Hump Day Hilarity – Pot o'gold at the end of the green rainbow

Josh just can’t seem to stop drawing. After yesterday’s classic soon to be on T-shirts and mugs, we have this related to The GWPF study on the economic futility of wind power today.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
March 7, 2012 12:20 pm

I agree with James Delingpole’s description of wind “farms” as ‘Bat-chomping eco-crucifixes’

March 7, 2012 12:21 pm

The gift that keeps on giving

Joachim Seifert
March 7, 2012 12:32 pm

Very funny….even a spider web is there and a big grin….

Craig S
March 7, 2012 12:34 pm

It’d be funnier if it wasn’t so true.

March 7, 2012 12:53 pm

I’ve often seen these green schemes in the same light as a black hole.
The “green hole” – an industry so dense in subsidies that no taxpayer dollars can escape.

kbray in california
March 7, 2012 1:14 pm

$$ Money for (from) you and me…

March 7, 2012 1:22 pm

Excellent! I’ve sent the link to Conservation of Upland Powys who are fighting the scam destroying their environment in Wales.

March 7, 2012 1:26 pm

Continuing the fun (Bring Back Our Incandescents!)
‘Political correctness gone mad, it is,’ added Jedi Grand Master Yoda. ‘Environmentally friendly we must be, but green I am already.’

March 7, 2012 1:48 pm

But but but “the remarkable new ”green deal” is almost ready to launch”!
Not my words, but the sentiment today of one of our more sentimental Aussie journo’s, who appears to believe that using electricity is evil and suggests (perhaps slightly tongue in cheek):
“In the same way, you could require huge real-time readouts on the front of every house, with metre-high neon letters showing in micro-increments how much greenhouse weight its denizens are adding to the atmosphere.”
Gold, pure gold, the whole article (well, er, sort of). See, there really is a pot o’ gold at the end of the virtuous green rainbow, its just virtual, or something, like the sea level rise which drowned us all 3 years ago. The final platinum paragraph:
“We may not have fuel poverty, but only because we’re a nation of pathetic fossil-fuel junkies. Fossil fuel, fossil brains. Decoupling energy producers from the profit wagon is hypocritical at best until we’re prepared to decouple ourselves.”
I think she forgot to add words at end: …from reality.

March 7, 2012 2:30 pm

It’s worse that we thought!! We pay them to produce, then we pay them more NOT to produce.

Wind farms in the Pacific Northwest — built with government subsidies and maintained with tax credits for every megawatt produced — are now getting paid to shut down as the federal agency charged with managing the region’s electricity grid says there’s an oversupply of renewable power at certain times of the year. (FoxNews 120307)
<a href=

cui bono
March 7, 2012 3:26 pm

Thank you as ever Josh!
A modest proposal:
Given the pathetic real (as opposed to advertised) energy output of a wind turbine, surely it should be possible to replace each one with a limited number of people peddling furiously on bicyles attached to mini-generators. The people could respond to energy demand more flexibly than windmills (they could, for example, be whipped harder).
This would have many advantages. The beauty of the UK countryside could be restored. Many of the currently unemployed population would be transferred to productive work. The obesity epidemic would be reduced as the cyclists got thinner and thinner through exercise and reduced food intake (national mealtimes obviously require more energetic peddling, so food breaks for the cyclists would have to be kept to a minimum). Finally, recycling old, tired or dead workers would enhance the biofuels industry.
I can see no obvious environmental objections to this idea, and hope it is taken up by Greenpeace et al when the idea of relying on intermittent and inefficient giant wind turbines finally becomes politically unacceptable.
PS: To replace offshore turbines we will simply replace bicycles with pedalos.

F. Ross
March 7, 2012 4:46 pm

To me “green” is becoming a four letter expletive word.

Rick Bradford
March 7, 2012 5:26 pm

@cui bono
An excellent suggestion.
In a country where I once lived, all members of society, whether they were executives, cab drivers, bank tellers, or whatever, were supposed to spend one day a month “working for the glory of the State”, by picking fruit, or driving a tram, or filling in potholes.
For the UK, simply divide the population by 30, buy that many bicycles, and away you go for 8 hours pedalling.
Of course, in the country I referred to, many people paid to get out of their obligations, usually by paying an unemployed person to do it for them, plus a bribe to the officials. It was the first appearance of the free market, and an excellent model for the UK to follow.
Might even win some Olympic cycling gold.

March 7, 2012 5:31 pm

henrythethird says:
March 7, 2012 at 12:53 pm
The “green hole” – an industry so dense in subsidies that no taxpayer dollars can escape.

Classic! Thanks

March 7, 2012 5:40 pm

“Landlords and Turbine Co” is brilliant, but brought back horrible memories of losing miserably at Monopoly as a youngster.
With 7,000 wind turbines in the UK now, and 20,000 more planned, landing on those squares will end the energy, commerce, industry, and employment game for sure.
“UKIP has long been opposed to the creation of wind farms and has always challenged the belief that wind power is an effective form of renewable energy.”

March 7, 2012 7:35 pm

Germany has 20 GWpeak of wind power installed, average electricity consumption is 80GW.
Capacity factor of wind is at 17%; so we have an average wind power production of 3.4 GW.
With 8760 hours in a year we get a yearly production of 29784 GWh by wind power.
Total energy consumption of Germany 2011 was 13,411 PJ = 13,400,000 TJ = 13,400,000,000 GJ
= 13,400,000,000,000,000,000 J
With 1 kWh = 3600 kJ = 3,600,000 J.
that’s 3,722,222,222,222 kWh per year, or 3,722,222 GWH.
What part of that came from wind power? Notice that I put wind power in relation to total energy consumption; not only electricity.
29784 GWh / 3,722,222 GWh = 0.0080016
So, wind power has produced slightly below 1% of our energy needs in 2011.

Mesa Econoguy
March 7, 2012 8:22 pm

There is a reason why the US unemployment rate is 8.3% (11% if you use 1990s participation rate, and 20% if you count actual unemployed persons).
Unproductive, unprofitable (except to subsidy recipient), uneconomic ‘Green’ energy companies are an economic dead weight loss.
This displaces productive capital, and destroys the economy, contrary to Paul Krugman’s ignorant rantings.

Roger Knights
March 7, 2012 11:44 pm

Here’s another caption (or use it in a future cartoon about whirligigs):
The “Green” Bay Tree”
(The windmill should perhaps be colored green in the cartoon.)

Robin Melville
March 8, 2012 12:09 am
Bloke down the pub
March 8, 2012 3:40 am

The headquarters of one of the better known turbine companies is in my nearest town. I think I might just run off a few copies of Josh’s latest piece and nail them to their door.

dave ward
March 8, 2012 5:09 am

cui bono says:
March 7, 2012 at 3:26 pm
“The people could respond to energy demand more flexibly than windmills (they could, for example, be whipped harder).”
We have over 600 useless MP’s in our Parliament, who normally obediently follow orders handed down by government “whips”. I think they should all be given a pedal generator, and put to work. If someone can develop a combined cycle (deliberate pun) generator it could also recover energy from the hot air they produce…

March 8, 2012 8:18 am

“Unproductive, unprofitable (except to subsidy recipient), uneconomic ‘Green’ energy companies are an economic dead weight loss.”
But I thought green energy companies were the only way to make more of Joe Biden’s favorite three-letter word: JOBS!

March 8, 2012 11:26 am

“The headquarters of the UK’s Green Investment Bank will be based in Edinburgh”
£3bn of tax payers money at the end of this rainbow.

Brian H
March 8, 2012 1:52 pm

PaulH says:
March 7, 2012 at 12:20 pm
I agree with James Delingpole’s description of wind “farms” as ‘Bat-chomping eco-crucifixes’

Cute, but not accurate. The bats aren’t hit by the blades, their lungs are burst by the vortices behind them. So, amended: “Bat-popping eco-crucifixes”.

Brian H
March 8, 2012 1:54 pm

Or, to indulge my affinity for alliteration: “Bat-bursting eco-crucifixes.”

March 9, 2012 5:30 am

Has anyone else noticed the resemblance of these new windmill blade configurations to the CND emblem??
We all know that symbolism is a very powerfull visual image that infects the brain, so we may well see this new ‘image’ being used in the same way as the ‘ban the bomb’ logo with all the associated promotional and left wing propaganda!

%d bloggers like this:
Verified by MonsterInsights