More Conversation with the Pro-Nuke, Anti-Wind People: It’s Not a Particularly Intelligent Discussion, But At Least It’s Short

Another fellow from the pro-nuclear energy group writes more on his “anti-wind” viewpoints:

I crunched a lot of numbers relating to the Budischak & Kempton 2013 study of cost minimization using wind, solar and storage technologies, which study was well received by renewables advocates.  My number-crunching came to a startling conclusion about land use:  To supply the entire USA electric grid with 99.9% up-time, using the recommended Budischak & Kempton overbuild strategy, would cover ALL of Pennsylvania, Virginia, and Ohio with wind & solar farms.

You should understand that no one who knows anything about the subject whatsoever would advocate trying to supply the entire U.S. electrical grid with 99.9% up-time using nothing but wind and solar energy, any more than they would try to feed all 317 million Americans with nothing but lobster tails.  Your “number crunching” has no bearing on anything real or practical.

Wind contributed 4.18% to the U.S. grid-mix (solar about 0.23%) in 2013, displacing over 500 billion pounds of CO2.  That’s a very, very good thing.  You’d be wise (and appear wise) simply to accept that.

Why are you and the other so-called “scientists” in your group trying so hard to invalidate the concept of wind–especially in such a childish way?