By Steve Goreham
Originally published by The Washington Times
The US Department of the Interior announced the first offshore wind energy lease sale earlier this month. Interior plans a July auction of 164,750 acres off the southern coasts of Rhode Island and Massachusetts for commercial wind farms. But why are federal and state governments promoting expensive offshore wind energy?
The auction is a continuation of the “Smart from the Start” program for expediting offshore wind begun by former Energy Secretary Steven Chu and former Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar in 2011. Sally Jewell, the new Secretary of the Interior, has embraced the program, stating, “This is history in the making as we mark yet another major milestone in the President’s all-of-the-above energy strategy. Today we are moving closer to tapping into the enormous potential offered by offshore wind to create jobs, increase our sustainability, and strengthen our nation’s competitiveness in this new energy frontier.”
Several governors joined the chorus for offshore wind. Massachusetts governor Deval Patrick supports the program, “The U.S. Department of Energy projects 20,000 jobs by 2020 in offshore wind. Why not host those jobs here in Massachusetts?” Maryland governor Martin O’Malley agreed, “Offshore wind is a potential win-win-win for Maryland. Today’s vote positions our State for greater job creation and opportunity, while moving us forward toward securing a more sustainable energy future.”
Governors also voicing strong support are Paul LePage of Maine, Pat McCrory of North Carolina, Bob McDonnell of Virginia, and even Ted Strickland of Ohio, who would place wind turbines in Lake Erie. In 2010, governors from ten states, Delaware, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, North Carolina, Rhode Island, and Virginia, signed a Memorandum of Understanding to establish the Atlantic Offshore Wind Energy Consortium to promote offshore wind development.
Unfortunately, offshore wind is enormously expensive. The US Department of Energy (DOE) estimates the levelized cost of wind-generated electricity at more than double the cost of coal-fired electricity and more than three times the cost of power from natural gas. For example, the proposed Cape Wind project off the coast of southeast Massachusetts will initially deliver electricity at 18.7 cents per kilowatt-hour with a built-in increase of 3.5 percent per year over a fifteen-year contract. This is more than triple the wholesale cost of electricity in New England.
Offshore wind is only possible because of generous subsidies, tax breaks, and mandates from government. Today, 38 states offer property tax incentives, 28 states offer sales tax incentives, and 24 states offer tax credits for renewable energy sources. Twenty-nine states have Renewable Portfolio Standards laws requiring utilities to buy an increasing share of electricity from renewable sources, including all ten states in the Offshore Wind Energy Consortium.
At the start of the year, the US government extended the Wind Energy Production Tax Credit (PTC), providing 2.2 cents per kilowatt-hour for electricity generated from wind. The PTC will cost taxpayers $12 billion this year. Look for the DOE to offer loan guarantees to offshore wind developers. Altogether, government incentives pay 30 to 50 percent of the cost of a wind installation.
The consumer pays twice for offshore wind. First, consumer taxes fund wind energy subsidies and tax breaks. Second, states like Massachusetts force utilities to buy high-cost offshore wind electricity, which then increase electricity rates so the consumer pays again.
At the same time, we’re in the midst of a hydrocarbon revolution. Advances in hydraulic fracturing and horizontal drilling will provide more than 100 years of natural gas at current usage rates. With electricity from natural gas at less than one-third the price of offshore wind, why the support for offshore wind from our political leaders?
Electricity from your wall outlet is standard voltage and current. No one can tell the difference between electricity from hydrocarbon sources or “green” sources such as wind. Would governors Patrick and O’Malley repurchase their current car at three times the price?
Wind energy backers claim that if the government subsidizes wind systems, the cost will come down. But that idea is false. Wind turbines are not new technology. After 25 years of installations, about 185,000 wind turbine towers were operating across the world at the end of 2011. Wind technology is already well down the cost learning curve.
In fact, data from the DOE shows that the installed cost of US wind systems has been rising, not falling. Installed costs have risen 65 percent over the last six years, from $1,300 per kilowatt in 2004 to over $2,100 per kilowatt in 2010.
Underlying the push for offshore wind is the ideology of Climatism, the belief that man-made greenhouse gases are destroying Earth’s climate. But anyone who believes that building offshore wind turbines will stop the oceans from rising, make the hurricanes less severe, and save polar bears needs to reconsider. Suppose we invest in cost-effective electricity sources, rather than offshore wind?
Steve Goreham is Executive Director of the Climate Science Coalition of America and author of the new book The Mad, Mad, Mad World of Climatism: Mankind and Climate Change Mania.
Increase CO2 emissions: Consider industrial infrastructure as a zero-sum. Add alternative energy production device manufacturing and the fraction of CO2 emission due to alt. energy increases. Also the capacity for existing manufacture is reduced so overall capacity must be increased. Pollution emission must be integrated across all of technology and alternatives must be credited with their increase.
I notice that South Carolina is building four new nuclear power plants (lifespans 60 years plus, making them cheaper to build than wind turbines, and with passive safety systems deemed thousands of times better than current reactors), which will give them 11, and boost their proportion of nuclear generated power from the current 53% to over 90%. Georgia is also building two new nuclear plants as well, and Florida is uprating most of their reactors. Northeastern Atlantic coast states are following their traditional paths, which requires low IQ citizenry electing equally low IQ politicians. In other words, the dumb demand leaders just as dumb.
arthur4563 says: June 8, 2013 at 6:35 am “I notice that South Carolina is building four new nuclear power plants …” Sumner 2 & 3, OK, what are the others please.
South Carolina has deep experience with nuclear power, with lots of experience released to the market by BRAC03 closure of CNS.
“Wind Power – it doesn’t just blow – it SUCKS!”
“Solar Power – Stick it where the Sun don’t shine!”
Jeeze. Surely there is sufficient experience to show that wind power on land is a lousy economic proposition. The construction and maintenance of these things at sea is going to prove hugely expensive. The oil exploration companies will be perceived as biased but ironically they do actually understand the financial and engineering challenges involved with large metal structures at sea (i.e. oil rigs). The proponents really don’t appreciate the forces created by the waves and swell (yet alone storms). Or the issues with fatigue and corrosion. Or the challenges associated with performing maintenance.
The stupid, it burns. Obummer et al don’t want oil exploration offshore, but those useless pinwheels are just fine.
Already so many Rhode Island residents can’t pay for electricity that NationalGrid begs for “Warm Thy Neighbor” donations with every winter bill. Now they are committed to rates that will rise to 23 cents per kwhr when the windmills are built. Most of the populace can’t do math or physics and elects a parasitic legislature to fleece them at ever turn. One town is facing a half million dollar charge to either fix or take down a windmill that failed after only a few years of operation. Smart people move away if they can.
It does make one wonder which Friend Of Obama will be cashing in on this particular bit of crony capitalism (crapitalism).
the WSJ has an article out this morning about how this month, Spain is going to slash solar power subsidies because the govm’t is broke and they can’t afford to pay them anymore. But this is probably going to bankrupt hundreds, if not thousands of spanish investors who pumped money into these projects on the basis of the subsidies. Of course these bankruptcies will damage Spain’s economy even more.
But a true “Crisis” is when there are no good ways out of a situation – only a range of bad ones. This is what happens when all the money runs out and you’ve spent all your money on foolishness that isn’t returning anything to you. This is where the wonderful promise of “Green Energy” leads.
Five (5) paragraphs in we get what should be the ‘take away’:
Ian W has it right:
and in france some solar panels can heat a house..by burning it..
http://www.maisonapart.com/edito/construire-renover/charpente-toiture/des-panneaux-photovoltaiques-scheuten-prennent-feu-7036.php
Ontario Canada was going to allow off-shore wind turbines in the Great Lakes — then there was a minor problem…
http://ontario-wind-resistance.org/2013/03/24/offshore-wind-moratorium-mixed-policy-and-politics-lawyer-argues/
John Spears, Toronto Star
Ontario’s Liberal government called a halt to off-shore wind farms in 2011 in order to improve its chances in the next election, a lawyer for Trillium Wind Power argued in court Friday. “This was done because they wanted to win three ridings in Lake Erie,” Morris Cooper told a three-judge Ontario Court of Appeal panel.
But a government lawyer shrugged off the charge. “Decisions made for political expediency are what governments do,” Kim Twohig told the court, “They do it all the time.” There’s nothing wrong with governments changing unpopular policies, she said, and the courts are not the place to argue them. “If you don’t want these types of politically expedient decisions, the remedy is the ballot box,” she said.
Trillium has brought a $2.25 billion claim against the province, which imposed a moratorium on offshore wind projects on Feb.11, 2011. Cooper said the announcement torpedoed a $26 million financing deal due to close later that day for a 420-megawatt wind project in Lake Ontario near Kingston.
Of course some would argue that an awful lot of Liberal supporters had cottages on the shores of the great lakes and did not want their views ruined — was it that the NIMBY monster reared its ugly head? Was it the saving of the political base? Only the courts will tell us…
AndyG35: you are correct. Construction and operation of offshore winf farms will violate the Marine Animal Protection Act. This law probably will not be enforced against the wind farms just like the plethora of laws that protect migratory birds and raptors are ignored.
It is essential that theses points are raised in the environmental assessment process. The 2014 elections come soon. Green energy producers, environmental groups, climate alarmists should receive notoriety about their sins during the election campaigns.
The salt water environment is one of the most corosive environments on the earth. The designers are going to end up spending a lot more money to build these things than land based or they will fail in 2-3 years. This might be a good thing in terms of a slap on the hand and a realization that this was a bad idea from the get go.
I would say if you know any bird lovers let them know about this project, might generate some green hate and get this stopped before we spend the millions/billions to learn a hard lesson.
What will people own when our paper is worthless? Gold? No, Land!
Joe Public says: “Think of all that free power they’ll generate during a hurricane!”
Which brings up the cost of the underwater transmission line that must big enough to carry the maximum design generated load but, unlike any other power transmission line ever built, will sit there carrying less than ~20% capacity on average.
A problem I think about is that the stanchions will automatically become artificial reefs attracting sea creatures which will then attract sea birds who will then get sliced and diced… attracting even more sea creatures!
Taphonomic: or as Babawa Walters would say, “Cwapital Cwoanyism”
Joe Public says: “Think of all that free power they’ll generate during a hurricane!”
Of course the Industrial Wind Turbines (IWT’s) are shut down during high wind — so much for a great idea!
beng says:
June 8, 2013 at 7:32 am
They simply represent the middle digit that he’s been giving everybody lately, except his most “trusted” acolytes–those get promoted.
In fact, the dems could use a miniature windmill mounted on said middle digit as their next “green” campaign icon.
How fitting!
Steve, nice (un)common sense review. Is the $2100/kW for nameplate kW or should we multiply this by six?
The university created, tax funded green industry MUST HAVE a continuous stream of projects so all those graduates (rich kids) can walk into tax funded jobs..
This is why the reality of the situation is so completely skewed..
A shinning example of whats wrong with any form of government that starts to back fill its own propaganda with corruption.. They like to call it progress, but it never works out that way..
Another way to get your politics, your supporters, in the bag, that’s inside the bag, that’s inside the bag.. So it becomes impossible to deconstruct without taking the whole house down..
The Inca’s just disappeared? Rome just fell apart? No.. Stupid ideas that enriched / empowered the ruling class were sold as progress.. The more it failed the more addicted they became to it until there was nothing left to save, and nobody willing or able to do it anyway..
Enter war to clear the slate and hide the incompetence, so we can do it all again.. Progress..
wws says:
June 8, 2013 at 8:00 am
“the WSJ has an article out this morning about how this month, Spain is going to slash solar power subsidies because the govm’t is broke and they can’t afford to pay them anymore. But this is probably going to bankrupt hundreds, if not thousands of spanish investors who pumped money into these projects on the basis of the subsidies. Of course these bankruptcies will damage Spain’s economy even more.”
With ~30% unemployment, this may be a godsend for the economy of Spain. At last the Green Economy will kick in – paying workers to dismantle all this ridiculous (infrastructure seems wrong, how about:) ultrafolly.
pochas said on June 8, 2013 at 8:17 am:
Bah, people don’t own land anymore. The government mandates payments (property taxes), pay or the state will take your land. That’s leasing, not owning. They can regulate what you do with the land, require so much upkeep. They can declare eminent domain, take your land, toss you “fair market value”, then keep it for themselves or hand it off to cronies who will “make better use” of your former land.
If you’re walking down the street, a politician accosts you, demands money to allow you to wear the shirt on your back, demands you rip off an unapproved logo, insists you fix a button immediately, then decides he’s just going to take the shirt and give you a buck since that’s what you’d get for it at a yard sale, all while a friendly armed police officer is standing behind you to ensure your compliance, do you own the shirt?
@AB –
And a perfect example of the despoliation of landscapes by wind turbines. How dare they mess up the beautiful English countryside like that!
@Gary Young Pearse –
Crony capitalism in its death throes, mehopes? How about we make George Soros and Jeffrey Immelt and Warren Buffett and Al Gore and Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer and Gina McCarthy and Steven Chu and Lisa Jackson and Ernest Moniz and der Fuehrer himself pick up the tab for removing these destructive eyesores from our midst?.
Kaboom says:
June 8, 2013 at 12:25 am
That’s what goes for progress in green circles, the same product at three times the cost but without the reliability. They should be made to sign onto a health care plan like that.
=======
They have been, it’s called ObamaCare.
kadaka (KD Knoebel) says:
June 8, 2013 at 9:18 am
“They can declare eminent domain, take your land, toss you “fair market value”, then keep it for themselves or hand it off to cronies who will “make better use” of your former land.”
That’s why you want to be “one of the cronies.”