Posted on 06/14/2009 4:52:22 AM PDT by Son House
KENYON -- Russ Foss has lived on his 500 acre farm, southeast of Kenyon, for more than 42 years. A dairy farmer, Foss has kept busy serving time on the local co-op board and growing crops in his field. But Foss is clear to say that his 500 acres will never be home to what some are calling a "second crop," -- wind energy.
"When they (the turbines) came out, I myself thought it was a good idea," he said. "Wind sounds like a good idea, until you really look into it. Then there are just so many holes in that whole deal that you just start thinking."
Foss and his neighbors were approached a couple years ago by Kenyon Wind, LLC, a small firm from the Twin Cities, to put turbines for a small Community-Based Energy Development.
His first concern was for the field drainage tile systems that he and his neighbors had installed more than 40 years ago.
"Our agreement said no one could tamper with these lines, and that was a legal document, and of course now the lawyer (Kenyon Wind) has an option on these farms to build wind towers," Foss said. "My concern was, now they are going to run out there with these huge cranes and the cranes will be crushing these tile lines as they go and they won't know they are doing it."
Foss said that when he brought that up, he was told that the developers were going to fix everything they broke.
But Foss was still skeptical. So he joined together with some other concerned neighbors who had formed Citizens for Environmental Rights & Safety, a group that opposed the Kenyon Wind project.
"This group, CFERS, they like to label us radicals," Foss said. "But the people that are involved are just common people that live in the neighborhood, but they are concerned about their property and about some of the issues that go with this stuff."
Personally, Foss is concerned with several different aspects of having a turbine on his land, ranging from stray voltage to the throwing of ice and the possibility of one of the turbines spinning out of control.
"Electricity is a very volatile commodity, it truly is, it's dangerous," Foss said.
He also points out that wind as a form of energy isn't dependable.
"When I was growing up, we pumped our water with wind, everybody did," he said. "So when you had only about a dozen cattle and 50 pigs, you could get by five days, but every day it was on your mind, when is the wind blowing? Better pump water to make sure that tank is full."
Foss is also opposed to wind energy because of the cost.
Currently he is paying about 10 cents per kilowatt-hour for energy. A December newsletter he received from the Goodhue County Cooperative Electric, has him fearing that he could be paying 2.5 cents more per kilowatt hour due to wind. Add to the bill the building of new power lines they are suggesting to transport wind power, and Foss isn't happy.
"It's going to raise the electric costs quite a little with this wind power, and I don't know if that's a good deal or not.
"So whether it is a good thing or not, I guess I don't know. I don't know what the answers are, I am truly concerned about some of the safety issues with this stuff."
Currently the Kenyon Wind project has stalled, but in February they received an extension from the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission for an additional two years.
While I agree with the man this statement is patently absurd. We have millions of miles of power lines and feeds all over the U.S. If it were that dangerous then we would be reading daily about deaths and injuries.
Respect for electricity is the most important thing. It is not a living being. It can only do what it's told to do.
First, this “farmer” sounds like a NIMBY or an environmentalist.
If he and his ilk are truly concerned about their drainage tiles, have it put into writing, via the contract, that repairs must be made.
But there seems to be a bigger issue here that is not reported.
I live in Central Illinois. There’s a huge wind farm project going on here. You can see the windmills from I74 on route to Champaign. There are dozens of them, soon to be hundreds.
We hear that the farmers allowing them on their land are being paid $5000 annually. Many of the farmers have ten or more within a 360 acre area or so it seems as they’re really out there in the distance.
BUT HERE IS MY QUESTION. THE WINDMILLS ARE ALWAYS TURNING... ALMOST LIKE 24/7. LIKE TODAY WHEN THERE IS VIRTUALLY NO WIND, THEY’RE TURNING.
HOW CAN THIS BE?
I know there may be wind 100 feet up, but I doubt it.
DOES ANYONE KNOW IF THESE WINDMILLS ARE SET UP TO FEED ELECTRICITY BACK INTO THEM ON QUIET DAYS TO KEEP THE BLADES GOING?
Secondly, I doubt seriously the wind will EVER provide much in the way of energy at affordable prices accept in unique locations.
This and the ethanol fiasco... (burning up food for gasoline to drive our cars...) where it TAKES MORE ENERGY TO FERMENT A GALLON OF ETHANOL THAN IT WHAT IT PRODUCES IN YOUR CAR...are examples of our politicians once again running amok...
Is there anyone out there...ANYONE...who can rise up and lead this country into reality?
I dont care whether the guy is NIMBY or BANANA he raises a great point. I drive by these wind farms all the time in Iowa, Illinois, and Minnesota, and it seems like they remain idle due to lack of wind. And since this junk is for peaking and not baseline power how do you control the coal-fired plants to compensate quickly when the wind stops?
I really don't care as long as taxpayer money is not involved.
Cost to them is $90,000, the tax payers pick up the rest of the total cost of $500,000. Their electric costs for a year average $30,000. After 3 years, thier original investment will be paid off and they get "free" electricity, not only that but they get paid by the electric company for any excess electricity the wind mill produces.
Is that a sweet deal or not?
I use to work on radio towers. Having spent a little time at 100 feet above the earth I can honestly tell you that most folks would be surprised at how much more wind there is at 100 feet compared to ground level. On my own tower here at home I once put some yarn at the top just hanging down as a wind indicator. It almost always was moving. However, when the wind was perfectly still at the ground, there was only about a 5 mph wind at 100 feet. That really won’t generate much electricity.
The recent building of the of the Wolfe Ridge wind farm is an example of what is possible - the farm is in a low wind area, but it will provide 40% of the power needs for 40,000 people in Denton, TX. Then the existing power plants can fuel the industry that has been coming to the area and keep costs down.
The infrastructure does have to be paid for, and that can raise rates. But then nothing’s free.
For the individual home (farm in particular) appropriately located and planned to be a long-term residence, though, it could pay off.
Deep well with windmill pump. Storage tank (or raised pond). Waterwheel attached to a generator. Let wind and gravity do the work, and sell what is not needed back to the grid. Short term, costly, but long term very economical. Irrigation with the “used” water as needed, which also helps recharge the aquifer.
Few ranchers install windmills anymore to pump water. It’s too expensive.
Electric pumps are cheaper, more depndable, and can go years without maintance. Solar panels provide the electricity.
Where you see the Democratic moniker of no, I see serious questions that no one wants to answer. By the way, 1% would typically be considered statistically irrelevant in most circles.
There probably is some wind up there, but on a still day, it won't be much. If they're like the wind turbines I've seen, they have a variable blade pitch so that they will continue to turn in varying wind conditions. The turbines I've seen have blades that will actually turn to 90 degrees to prevent rotation when the winds exceed 50 mph or so - this way, the windmill will not be damaged.
Do note that just because it is turning doesn't mean that it's producing power. The amount of power produced is proportional to the amount of wind force that occurs. Stronger wind means more power. Weak wind means no power - the clutch will disengage at some point if the wind is insufficient to produce positive power flow and the turbine will simply free-wheel.
For all the hoopla about wind power, the cost is considerably higher than people think. The mindset is that it's "free energy" but it's actually quite expensive in terms of construction and maintenance as a cost per kilowatt hour. More expensive than coal or nuclear and even combined-cycle gas generation.
One of the biggest problems with wind is that it's rarely 100% available. In other words, despite the nameplate capacity of a wind turbine, the actual amount of power produced averages around 20-30% of that rating. Which means that you need to build 3-5 times the capacity in wind power that you actually expect to produce. So if you want to build 100 megawatts of generating capacity, you would need to construct 300 to 500 megawatts of wind power to displace a single 100 MW coal-fired plant.
Another issue with wind is that it cannot be regulated. You can, of course, take wind turbines off line if you don't need the energy, but you cannot push them to full output if you do need the energy - that is totally reliant on wind speed. A summer or two ago, Texas (which has a fair amount of wind generation) had to curtail power sales to several customers with interruptable contracts due to lack of wind energy on a particularly calm day. That is not a fate that I would wish on my customers, but if wind becomes a prevalent portion of our power-production portfolio, it will happen on a much broader basis.
Being that I'm the proverbial taxpayer, I would say that this is a boondoggle.
The system needs to either stand on its own merits of fail - I am completely against any taxpayer subsidy here. If it's a viable and potentially profitable source of energy, private investors WILL put up their money. If not, they will walk away. Odds are, investors don't see the viability of wind power, which is why the government has to use tax dollars stolen from taxpayers like me to subsidize it.
More than likely there is wind moving to drive the turbine. Most wind mills are much higher than 100ft closer to 200ft.
To your knowledge, does anyone reuse the pumped water to generate more electricity? Wind may stop for a time, but gravity is always there!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.