More NYT Double Talk

Just over a month ago we find an editorial in the good 'ole Grey Lady about T. Boone Pickens and his impressive plan to save this country from itself by augmenting our national power consumption by producing somewhere on the order of 20% of our electricity needs via renewable wind. Today's NYT brings us an article entitled "Wind Energy Bumps Into Power Grid’s Limits." It has always amazed me how the NYT is singularly capable of playing both ends against the middle on any given subject. The electrical grid issue was mentioned in the previous editorial. Certainly the issue of power transmission deserves more attention.

I ask in what fashion should this issue be addressed? If you are a long time reader of our nations paper of record, you'll know that they are no fan of oil, drilling, refining, coal or anything else the world currently uses to turn on the lights. Then how is it that this national deficit is tied into the new talk of the town, renewable wind energy? The fact of the matter is that our transmission grid needs to be updated regardless of where or how we make it. Electricity is electricity. As the article astutely notes, "The difficulty is most acute for long-distance transmission, but shows up at times even over distances of a few hundred miles."

If we were to build generation facilities using any of the available, proposed or yet to be discovered methods we would still need to create a better power transmission infrastructure. As Mr. Wald points out: "Builders are also contemplating immense solar-power stations in the nation’s deserts that would pose the same transmission problems." Why not an article on power transmission? Why tie the transmission deficit into wind? I appreciate the effort to focus attention on this issue. It just rubs me the wrong way as to how their headline writers go about doing it.

Regarding the power transmission he-said-she-said, I personally think it is the duty of the federal government to regulate and mandate solutions to this problem. Akin to the mandated roll-out of the national interstate highway transportation network in the 1950's on national security grounds. In my humble opinion, this issue is at least on equal footing meriting "national security" status. When making a decision on where to live in the country, I would hate to have to add to the long list of factors whether or not I live in a location that has adequate power availability.