It wouldn’t surprise me one bit if he were.

This much I do know: someone is paying Karl off, big time. And the Bushies are in the background somewhere, somehow.

What Palin is going to be doing over the summer in regard to energy issues should be interesting to watch on the Right. I think she’s probably decided to try and keep Romney honest.

Not that it will work. Romney isn’t a conservative.

victor82 on June 10, 2012 at 8:44 PM

I don’t think Palin would take ANY position offered her in a “Romney administration”….they loathe each other.

Palin would have to verbally and actually follow whatever Romney’s “energy plan” would be….it’s not like Palin could initiate her own plan. Who knows what Romney’s energy plan is, let alone think that his plan wouldn’t change by the time he gets in office.

Nope….Palin will run far away from any “Romney administration” offer.

tencole on June 11, 2012 at 11:28 AM

The obvious question is . . . who benefits from the wind subsidies? And, which of Karl Rove’s contributers is high up on the wind farm food chain? Please, we don’t need the Republican version of Solyndra!

joecollins on June 11, 2012 at 10:48 AM

Ding, ding, ding…that’s a winner folks.
But we’ll probably never know, since neither Rove OR Mitt is publishing who their “contributers” are.

tencole on June 11, 2012 at 11:30 AM

Funny,

I don’t see the word “subsidy” coming out of Rove’s mouth.

Tax Credits aren’t “subsidies”

Tax Credits let you keep money you’ve already earned. Subsidies are money over and above what you’ve earned, or a replacement for what you may have lost.

Rove is absolutely correct.

franksalterego on June 11, 2012 at 11:45 AM

Karl Rove = part of the problem

dom89031 on June 11, 2012 at 1:14 PM

Rove is testing the number of times someone can be dead to me.

ConservativeLA on June 11, 2012 at 3:05 PM

Not that it will work. Romney isn’t a conservative.

victor82 on June 10, 2012 at 8:44 PM

Spot on, yet the RomBots haven’t a clue as they believe everything they read from the RomneyGanda group.

Palin would have to verbally and actually follow whatever Romney’s “energy plan” would be….it’s not like Palin could initiate her own plan.

tencole on June 11, 2012 at 11:28 AM

Sarah has her own plan. I’m certain she would remain quite vocal about it.

DannoJyd on June 11, 2012 at 3:48 PM

I can handle my enemies. It’s my goddamn stupid on the take friends who are the trouble.

Rove, fade into the sunset you full of shit has been.

papertiger on June 11, 2012 at 4:13 PM

Why with the economy in the cellar do we need any subsidies? The tobacco subsidies for example. We have a parasitic Europe as a subsidy but our government will not call it that but I will.

mixplix on June 11, 2012 at 7:37 PM

Gee, Rove is a whore.
Who knew?

W ruined the Republican brand with his insane spending, compassionate conservative crapola and hooked-in politicos like Karl Rove.

TexasJew on June 11, 2012 at 8:02 PM

franksalterego on June 11, 2012 at 11:45 AM

You must have been a Boy Scout, because you sure are good at tying yourself into knots!

Dunedainn on June 11, 2012 at 9:24 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3