A “Power Hungry” book review surprise – the AWEA and Jon Boone disagree.

In an earlier post we suggested that a wide gap remains between folks touting industrial wind as an efficient, reliable and cost-effective solution to our growing energy needs and folks happy to explain Why Wind Won’t Work.

The two recent reviews of Robert Bryce’s Power Hungry – The Myths of “Green” Energy and the Real Fuels of the Future” we offer here are certainly representative of the ongoing debate and, we feel, well worth your time.

First, Jon Boone of Stop Ill Wind provided this assessment of “Power Hungry” in his March 28, 2010 review.  We provide the full text here for your convenience:

Second, from the AWEA (American Wind Energy Association) web site:  A critique of “Power Hungry” from the AWEA’s Michael Goggin. The full text is provided for your convenience:

We provide this post and the many links on this site to stimulate you interest in further questioning industrial wind as a key element of our energy future.  The costs are very high and you should be sure you are getting your money’s worth.  After all, your money is subsidizing renewable energy initiatives either through taxes or electricity rates.  Make sure your elected officials are acting in your best interest when deciding how your money is to be invested.  Remember, there is no such thing as a free lunch!

AT Note:  We make every effort to be accurate.  We encourage your comments and suggestions.  Please report any “dead” links, errors or omissions in the comment section.

This entry was posted in Jon Boone, Robert Bryce and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to A “Power Hungry” book review surprise – the AWEA and Jon Boone disagree.

  1. Sean Holt says:

    In order for one to support “alternative energy” especially
    the wind variety, one MUST be either very stupid or very greedy.

    The latter definitely applies to AWEA!

    There “facts” when scrutinized even a little turn out to be fantasy! According to the International Energy Agency, Demark has managed to reduce her coal consumption a paltry 1.54% and her CO2 emissions only one tenth of one percent after twenty years of trying. As for economic benefit, ask Spain how it has worked out for them!
    The observant among you will note that although opponents of alternative energy are compelled to provide scientific references to back their assertions,
    proponents rarely do?

    Too bad it is my money being stolen to subsidize that stupidity and greed!

    Sean Holt.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s