A24 Global Warming: What's Up with Solar and Wind P6

This topic will be covered in two articles. Are wind and solar the future? Are they great salvation of man as prophesied? Let us find out the truth behind the matter.

Cheaper energy, they say. Wind and sunshine are free. However, the more we build the more energy costs seem to rise. Is it really cheaper? Let us check in on Minnesota to see how they are doing:

Wind prices are twice as expensive as natural gas and coal. Looking at solar prices, Minnesota families and businesses will be forced to pay 3.3 times more for this solar electricity than power generated by coal and 4 times more than generated by natural gas. Such prices are the norm, not the exception. Not so cheap, is it? 

Let’s look at the Golden State, the leading player in going green. The average residential electricity rate in the U.S. is 17.24 cents per kilowatt-hour (kWh), and the average home in the U.S. consumes 863 kWh of electricity per month (total of $148.78). California is ranked the second worst at 34.71 ¢/kWh, twice the national average. If you are wondering which state is the worst, that would be Hawaii at 41.62 ¢/kW. Those islands are a special paradise, but no one is looking there for a cheap future.

Now for business rates, the average business consumes 6,207 kWh per month at a rate of 13.63 ¢/kWh (total of $846.01). California again had the second worst 26.92 ¢/kWh, behind Hawaii, at twice the national average. What is also important to note is while the average increase in the U.S. since last year is 7.8%, California’s electricity prices increased at a rate of 16.1%. Not only are its electricity prices twice the national average, but it is increasing twice as fast as the rest of the nation. Therefore, California’s price growth is 4x the national average.

This state is not alone however, for even one like Texas has bent the knee to the renewable takeover of the electricity grid. ERCOT, which manages 90% of Texas’s electricity supply, will have 96% of new projects be renewable, and based on 2026 data about 93% of available electricity generation capacity will be renewable. If such projects continue, Texas’ electricity prices will rise just the same. The danger we face is a national problem, not merely state-specific. 

It is quite obvious that renewable energy is not cheaper, no matter the fancy models these scientists use. Now, let’s see how effective each worker is at producing energy. Based on 2016 data:

It’s even more glaring when you look at the amount of electricity generated per worker. Every coal worker generated an incredible 7,745 megawatt-hours, natural gas 3,812 MWh per worker, wind a measly 836 MWh, and solar an abysmal 98 MWh. Coal workers were 7,800% more productive than solar workers. If efficiency is out the window, we might as well generate power with treadmills to create even more jobs for the energy sector. 

Today, wind and solar power represent about 17% of the nation’s electricity from 6.5% in 2016. If it is so expensive and inefficient, then why have they been put implemented? The answer is subsidies. Let’s take a look.

Energy subsidies from the U.S. government come in three forms: tax expenditures, direct expenditures, and research and development expenditures. Though the proportions vary based on the energy type, the vast majority of federal energy subsidies are in the form of tax expenditures, or tax credits. Ultimately, the taxpayer will bear the burden for all of these. Why do I focus specifically on wind and solar? for renewable subsidies and not something like hydro? Because those two sources captured 94% of the federal renewable electricity-related subsidies in the fiscal year of 2022—a trend that shows no sign of stopping.

To give an example of what we are dealing with, the Energy Policy Act of 2005 established a 30-percent personal tax credit, not to exceed $2,000, for the purchase of solar.

The Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 extended the 30-percent tax credit through 2016 and removed the cap, while also allowing electric utilities to qualify, paving the way for large-scale renewable development.

The 30% credit structure persisted, and the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act significantly expanded these incentives. Under provisions such as Section 48E Clean Electricity Investment Credit, renewable projects became eligible for additional bonus credits that could raise taxpayer support to 50%.

Recent legislative changes have begun to tighten these incentives, however the utility-scale wind and solar facilities—the true tax dollar vacuum—will still be eligible for investment credit if placed in service before the beginning of 2028.  

We will see a tremendous amount of worthless and wasteful building of renewable energy in these next two years that will solely benefit investment groups at the taxpayer expense. Unless vigorous action is taken, energy prices will continue to climb. 

Worse yet, 80% of the installed solar panels are imported from Asian manufacturers, meaning these funds do not even support American companies. We are paying foreigners to raise our energy prices. Is there any policy more suicidal?

Just so you can understand the renewable market on a macroeconomic level, IBISWorld estimated for 2024 that U.S. wind generators will receive $49.7 billion in revenue, with another $19.5 billion flowing to solar generators. At a combined $69.2 billion in industry revenue, that $21 billion in federal subsidies inflates the return on investment by 30% over actual energy sales. In other words, the industry’s profitability is not built on energy—it is built on plundering the taxpayer.

Now let’s look at the comparison of fossil fuel subsidies to those of solar and wind. From 2010 to 2019, renewable energy subsidies were more than double the subsidies for fossil fuels, $74.1 billion to $37.9 billion. Today that gap is widening. From 2020 through 2029, subsidies for renewables are projected to be $244.9 billion compared to $22.5 billion for fossil fuels. 

While federal subsidies for fossil fuels have been slashed by 40%, while renewable subsidies have surged 230%. This disparity is even worse when you consider energy output: fossil fuels provide 83.8% of our total energy, while wind and solar provide a paltry 2.8%. These renewables are subsidized 227x more than fossil fuels per percent of energy production.

Now even the small subsidies for oil, natural gas, and coal turn negative, dramatically, when the previous administration’s anti-fossil-fuel agenda is added, 225 actions worth. To put the cherry on top, many states have greenhouse compliance costs which for the New England states are $6 to $8 per MWh and California a whopping $15 to $20 per MWh.

We are shutting down cheap and reliable coal and natural gas facilities, preventing new ones from being built, pummeling coal mining communities, and sending electricity prices higher and higher. Let’s look at the subsidies which we pay per Megawatt-hour to fund the electricity: 

Now look back at the graph of the prices of Minnesota: 

Even with all the subsidies, the prices we pay are still two to three times higher, yet this is cheap? It is time we stop acting like little children and recognize the hopeless future of renewable energy. For almost 40 years, wind and solar proponents have been lecturing us that the subsidies they rely on are only temporary. How much longer shall we wait, until we stop believing the lies?

The reliability of the U.S. grid is also taking a beating. Renewables can only generate electricity when the sun is shining or the wind is blowing. This intermittent nature of renewables imposes a great burden.

Modern coal or gas-fired power plants use less than 300 acres to generate 600 megawatts 95% of the time. Indiana’s 600-MW Fowler Ridge wind farm covers 50,000 acres and generates electricity about 30% of the year. Solar panels on Nevada’s Nellis Air Force Base generate 15 megawatts of electricity closer to 22% of the year from 140 acres. Getting 600 MW 22% of the time from such panels would require 6,000 acres. Remember those acreage amounts for the next article. 

Because wind and solar power generation is random and intermittent, it must be backed up by reliable coal or gas power plants that actually do 80% of the work. So, we must build both renewable systems and fossil fuel systems. 

Looking again at Texas, over the last 10 years, Texas politicians and regulators have forced consumers and taxpayers to pony up on average about $5.8 billion a year as they try to incentivize new natural gas-fired generation that can come online when renewables fail. Solar and wind will always need fossil fuels. Anyone claiming we can effectively go to 100% electricity generation is just lying.

States however, to keep the green narrative, solve their fossil-fuel energy production problem by just importing what they need. In 2024, California imported 22% of its electricity as well as 93% of its natural gas and 76% of its crude oil.

What is more comical is the oil imports were from the very same countries which are condemned by this green religion. How is it more reliable or less carbon intensive to import the oil than to drill for it right off the coast?

What is true for California, however, is true for our grid as a whole. It is an unreliable mess. We have a few states like Pennsylvania (2% renewable usage for electricity), Alabama (2.8%), and Illinois, (5.3%) that produce enough electricity to outflow to other states.

What do we see? All the states generating electricity are using fossil fuels and nuclear, not renewable energy. On the flip side all the states which have pushed to have a carbon-free grid have become vampires on the system. If nothing changes it will only get worse as Texas wants a 100% renewable grid by 2035, California 2045, Virginia 2050, and many more. We cannot all go green; someone must actually produce the power. At what point will we have had enough of their little games, and condemn these leeches with their fake righteousness, while praising the states which birth us reliable power?

Solar and Wind already look abysmal, and I have yet to get into those myths about them being renewable and green. Where is the science? I am still looking for it. Maybe it's found by following the White Rabbit down the rabbit hole to meet with Tweedledee and Tweedledum before heading off to see the Queen. It certainly isn’t found in the realm of reality. I for one am getting quite tired of their shenanigans and utter mockery of science.

Your Humble and Obedient Servant,

Francisco Pereira

Here we have some more Christianity in the constitution:

This clause comes from Deuteronomy 17:6:

A single person’s testimony is not enough to condemn another for treason. This standard is not to allow the guilty to go free, but to shield the innocent from false condemnation. This principle is also repeated for all common law: 

The perversion of this principle is one of the great sins that currently infected our legal framework. By abandoning this biblical requirement, our modern legal system has traded justice for convenience, allowing the state to weaponize accusation itself as punishment.

For those who enjoyed the last article and wish to read that book that captured the hearts of man and woman alike, a free online version can be found here. Here is a teaser: