State of Delusion: Push to Kill-Off Arizona’s Nuclear Plant & Go 50% Wind & Solar

Arizona’s full-time power plant: Palo Verde.


Believing that wind and solar can power your economy means sacrificing our good friends, logic and reason. It also demands ignorance of the most basic of facts: eg, sunset and calm weather.

The inevitable consequence of those daily occurrences on wind and solar power generation ought to be apparent to all but those suffering from some organic, mental defect.

Alas, like drooling and plodding zombies, there are enough deluded zealots on the prowl to put the frighteners on anyone with even the vaguest interest in maintaining reliable and affordable power supplies.

The latest outbreak of renewables mania has just struck in the desert State of Arizona.

Being ‘green’ is easy, ignore facts
Mesquite Local News
Thomas Mitchell
7 June 2018

If you thought the “green movement” was more about self-righteous politics than clear-headed science, here are two tales that prove the point.

In Arizona a petition is being circulated in an effort to get on the ballot an initiative called the Clean Energy for a Healthy Arizona Amendment. This would require 50 percent of the electricity generated in the state to come from renewable sources by 2030.

The petition states: “The Amendment defines renewable energy sources to include solar, wind, small-scale hydropower, and other sources that are replaced rapidly by a natural, ongoing process (excluding nuclear or fossil fuel). Distributed renewable energy sources, like rooftop solar, must comprise at least 10% of utilities’ annual retail sales of electricity by 2030.”

To get on the November ballot petitioners must gather nearly 226,000 signatures by July 5.

If the measure passes it would necessitate the closure of the Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station west of Phoenix, which currently provides about 35 percent of the state’s electricity, even though it produces no carbon emissions.

If the state were to achieve the goal of 50 percent of its power coming from mostly solar and wind, both of which are intermittent, there would be no room on the grid for Palo Verde’s power, because reactors can’t be quickly turned off and on — it takes weeks of preparation.

“We would have to shut Palo Verde down during the day every day,” one plant official was quoted as saying by Cronkite News. “But that’s not how nuclear plants really work. Nuclear plants can’t just be shut down and then started up again.”

The most likely source of rapid start-up generation would be natural gas, which produces carbon emissions, especially when frequently idling.

Adding wind and solar to the power grid could increase the carbon dioxide output.

Retired electrical engineer Kent Hawkins wrote in February 2010 that “the introduction of wind power into an electricity system increases the fossil fuel consumption and CO2 emissions beyond levels that would have occurred using efficient gas plants alone as the providers of electricity equivalent to the firmed wind.”

This is because every kilowatt-hour of intermittent electricity introduced into the grid must be backed up by a reliable fossil-fuel generator. When the wind doesn’t blow and the sun doesn’t shine, the demand for electricity remains.

Starting and stopping natural gas-fired generators is inefficient, comparable to operating a car in stop and go traffic instead of steady and efficient on the open highway. Just like the car, the fuel consumption can double, along with the carbon emissions, negating any presumed carbon savings by using solar or wind.

Opponents of the measure say it will drive up power bills in the state. Proponents argue long-term benefits of solar power and reducing nuclear waste offset any immediate cost spike.

Meanwhile, in New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo has announced plans to build $6 billion worth of offshore wind turbines while shutting down the nuclear-powered, emission-free Indian Point Energy Center in Buchanan, N.Y.

Robert Bryce, a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute, explained in an op-ed in The Wall Street Journal that the wind turbines will produce only 60 percent as much power as the nuclear plant being closed.

How will this gap be covered? You guessed it, natural gas.

“The irony here is colossal. Mr. Cuomo, who banned hydraulic fracturing despite the economic boon it has created in neighboring Pennsylvania, and who has repeatedly blocked construction of pipelines, is making New York even more dependent on natural gas, which will increase its carbon emissions,” Bryce writes. “At the same time, he has mandated offshore wind projects that will force New Yorkers to pay more for their electricity, even though the state already has some of the nation’s highest electricity prices.”

This past week NV Energy announced plans to contract to build six new solar power projects at a cost of $2 billion and double the state’s renewable energy capacity, but only if voters reject the Energy Choice Initiative on the November ballot that would end the company’s monopoly in most of the state and allow competition. No mention was made of how this might impact power bills.

In all three states emissions would likely increase, as well as power bills.

Being green is a state of mind. Just never let the facts get in the way.
Mesquite Local News

About stopthesethings

We are a group of citizens concerned about the rapid spread of industrial wind power generation installations across Australia.


  1. Marshall Rosenthal says:

    This is indeed a battle between a proven source of energy, nuclear power generation, that has had its own great problems, and a toy source of energy, wind and solar, that threatens to put us out of business, entirely. The Green interests have single-mindedly striven to “win the hearts and minds” of the vast majority of people in this world, a tribute to the success of their propaganda effort, while a few engineers, medical doctors, people who DO science, commentators who know what time it is, have been trying to warn the public of the Grand Folly. It’s really a “crap shoot” as to whether we return to the type of society that used candles, whale oil, and wood to keep warm, or be a society that can flip a switch and turn on the lights. Whatever what one tries to say about this, they will be attacked. We all know how great civilizations fell into the Dark Ages. We have entered our Dumb Age. I do not want my civilization to fall.

  2. Son of a goat says:

    The mind boggles, at 8:55pm EST we in South Australia are paying 3 times the wholesale price of electricity then any other state.

    The states demand is about 2200MW there is of course no solar generation and sweet f-all coming from wind.

    Gas provides about 1500 MW and the remaining 700 MW is via the Heywood and Murraylink interconnectors….. coal generation!

    It will be the same scenario tomorrow morning and probably for the rest of the week with a dominant high pressure cell and associated calm conditions.

    I’m not sure what else STT and others can do to infiltrate the deluded mind of Frydenberg.

    I find it nothing short of staggering that this week he has come out and stated that under the NEG, in times of high demand, large end users such as the smelters will have to sure up their own energy supplies.

    If the NEG is to pass through parliament it would be a dogs breakfast of a policy.

    It will be complicated and it will require fossil fuels to back up renewable new builds and power prices will continue to escalate.

    Frydenberg will go down as the politician who shot Australia in the foot.

    Unfortunately he has no shame!

  3. Charles Wardrop says:

    These Green, fake, initiatives just must reflect widespread, if short of universal, corruption-back handers and the like-since the case for them, if ever there were one, collapsed years ago.
    Withdrawal of the subsidies is now the only solution to our self-inflicted crazyness.

    • The problem with that, at least here in the UK, is that the nuclear industry has also got used to having its snout in the subsidy trough in various ways, and now that spotlights are being shone into the recesses of the energy business with consequent calls for removing the subsidies, it’s proving less agile in extracting it, probably due to the technology’s longer time scales.

  4. Crispin says:

    This is now a fight between nuclear energy and renewables.

    If nuclear wins, there will be no need for renewables. They will be rendered superfluous.

  5. Terry Conn says:

    The only comforting thought to this US based insanity is that not all of the world’s nutters live in Australia.

Leave a Reply

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

You are commenting using your 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 )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: