Huh. Sounds just like Massachusetts' experiment in wind power:
This isn’t advancement.
It’s an explicit statement that a lot of people think the German power grid won’t be able to keep the lights on in a few years.
Thanks to intelligent controls and network connections, large quantities of electricity could be fed into the public grid, thereby offsetting fluctuating energy volumes from renewable energy sources such as wind and sun.
Translation: Alternative energy is too unreliable to actually provide baseline power, so we’re going to need millions of fossil-fuel backup generators scattered everywhere to take up the slack. We’re going to use millions of relatively inefficient petroleum-burning generators so that we don’t have to build nuclear plants.
The idea of tying all the backup generators together in a network so that the generators can kick on before the grid goes down is a good idea but its just an evolution of the current system. The system is still just a bunch of fossil-fuel backup generators.
The end result of this system will be an increased consumption of liquid and gas fossil fuels as well as increased consumption of fossil fuels per watt produced. It will produce significantly more CO2 per watt than do large-scale fossil fuel plants and way, way more than nukes.
Welcome to the alternative energy future: unreliable, intermittent power at more than twice the price of traditional generation.When you dress the "Progressive" agenda up in the white lab coats of the scientists, it's still agenda. Badly designed, poorly thought out, unreliable and expensive, and which generates more pollution than how things are done today. But it advances the control of the Progressives over society. It's about power all right, just not the sort that comes out of the outlet.
Can all the lefties please just shut up about the "Republican War on Science" now?