Utilities pay a contractual rate for wind energy, which should be included in the mix of their rate to consumers. Any premium above this for "green" energy is a marketing ploy by utilities which they simply pocket.
Utilities must have back up and reserve generation anyway, for peak demand periods and/or when other plants are taken offline for scheduled maintenance.
I forgot to say that the offshore barrier islands on the Gulf of Mexico in south Texas are mostly state and national wildlife refuges, including the one where endangered whooping cranes go to nest and such. Those refuges are only open part of the year, when nothing is nesting or breeding, but they bring in a ton of tourist money-nope, very bad place for turbines that butcher birds...
The "contractual rate" the utilities pay is higher than the rate they would pay for conventionally generated power -- from their own plants or others. "Wind energy" is innately expensive. The utilities pay a premium price for it, ergo so do you.
Those idiots who choose to pay a further premium for "environmentally-friendly wind energy" from the likes of the Wyly Brothers' Green Mountain Energy are even dumber.
Utilities must have back up and reserve generation anyway, for peak demand periods and/or when other plants are taken offline for scheduled maintenance.
Yes. But only "wind energy" (and solar) require 100% back-up! And, since the utilities have to build the cost of such facilities into their rate base, we're paying for them even when the windmills are turning.
The wind may be "free", compared to coal or gas fuel, but the prohibitive cost of "harnessing" the wind eliminates whatever cost advantage it may have possessed.
"Wind energy" makes every bit as much sense as automobile fuel from corn.
In the absence of government subsidy and/or mandate, it would never happen!