Debunking Robert Bryce’s power hungry gusher of lies

[bananas]

http://climateprogress.org/2010/09/14/power-hungry-robert-bryce-debunkin/

Debunking Robert Bryce’s power hungry gusher of lies
September 14, 2010

One could devote a lifetime to debunking Robert Bryce’s new book “Power Hungry.” Fortunately, we have A. Siegel of GetEnergySmartNow! on the job in this repost.

<snip>

Masquerading as an unbiased, fact-based look at America’s energy situation and viable paths forward into the future, Robert Bryce’s Power Hungry is a mixed collection of factual material, thought-provoking constructs, selective ‘truthiness’, questionable (if not simply wrong) data crunching, and outright deceptions. This mix of material makes Bryce’s work dangerous reading for those without a serious grounding in energy (related) issues while that same mix calls into question this work’s value for anyone with that more serious background.

<snip>

A while back, I wrote something about Bryce's previous book:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=115x251126

Gusher of Lies: The Dangerous Delusions of Conservative Idiots

I just came across this book review from 2008:

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/apr/13/energy-independence
...
In "Gusher of Lies: The Dangerous Delusion of 'Energy Independence,'" Mr. Bryce, despite a tendency to reach for the rhetorical sledge- hammer, writes with strength and gusto, and is an equal opportunity attacker.
...
Mr. Bryce also excoriates Greenpeace, World Watch Institue, Amory Lovins, Al Gore and his championing of "the enthanol scam," as well as all the presidential candidates, Nancy Pelosi, the Center for American Progress, Robert Redford (also touting the ethanol scam), Thomas Friedman, and even poor James Carville.
...
By 2030, wind will perhaps provide just over 1 percent of all our electricity, and solar less than that.
...

Wind was generating almost 2% of US electrcity in 2009, one year after the book was published.
How could Robert Bryce get his prediction so wrong so quickly?
The guy must be delusional.

<snip>

[kristopher]

1. Sounds like he collaborates with some of our right-leaning posters here on EE

Bryce asserts that “the average wind turbine has a power density of about 1.2 watts per square meter” . As there are 4000 square meters to an acre, this would mean that an “average” wind turbine would be able to produce, on average, 4800 watts (4.8 kilowatts).

The planning factor for wind turbine placement – the “a “footprint” of land that has to be taken out of production to provide space for turbine towers, roads, and support structures” – is 0.25 acres per wind turbine. (See here for details.) This would mean, according to Bryce’s formulation that an “average” wind turbine produces 1200 watts on a constant basis. Using a somewhat low capacity factor of 0.33, this would mean that an average wind turbine would be rated at 3600 watts (3.6 kilowatts) to meet Bryce’s statement of the “average” wind turbines. Translating this to acreage, this would be 14.4 kw/acre of wind-power capacity. An analysis of 93 wind projects, with some 14 gigawatts (14,000,000 kilowatts) of wind power capacity found “the average permanent direct impact value” of 0.3 hectares per MW of capacity. As an acre is 0.4047 hectares, this translates to roughly 1.33 MW of capacity per acre or nearly 100 times greater than what Bryce’s formulation suggests. Using that 33% (which, again, is low) utilization factor, this translates to about 440 kilowatts per acre or 440 watts per square meter as opposed to Bryce’s assertion of 1.2 watts per square meter.

[bananas]

2. Yes, it does.

edit to add: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=115x260133

[diane in sf]

3. the link doesn't work

[Name removed]

4. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[kristopher]

5. Kick to warn of this rightwing claptrap.