Opinion

Alternative to alternative energy

Tuesday, July 21, 2009

Repeatedly I fly to Ulysses, Kansas for business. During the past winter I watched with interest as an "alternative energy" project was constructed west of Scott City. The operational result is 19, I think I counted, of those huge electricity generation wind mills. These are the ones that utilize the huge turbine blades that we often see transiting McCook on Highway 83.

What has surprised me in watching the completed "free" energy project are the many times that I fly by and see the propeller blades standing at attention, nary a single one of the 19 turning. It makes me wonder how inefficient that source of electrical power really is. Having electricity only during the times that the wind blows, with enough but not too much velocity, would be a positive irritation.

Yes I know that wind energy is only supplemental energy, the electrical utilities have to have adequate generating power from other, more reliable sources, to cover their loads on a 24-7 basis. And then checking in to it farther I've been told that the payback on a wind farm project is something like ten years. In other words it takes 10 years to produce and sell enough electrical power to pay back the original investment. Couple that with an expected production life of eight years and it looks to me a rather poor place to invest one's money. Voila, it is the government subsidy, our tax money at work, which makes the wind projects such a popular investment scheme.

The Scott City wind farm is small in comparison to the multitude of windmills south of Sidney, Neb. If you have driven to Wichita recently you also have seen the huge wind farm north of Salina with what seems like hundreds of the slowly turning giants along the interstate. East of the Las Angeles basin in California the highway traveler is treated to miles of wind turbines which seem to be turning more reliably than the ones I see in this part of the United States.

Wind generated electricity shares the same vulnerability as ethanol as a source of energy. Both depend upon unreliable monetary subsidies from government to be profitable. Ethanol has been a boon to farmers by raising prices for those that produce corn. Cattle feeders, however, aren't quite so enthusiastic about the higher price. If one doubts the efficacy of the ethanol industry he only has to visit with the good people in Cambridge about their now idle, barely used, ethanol plant especially the employees who signed on to work there.

All this silliness about pursuing "alternate" energy is the dream of our current crop of politicians and their insatiable thirst for power -- political power that is. They perceive that this country's dependence on foreign oil is a bad thing and envision a way to change. Never mind that it might be a good idea to use up the cheap foreign oil and save our own for the future. In the minds of those same all-knowing politicians, clean, safe, nuclear power is anathema -- no reason, they just don't understand it and thereby fear it. The USofA has the largest reserves of coal in the world but the visionaries perceive coal as polluting and will do all they can to shut that industry down. Again the USofA has huge untapped reserves of oil but by decree, stemming from environmental dreams, our visionary politicians won't let further development of the petroleum industry happen either.

Politicians do understand that energy responds to what economists term elastic demand. If the price of a commodity increases, the demand for it decreases. In their world, there is too much demand for energy so if they can increase the price we Americans will use less thereby attaining their goal of decreasing our dependence on foreign oil. Adding taxes to anything related to energy is one way to raise the price and decrease the demand. Added taxes carry the bonus of more money for those same politicians to spend never mind the havoc wreaked on our economy. Higher taxes less energy use, it is a liberal marriage made in heaven.

It will be interesting to see how our own Sen. Ben Nelson votes on Cap-and-Trade, which will be the source of money to fund President Obama's reworked Health Care System. In my opinion, a vote in favor of either of those legislative monstrosities will be all the more reason to turn our favorite Senator out of office.

That is the way I see it.

Comments
View 9 comments
Note: The nature of the Internet makes it impractical for our staff to review every comment. Please note that those who post comments on this website may do so using a screen name, which may or may not reflect a website user's actual name. Readers should be careful not to assign comments to real people who may have names similar to screen names. Refrain from obscenity in your comments, and to keep discussions civil, don't say anything in a way your grandmother would be ashamed to read.
  • Daily I read editorials, comments and letters-to-the-editor from all over the nation. Whereas when the House passed the bill it was maybe 2-to-1 against cap and trade, opinion now seems to be at least 6-to-1 against. The Senate will be wise to heed the overwhelming lack of public support and stop this disastrous legislation from passing into law.

    If instead of cap-and-trade the United States had a national mandate to replace coal generation plants with natural gas and nuclear energy, plus if we replaced our commuter cars with battery-powered electric cars, we would drastically reduce our dependence on foreign oil and reduce CO2 emissions faster and beyond the proposed cap and trade targets.

    -- Robert Moen, www.energyplanUSA.com

    -- Posted by Rmoen on Tue, Jul 21, 2009, at 5:08 PM
    ! Report comment to editor
  • I have driven by those windfarms in western kansas on the way to see my folks in New Mexico and they seem to be turning.. Looking from below..

    -- Posted by mickhaney on Tue, Jul 21, 2009, at 10:33 PM
    ! Report comment to editor
  • We should keep sending billions to countries in the middle east that fund terrorism, so when they run out of oil, we'll still have ours? Cheap foreign oil. Not if OPEC decides to make it expensive. Our country values liberty, yet we are at the mercy of dictators. I want energy independence!

    -- Posted by justhuck on Wed, Jul 22, 2009, at 9:44 AM
    ! Report comment to editor
  • Why in the world would you want to use electric vehicles? Doesn't electricity require generation by some source such as coal plants to produce all that electricity?

    -- Posted by geewhiz on Thu, Jul 23, 2009, at 10:17 AM
    ! Report comment to editor
  • Whats the difference between a Windmill and a Windcharger????

    Look around a little and figure it out!!!!!

    -- Posted by Just a reader on Thu, Jul 23, 2009, at 9:44 PM
    ! Report comment to editor
  • The thing with wind power is that it is in its infancy....the tecnology is out there that will make it much more efficent. Far beyond the supplimental power it is now. The turbines that are in place now...the large fan blade that chops up birds...etc... and only turns when the wind is out of JUST the right direction are not the turbines of the future. We all need to look in to the kind of turbines that will turn in even the lightest of wind and it wont matter which direction the wind come from. They are called squrrel cages. They are the kind of fans that pull air out of most of our bathrooms and kitchens...and are in our furnaces... and have been in use for at least 50-75 years or more.

    My husband has been working on just this kind of turbine for our own personal use and we are very close to getting off the "coal train" or "grid" as most want to call it. We may even be able to put energy back into the grid.(oh my)

    Jay Leno has one on his antique car collection garage in L.A. that supplies all the energy he needs and more.... you would know this if you watched the discovery channel....it is the turbine of the future.

    Solar panels an squrrel cage turbine on every house and busness would make a giant step in giving our country(and the world) freedom from our oil addiction and polution problems.

    Nuclear power IS NOT A SOLUTION! It is a step backwards. All intelegent people know this!

    Do the reserch people....find a better way. Take responsibility for your impact on this planet.

    PEACE

    -- Posted by kaygee on Wed, Jul 29, 2009, at 8:48 PM
    ! Report comment to editor
  • Sorry kaygee, I just can't sit back and watch you do this again. Yet again, there are just too many (for the sake of civility, shall we call them) "misstatements" in your comment.

    "Wind technology is in it's infancy"? Is that why we see all the broken dilapidated windmills all across the countryside? Wind energy is not in it's infancy state...current available technology combined with wind energy may changing daily, but wind power is far from infancy. In fact you couldn't be more wrong to say that nuclear is a step backwards, while at the same time making everyone believe that wind is new. Nuclear energy is in it's infancy stage thanks to all the fears that have been directed towards it. With more research, nuclear would have a much better result than any current green energy.

    The problems with wind generation are quite simply physics. You aren't going to produce "wind" energy from a box in a room with little or no airflow. Now there may be some other technologies that are in their "infancy". stages, but wind? No.

    The big wind turbines that produce greater than 1 Megawatt of generation are designed to turn into the wind so that they can generate regardless of which direction the wind is coming from. The obvious problems with wind generation, is that A) the wind doesn't blow all the time (in fact it's more like 30-40%) and B)it certainly doesn't blow during the hot summer peaks when it is needed. Many of these wind generators have to be shut down when the wind reaches speeds in excess of 35-50 mph depending on manufacturers specs. The squirrel cage that you are talking about installing will still need backup generation - today and for years to come. Unless you only want limited power, I suspect we won't hear you complaining on this blog about using coal or nuclear power during those times when your "primary" source of energy isn't enough.

    When / if you do get your hamster cage to put electricity back on the "grid", what do you expect to be paid for it? Let me guess...more than the price that your utility currently pays for coal or nuclear...correct? So ask yourself, where will your utility spread that extra cost for kaygees "contribution" to the grid? The answer is: to the rest of us. Cheap?? Free?? I think not.

    You'll forgive me for sounding like the bully again, but I'd prefer to gather my own research through something other than the Discovery channel and Jay Leno.

    It's a bit hypocritical to call others unintelligent when you can't even spell the word.

    By the way Dick, great article.

    -- Posted by Husker23 on Thu, Jul 30, 2009, at 1:23 PM
    ! Report comment to editor
  • Husker23,

    Wind energy is not in its infancy, but mass production of it is. It hasn't been until the past 4 years or so that these large wind forms began to be built, and they were rushed into production because of political aspirations. We do have the technical know how to correct the problems so that these large generators can operate in winds 35 mph to 50 mph, but what is more important is to get them to work even when the wind doesn't blow by using large scale capacitors to store the energy. These capacitors can be used to trickle charge battery back up systems that are used in many small towns like the emergency back up system at the Power Plant in Ulysses. They have a series of very high output lead acid batteries that are an emergency back up system that enables them to stay in operation while they restore down power lines from a severe thunderstorm or ice storm. Another problem is to get them to operate even with low wind speeds around 10 mph. There are not very many days in Western Kansas where the wind isn't at least 10 mph. And then we wouldn't have to subsidize it with tax dollars, which only does one thing. It raises the cost of energy, while hiding it through subsidies. And the government never gets blamed for their purposeful evasion of responsibility. I do agree with you on Nuclear energy, and that we should be using much more of it, and tie into the grid that is already built. No new infrastructure needed. The same thing needs to be done with Wind Farms with the massive quantities of large wind generators with a way to store the energy for later use, for emergencies only while they develop more efficient generators. That is the infancy stage that the author of the original entry was referring to. But keep up your criticisms of things like this, because it only gets more people involved to come up with ideas to make it less expensive so that we tax payers do not have to subsidize it while the government hides that hidden cost from most people.

    -- Posted by Mbaker73 on Sat, Aug 1, 2009, at 6:54 AM
    ! Report comment to editor
  • I just want to say that is a great article dick however I have to dissagree with this statement "In their world, there is too much demand for energy so if they can increase the price we Americans will use less thereby attaining their goal of decreasing our dependence on foreign oil." not necesarily the statement but the wording. You see as of right now we are still bringing in close to the same ammount of foreign oil the thing we are not doing is pumping near as much out of United States oil leases. The oil industry in the Gulf of Mexico has crawled to a near stand still as to what it was a year ago. But at the same time those BIG tanker vessels still roll in and out with the same large numbers they were a year ago so with this being said we are still " Funding Terrorist" as some like to say where as we have many lost jobs to that same foreign oil. So all I can say is do this country a favor Mr. Obama and get the oil flowing back from the Gulf.

    Thanks for a great article and if you want some info about oil production world wide on land and offshore check out the website rigzone.com

    -- Posted by kman on Tue, Aug 4, 2009, at 5:28 PM
    ! Report comment to editor
Respond to this story

Posting a comment requires free registration: