“The Icebreaker Windpower project can be seen as entirely moot: there will be no meaningful benefit to Ohio and its citizens. The chimera of jobs and a boosted economy will never become material; the obvious loss to bird and bat life scarcely needs a comment.”

The heat is on for supporters of the six-turbine LEEDCo Icebreaker Windpower project offshore of Cleveland.

A show of “yeas” at the November 8^th public meeting of the Ohio Power Siting Board (OPSB) at Cleveland City Hall failed to make a dent in the logical and passionate opposition. A few dozen supporters at a public meeting is not material for a facility that is uneconomical and environmentally invasive–and unneeded except for a poster child of what was Obama energy policy.

It is surprising that the OPSB has not closed the file on the now called “Icebreaker Windpower.”…

[Editor note: Mark Krebs has been a leading advocate (see here) for free-market decision-making between natural gas and electricity in homes and places of business, challenging the ‘deep decarbonization’ push of energy interventionists to disciminate against fossil fuels at point of use. This is the first of a two-part post.]

“Grid reliability should not eclipse energy reliability; especially during weather emergencies. Yet, much of the discussion looks like more of the same rent-seeking by interests looking for rebuilding damaged electricity infrastructure with inherently unreliable wind and solar generation based ‘microgrids’.”

The House Energy and Commerce Committee is undertaking an in-depth review of the laws and regulations affecting electric energy. Much of that review is through a series of hearing that started last July. The objectives for this series of hearings were officially stated as follows:

Today, the nation’s electricity industry is undergoing a period of transformation due to technological innovation and market competition, creating tremendous benefits to American consumers.

“‘Deregulated’ markets have introduced a mechanism that virtually always selects wind and solar over coal, natural gas, or nuclear power. Whether this was a deliberate effort to favor wind and solar to cut CO₂ emissions to combat global warming is unknown, but the effect of preferential dispatching has been to close fossil fuel power plants, as well as nuclear plants.”

The preferential dispatch system used by many RTO/ISO grid operators favors wind and solar to the exclusion of critical baseload power from fossil fuel and nuclear power plants.

Preferential dispatching is destructive because it results in the closure of fossil fuel and nuclear power plants–the reliable and scale economy energies that form the backbone of the modern electricity grid.

It could also be called discriminatory because it discriminates against baseload power.…

“Big wind’s complaint that the language reneges on a previous deal is entirely unfounded. The so-called ‘deal’  AWEA is trying to preserve … was a backroom negotiation between big wind and Obama-era IRS lawyers to craft guidance that went well beyond the statute. Congress is finally taking corrective action.”

“According to the Joint Committee on Taxation, the GOP bill will save taxpayers $12.3 billion in PTC-subsidies over 2018-2027. … [T]he GOP tax bill is headed in the right direction on wind energy development. But if the goal was to simplify tax legislation, the GOP should go further and repeal the PTC altogether.”

The GOP tax bill dropped last Thursday and it sent shock waves through the wind industry. Turbine makers Vestas and Siemens saw notable declines in stock value and the American Wind Energy Association (AWEA) blasted Republicans for reneging on a “tax reform deal” already in place.…