Are you angry as WA UTC begins to implement the 100% Clean Electricity Law??

Are you angry as WA UTC begins to implement the 100% Clean Electricity Law??


By David Boleneus


On Tuesday the WA UTC announced it begins to implement the 100 percent clean electricity law SB5116

SB5116 was passed by the Democrat-controlled Washington legislature and Inslee’s urging who are terrified of carbon dioxide from auto and fossil fuel emissions. The Democrats do not seem to know that 98% of carbon dioxide is natural. It is a plant fertilizer and grows their food, so only 2% of emissions from fossil fuels are human caused.


What will result from SB5116 and Washington’s 100% Clean Electricity Law?   Some FAQs.


What is Clean Energy?  No one has ever defined it. Can someone help here? I do not know and I have worked in energy-related matters for a couple of decades. I think it is an intangible thing, a feeling, maybe. If it cannot be defined, then why is the state spending so much effort and money?


  1. What happens when coal to generate electricity is outlawed by this law?


  • One-third (33%) of Avista customers’ electricity comes from COAL at the Colstrip mine and adjacent power plant in Montana, that includes Colstrip power plant units 1,2,3, and 4.
  • The Sierra Club was responsible for lobbying Avista to end purchase of electricity from 2 units. Does the Sierra Club represent electric customers’ wishes, or carry out customers’ wishes to pay more for electricity?
  • Do you find it curious, or silly that our legislature and Gov. Inslee are concerned with Colstrip emissions in eastern Montana that blow east with prevailing winds?
  • You should know that all mercury or ash from burning of coal are captured and never leave the plant so none of the emissions are “dirty”?
  • Closing Colstrip plant will cause 250 workers to lose those jobs and another 250 at the mine.


  1. What if customers must rely on natural gas to replace coal?


  • If natural gas substitutes to generate electricity (Avista already does) for convenience of paying a surcharge of 8.4 cents per kwhr  added to your electric bill for each kwhr from natural gas “peakers” to generate electricity, the most efficient plants.
  • Avista’s electric (similar to Inland Power or Vera) rate now is 8 cents per kwhr, so this rule will more than double the price of electricity for all investor owned utilities in the state.
  • If you pay $173 per month (my budget bill), then your bill will jump to $346 per month from the surcharge.
  • How many low-income earners will suffer, go without electricity, or be unable to pay double for electricity? Of course inflation will also add cost too. Rates in Ontario are so high now that parents need to decide to either feed the kids or pay the electric bill.


  1. If natural gas is outlawedbecause, like coal, it also creates carbon dioxide emissions……….then Avista says electric power will be “curtailed” (that’s a nice word for blackouts). Avista serves about 400,000 customers in the region.


  • Electricity is curtailed because there is not enough supply of hydroelectric from Bonneville Power Administration (BPA), which supplies a part of Avista customers’ electricity. BPA supplies its electricity to customers in several other states, so there is not enough for customers in its region.
  • Perhaps outlawing natural gas is a Democrat wish for the 2020 legislative session.


  1. What about electricity supplied from wind turbines if natural gas and coal are not available?


  • Avista says** they plan on blackout conditions (Avista says “curtailed” or “Loss of Load”) 50% of the time during the five (5) winter months when wind conditions are calm. Solar generation cannot fill the gap because of short days and overcast skies.
  • Electric from wind turbines is unavailable about one-half (49%) of the year. Wind turbines produce very little electricity, or are producing at less than 5% of capacity for 4280 hours (49%) of 8760 hours per year.
  • Wind turbines on average, rely on back-up power (fill-in) for 80% of their life, due to wind conditions rendering wind adverse to power production. Wind turbines provide nearly full power only 2% of the year.
  • Wind turbine electric generation is intermittent and unreliable, their greatest disadvantage.
  • Wind turbines in Washington, Oregon and Idaho rely on hydroelectric dams to “fill-in” when the turbines go on vacation. The question has been asked if wind turbines, with their need of hydroelectric as back-up, are a threat to salmon fishery.
  • Wind-less days during October through February period in the region (OR, WA), are 10 to 20 days per month each month for the Oct.-Feb. period. Windless days were 78.9 days in 2014 and 70.8 days in 2015
    • **Avista’s 2020 Integrated Resource Plan says plan on several blackouts lasting 10 days, continuously (Tech. Adv. Comm. Apr 16, 2019) (Avista chart below shows a typical January)
  • A comparison of the output of the BPA wind turbines system in the region (46 wind farms) against the four Snake River hydroelectric dams shows that, although the turbines have capacity 37% larger than the four dams, but it’s found that all 46 wind turbine farms (together) electric generation is 64% less than the four Snake River dams. Further, in examining the monthly output of the 46 wind farms it was found that for 26 to 30 days per month (January to June period over a 5 year period) that wind farms underperform the output of the 4 Snake River dams. That amounts to 167 out of 182 days over those average six months that wind farms are underperforming the dams. In short, the dams should not be removed under false pretense.
  • At least 2,241 anti-wind websites or Facebook sites worldwide are known that oppose wind turbines. Over 600 of these are in the U.S. because it has been found that wind turbine noise brings a serious health hazard to humans resulting in life-threatening health conditions. •– European Platform for Windfarms; www.aweo,org; www.ontario-wind-resistance; (Australia); (Australia);; Energy Matters:;;;
  • The health disease caused by turbines is another subject hidden from the public that must be addressed. At least 44 households are within the danger zone of two miles or less from wind turbine noise from Avista’s planned Rattlesnake Flat wind farm near Lind, in Adams County Washington. They are in danger because the safe distance for a residence or business from a wind farm is more than 10 miles as shown by an environmental health department studying 200 residents in Finland, the first of its kind. Residents within ten miles of turbines in the Finish study recorded severe to adverse health symptoms and reduced work ability due to proximity to wind turbines. Symptoms continued in residents beyond 10 miles but were less severe. In ground-breaking work, Dr Mariana Pereira, a biomedical engineer and medical colleagues have found serious health conditions and attribute it to vibroacoustic disease caused by low frequency sound below th range of human hearing, with some leading to death, for humans who experience industrial noise from wind turbines, called low-frequency noise or vibroacoustic disease over a period of more than two years. Dr Riina Bray, MD and medical director Women’s College Hospital, University of Toronto, Ontario said infrasound and dirty electricity contribute to ill health of residents nearby, including dizziness, depression, cognitive dysfunction, sleep disorder, fatigue, chest pain, nausea, heart palpitations. The Max Plank Institute and World Health Organization say wind turbine noise is a serious health hazard and liability, as noise identified with visible, proven change in brain activity, and noise poses serious cardiac health risks, respiratory risk and brain lesions. Numerous other works have similar conclusions.


  1. Will the level of carbon dioxide decrease as the 100% Clean Electricity Law is implemented?


  • No. Absolutely not.
  • Washington State emissions of carbon dioxide are only 0.24% (one quarter of one percent) of world emissions.
  • Ending all of Washington’s emissions of carbon dioxide will be replaced in 35 days from other countries, particularly from China and India. China is the largest importer and user of coal in the world. China is building new coal-fired electric plants at a rate 20 times faster than the U.S. is decommissioning coal plants.


  1. If Washington ends its emissions of carbon dioxide, will this moderate global warming or end climate change, sea level rise, or ocean acidification?


  • No. Absolutely not. There is no evidence to show that carbon dioxide controls temperature or in any way alters climate.
  • 98% of carbon dioxide is of natural origin and 2% comes from fossil fuels, so if Washington’s could stop its 0.24% of the global 2% of carbon dioxide of human origin, it will have no impact on climate.
  • Ending all of Washington’s emissions will not impact sea level which is rising at a rate of 4.3 inches per century, but realize that the tidal range in Seattle is 14.1 feet. Spring tides cause the tidal range to exceed 4.3 inches beyond the 14.1 feet, so a century of rise will be unnoticeable. The rate of sea level rise of 1.1 mm per year has remained unchanged with the level of CO2 increase in recent decades.
  • Ending carbon dioxide will not impact ocean acidification because, according to National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, NOAA pH sampling of sea water pH since 1910, the pH is rising, or become less acid. The ocean is pH-balanced, with salts bicarbonate and carbonate from carbon dioxide contributing to this balance and with additions amplifies and strengthens this resistance to a change in pH. Its is called a chemical buffer effect. Other sea water buffers are known that a magnitudes larger and stronger than the carbonate buffer.


  1. Clean electricity laws have been implemented in other jurisdictions, for example, in Germany, Ontario and Australia, in Denmark and Spain. What happened there?


  • The cost of electricity from renewable in Australia ranges from a low of US 34.8 cents per kwhr (Victoria) to a high of 47.1 cents per kwhr (South Australia). Victoria and South Australia now approach 40% of supply from renewables but with blackouts common. A 4-day black out in January 2019 heat of 115 deg F left customers in Adelaide and Whyalla without electric power when both wind and solar failed. Government ordered businesses shut and ordered private solar panels disconnected from the grid due to power surging.
  • A 100 MW “PowerPack” battery system installed by Tesla to balance a 100 MW wind farm in South Australia provided 1% of supply for only 2 hours to customers during the 4-day blackout in January 2019. AEMO’s spot electric prices rocketed to A$14,000 per MWhr during outages ($14/ kwhr).
  • Germany is now paying US 43.3 cents per kwhr and Denmark 44.8 cents per kwhr for electricity. German wind capacity continues to be added but shortages continue during the hot summer months when wind generation is non-existent. The demand is mis-matched with supply.
  • 20 countries participating in renewables experience average electric rate increases of 21 US cents per kwhr of added renewable capacity. Since renewables produce at 20% of capacity at best the cost impact is 5 times larger than the 21 cents. At minimum, the convenience of renewables adds $400 per month to electric bills.
  • Residents in Ontario are revolting, demonstrating in the streets to oppose building more wind turbines due to noise from turbines and cost of electricity up to 36 cents per kwhr. Ontario’s renewable generation is mis-matched with demand with a result that it cannot sell all the renewable power even to Manitoba or New York. Parker Gallant reports that wind electricity in Ontario costs 44 cents per kwhr. Adding more wind to its 6500 MW capacity costs customers an additional $1.3 billion, mainly because the excess cannot be sold. In March 2018 only 3% of wind electricity was usable so 65% was wasted and 68% the previous year.
  • In Denmark which Obama cited as the example to follow, they pay highest electric bills along with Germany, but Denmark exports 57% of its renewable power for free that it cannot get paid for.
  • In Spain each renewable job caused the loss of 2.2 jobs elsewhere in the economy and 9 out of 10 renewable jobs ended with construction ending. Spain committed $753,778 from subsidies to each renewable job. Each renewable megawatt destroyed 5.39 jobs elsewhere in its economy.
  • In short, no jurisdiction has exceeded 40% electric supply from renewables without experiencing serious economic impacts or electricity shortages.
  • No engineering or feasibility exists to show that 100% Clean Renewable Electricity is possible.
  • In Ontario, 62,730 electric customers were disconnected because they could not pay electric bills with the disconnect rate growing 19% in three years. Ontario’s Green Energy Act Round 1 will cost each customer $63,000 per household and if Round 2 is enacted will add another $3,247 per month to average customer. Paul Acchione an OSPE power engineer says the government issued more than 100 directives while ignoring the declining demand and mushrooming supply. Jon Kiernan of the engineers society says that renewables has morphed into “green corporate welfare”. Ontario’s coal exit plan was physically impossible to do but to remain employed you could not say this. Its Green Energy Act has already cost Ontario’s 11 million residents $37 billion and $133 billion over 30 years remains unpaid. It would have been far cheaper to charge $17 per ton carbon dioxide but the Green Energy Act has cost it $257 per ton due to its super-surcharge, the Global Adjustment Fee added to each customer bill that now amounts to 85% of each billing, or $170 billion over 30 years.


Following are some news headlines concerning Germany’s Energiewende:


— Germany’s green transition has hit a brick wall

— More Than 1000 Citizen Wind Energy Protest Groups: Germany on Path to the Unknown

Wind Energy Won’t Function For Supplying Germany With Power, Experts Say

— Germany’s Energiewende program exposed as a catastrophic failure

— Green No More: Germany Is Razing A 12,000-YearOld Forest To Make Way For A Coal Mine

— Germany’s Renewable Energy Disaster

— Part 1: Wind Solar Deemed Technological Failures’

— Part 2: Wind Solar Deemed Ecological Disasters’

— Part 3: Wind Solar Deemed Economic Nonsense’

— Part 4: Social Disaster Wind Turbines Wrecking Rural Communities

In Germany, Reality Is Triumphing Over Political Posturing On Climate

Germany’s Wind Energy Mess: As Subsidies Expire, Thousands of Turbines to Shut…Environmental Nightmare!

— Germany’s Wind and Solar Obsession Pushes Power Grid to Brink of Total Collapse

Germany’s “Ticking Time Bombs”…Experts Say Wind Turbines Posing “Significant Danger” To Environment!

Germany’s Federal Accounting Office Slams Government For Out-Of-Control Electricity Costs

— Renewables Fiasco The Astronomical Cost of Germany’s ‘Green’ Energy Failure

— Germany’s Energiewende 4: Electricity: 43.29¢In Chaos: On Brink of Collapse

— March 16, 2019: Europe’s Energy Crisis: Counting the Staggering Cost of Subsidizing Unreliable Wind & Solar: Germany and wind ‘powered’ Denmark pay Europe’s highest power prices, by a mile, and prices for both are still climbing at double-digits.

— Germany’s power market is in chaos, and its grid on the brink of total collapse.

— Germany’s residential electricity prices escalating 3 times faster than United States.

Failure…Hundreds Of Billions For Nothing As Germany CO2 Reductions Stagnant Almost 10 Years!

Intermittent Offshore Wind Power Costs 25 Times More Than Ever-Reliable Coal, Gas & Nuclear Jan. 2 2019

— Germany’s Energiewende 5: Unraveling 44 Years: Germany’s Temps. Unchanged


  1. Is the Green New Deal as discussed the way to go and can it provide enough electricity?


  • No. Absolutely not.
  • The Green New Deal is riddled with fatal flaws, 16 of them at last count according to authorities. Only one fatal flaw is needed to cancel it. For example its hydroelectric supply is deficient by 90%.  Its wind supply is undersized by 80%. Its solar supply is inadequate by 50%. Building systems would require widespread use of eminent domain takings. No feasibility has been demonstrated. It would take 40 years to build but solar and wind turbine lifetimes are 20 years. Estimated cost for a wind turbine system in Washington is $ 4 trillion and for US-wide is $497 trillion dollars. It will never be built. A nation-wide nuclear system could be built for $4 trillion and result in 30% lower emissions than full-scale renewables.
  • Natural resources (iron ore for steel, cement, molybdenum, copper, silver rare metals) are insufficient to build a nationwide wind or solar system. For example, to supply the copper needed for a nation-wide US system of wind turbines would require all of 107 years of copper production from the largest copper mine in the world, Escondida mine, in Chile.
  • Building a wind turbine system for Washington would require opening copper mines in the Cascade Mountains to supply needs of copper metal.


  1. Wind turbine developments depress real estate values and are a threat to local economies, including tourism.
  • Turbine development depressed real estate values in Calumet County MI 19% to 74%, in Ontario by 24.2% to 58.6%, in Fond du Lac and Dodge Counties WI by 29% to 36%
  • The Renewable Portfolio Standard, present in 30 states, including Washington is a cause of negative impacts in many states now and in the future, and in the case of Oregon, caused 21,637 lost jobs, with utility costs at $6,128 per year, carbon taxes at $1.48 billion per year and impacted the state economy in Oregon at negative <$2.64 billion> (T. Considine, Univ. of Wyoming)
  • A family, the Shineldeckers in Mason County, Michigan built a country home in 1995, but in 2012 a wind turbine outfit, Invenergy Wind finished constructing 56 476-foot tall wind turbines nearby with many near their home. The family suffered health impacts and because their noise, headaches, sleeplessness, reduced work ability was intolerable they were forced to sell at a loss (-$121,000) in 2014 to escape the wind turbines.


  1. What can Washington residents do?


  • Get out
  • Learn about the danger of wind turbines and companies that promote them


  1. What can residents do if threatened by a wind turbine development or similar renewable development and cannot leave Washington?
  • The website, Alliance for Wise Energy Decisions contains a lot of useful and truthful information about energy and how to mount a defense against the development. They are very clear that renewable energy is a poor choice with many examples.
  • If you or your community are being threatened by a wind farm or a renewable development, the same site gives very useful suggestions as how to fight or oppose it.
  • I have compiled a reading list that I can share. I am also will to speak and provide information


The foregoing is an abbreviated version of oral and poster presentations before Citizens Alliance for Property Rights, National Meeting, in Seattle, April, 2019


More information, including references, available on request.



David Boleneus



Tel. 509-468-9062