The great swindle of the wind turbine (Michel Gay) France

The great swindle of the wind turbine

By Michel Gay On February 6, 2014

Ruinous for the nation, but extremely profitable for many special interests, disastrous to the trade balance, not even capable of reducing CO2 emissions and generally built on falsehoods, the massive expansion of wind power, including in France , is a resounding scandal.

It is not unusual that the combination of industrial interests, astute businessmen, even simple crooks, reaches to gain large-scale products perfectly useless, often with a wealth of inventiveness, opportunism and organization. It is not trivial, however, that on behalf of the need to reduce fossil fuel consumption and CO2 emissions, the massive installation of wind turbines could be imposed on a continental scale as a major objective. A tour of legerdemain has also allowed to evacuate any consideration of the effectiveness of this operation, as well as any consideration of cost.

In this case, the role of the European Commission was decisive.

This study reveals the excessive weight gain in Brussels by the combination of a powerful lobby of environmental movements (with the active complicity of the mainstream media) and some industrial interests on an issue which is likely to condition for several decades the organization of the production of electricity and lifestyle in Europe.

Today, although the warning signs of a breakup of the "wind bubble" is increasing in the world, the goal of tripling the current installed capacity by 2020 is not yet challenged by the European Commission.

Beyond what might seem like a unusually large wastage, it is now the privileged position of France in the field of electricity generation which is at stake, on behalf of the alleged need for a hazy "energy transition ". The government aims at the removal of a third of nuclear power in France and a massive expansion of wind power. We recall that France produces cheap electricity which uses only 10% of fossil fuels, the rest being mainly supplied by nuclear power ( 75%) and dams ( 12%).

The bubble of wind power in the Western world.

"Renewable energies must prove both their environmental and economic performance insertion. Wind turbines do not cross any of these conditions . "We can't best summarize the situation by this statement, 31 October 2012 , John Hayes, Minister of Industry of Great Britain .

More than twenty years after its appearance in a few pilot countries (Germany , Denmark and Spain ) and after a decade of massive development in other countries, including France , it now has all the return experience necessary.

In Europe, wind power exists only in the massive infusion of aid when he absolutely can not qualify as a new technique that should help launch for a good ten years. For homeowners, wind energy is a particularly profitable operation. Thanks to the law, they sell all their electricity to EDF at the subsidized price of 8.2 câ‚Ź / kWh, while the market price is around 4 to 5 câ‚Ź / kWh. But it still has no intrinsic profitability perspective .

While it was justified by the need to reduce CO2 emissions (or, equivalently, the consumption of fossil fuels), none of the three countries mentioned above has obtained on this significant results.

1

Electricity in Germany and Denmark are among the most expensive in Europe (about double of France). As for Spain, for economic reasons, it was decided in 2012 a moratorium on the subsidies for new facilities which has stopped them.

What definitely restricts interest in wind turbine is its quickly and strongly fluctuating power. Major jolts of electricity involved are not storable and the production does not meet demand.

In a given country, the wind may save fossil fuel if, of course, the share of fossil power generation is important. The wind will then allows to replace a small portion of the heat (up to about 20%, in practice much less) at a price of additional costs and urban sprawl by a proliferation of wind turbines. This fact drives to the disappointing results of three European countries drivers.

If France decreases from its nuclear, power removed will be replaced by fossil-fired and when the wind blows part of the thermal flame will be replaced by wind power. With a resulting "energy mix" not "virtuous" at all. As in the "horse lark pie", we will end up with a horse of thermal and a wind of lark‌ The operating records of wind power generation in Europe1 has also found that, even in the ideal situation where you could globalize all wind generation in Western Europe, smoothing (effect of " abundance ") would not remove its basically fluctuating effect. Nothing significant is to be expected from massive development of networks that would entail. This "unfortunate" study also showed that in Europe there is usually no wind in the high pressure cold periods are also periods of high consumption.

Nothing significant is expected to further technological progress : we are very close to the theoretical yields. No cost reduction is to be expected from scale factor : it has long been in mass production, and the only gains to be expected are those resulting from the relocation of production.

The massive development of wind power in the last decade therefore has all the characteristics of a bubble - a bubble and always ends up dying.

Wind energy in France : a resounding scandal.

As for France , he was certain from the beginning that the wind had not the slightest interest, for the simple reason that there was little heat flame to replace because of the importance of nuclear power.

The very low thermal generation (about 10%) is almost incompressible. It is the minimum to meet the needs of regulating rapid fluctuations in electricity demand.

Worse still, the wind being strongly fluctuating in the short term, it adds the need for regulation that can only increases the appeal of thermal flame. In fact, if a wind turbine produces an average of 23% of its installed capacity, production can vary a few tens of minutes from 0 to 100%, or vice versa, and there is in France obligation to introduce this electricity in the network .

Extensions of the fossil-fired plants and electricity transmission network are also inevitable to allow the flow of electricity from wind power and regulate its fluctuations, all while keeping the same level of security (because the wind adds additional hazards).

The wind is also particularly poor in national permanent jobs, and disastrous for the trade balance.

Investment in wind power, which allows for guaranteed returns of 15 years from 20 to 40 % after tax, is an excellent deal. Such rates also allow opportunely to generate considerable sums for lobbying at all levels (political, media, government , legal assistance , ... ). This line also allows financial actions likely to overcome local reluctances, while allowing developers a substantial profit. With the pleasure of seeing in the local press the commissioning of a wind farm hailed as a gesture to humanity as a bonus.

Yet the 2020 targets for wind turbine of the " Grenelle de l'environnement " 2010, 26 GW , as defined under Directive 2009/28/EC, correspond to more than triple the power already installed (8.1 GW at the end 2013). These objectives are also consistent with Pharaonic a levy on the national wealth that can be evaluated at 67 billion euros, including 12 billion for installations completed before the end of 2012, and 55 billion for facilities after 2012. These costs result from both the wind and the need to build power lines and power plants additional flame.

1

http://www.sauvonsleclimat.org/images/articles/pdf_files/etudes/131120_Flocard_FoisonnementEolienTexte.pdf

2

Yet, even with abroad warning signs of a wind bubble breakup (drastic reductions in overcapacity are in progress in all European manufacturers), there is absolutely no question to change these objectives.

The Green Paper of the European Commission on energy and climate for 2030 (March 2013) does not show any change of heading.

How has it come to this ?

The main reasons are : 1 ) The main weight of the institutional role of the European Commission, which was set in stone, at the initiative of President Sarkozy, by the Treaty of Lisbon. This treaty also removed the veto only thing that could have remained national sovereignty .

Thus the French Parliament has never had, and never will have, to decide on the real opportunity of the wind turbine nor the quantitative targets set by the European Directives : its role is limited to the details of these objectives and to enable their implementation.

An organization such as the Court of Auditors can certainly ask many questions about the wind turbines, but can not call into question the previous points, which severely limits the potential impact of its work.

Arising from EU directives, which are at the top of the hierarchy of texts, the wind turbine was also able to rely on all national and European administrative and judicial machinery (the Court of Justice of the European Union ruling ultimately) to implement despite numerous objections he encountered .

Logically, supporters of the wind continuously refer to these guidelines, as well as all major media .

Besides, how could we simply contest it ? Would it not challenge the competence and objectivity of an organization that has been invested perfectly legal way to determine the mission, depending on the general interest only, major policies of the European Union, which has effectively for of this study with services properly ?

2) The irresponsibility of fact of the Commission, in the absence of two key guardrails that are the feeling of national interest and the prospect of having to account for the populations concerned.

3) The excessive weight that has been able to acquire a combination of powerful environmental lobbies and industrial interests through it.

In particular, with a tour of legerdemain, the relevant directives have made the development of renewable energies development a goal in itself, and the only one to actually take into account. Any consideration relating to the effectiveness with respect to the stated objective was evacuated.

Reducing CO2 emissions is just in fact a pretext. Evacuated also any consideration of cost.

It is at the very heart of the totalitarian mechanism which relies on the scam. Thus, for over a decade, France, which should be shown as an example with respect to these two basic criteria is charged. And Germany, whose performance is catastrophic, is put in a position to give us lessons. It is regularly presented as an example to follow in the way of wind and PV , and France is stigmatized as industrious dunce who would reluctant to reduce its nuclear production.

4) The role of the media. The interests of shareholders and powerful advertisers have only had to use technical ignorance and laziness. Journalists are mainly restricted to relay falsehoods, as huge as they are, issued by the European directives and the producers of renewable energy. There are not only misinformation. The concealment to the public of the real situation of what is not in favor of wind power in the world is almost systematic. For example , who among the readers was informed of the declaration of John Hayes? Who knows that in Spain and in Britain, under the pressure of the crisis, there is a moratorium on new onshore wind installations? Who knows that 14,000 wind turbines currently rust in the USA ? Also bet that if Germany, Denmark and Spain had achieved significant results, we have heard !

5) Obedience (and sometimes complicity ) of the French government, which in any case can not control what happens in Brussels, whose institutional role is limited to the implementation of directives received. He still has the possibility of delay or bury the implementation of what is contrary to the national interest guidelines.

Conclusion : It is clear that there had blockages only at the chain end, at the local level, when it came to finally see

3

people. Successive governments and the two political parties alternately, despite the grumbling of a few members, all voted objectives set in 2001 by the EU. Will they continue to be blind?

And if simply, France, on behalf of his interest and that of Europe, refused to continue the current resulting aberrations coming from European directives infernal trap in which his predecessors have plunged it ?

Bet that the government would have the support of the vast majority of the French population.

People of France, inform your congressmen, senators, ministers, that " there is something rotten in the kingdom of Europe " in the field of the energy policy.

4