Home Mobile Archives Reader Blogs Register Login

Thursday, November 20, 2008

Consumer Rip Off For Wind Energy

Image and video hosting by TinyPic

From the Submitted Links:

Otter Tail Power Co. wants to increase a special charge to electric customers that helps pay for its wind energy projects.

The charge now adds $1.45 to the electric bill of an Otter Tail residential customer who uses 750 kilowatt-hours of power each month.

Otter Tail is asking North Dakota’s Public Service Commission to increase the charge, starting Jan. 1. It would raise the payment from $1.45 to $3.83 monthly.

I hope this disabuses any idea that wind power is somehow free.  It costs money to put those windmills up and it costs even more to run power lines to join the net.

I think this gives us some insight on how much wind power does cost.  Let’s assume that Ottertail is going to supply 15% of their power from windpower.  15% of 750 kilowatt-hours is 112.5 kilowatt-hours.  The proposed charge of $3.83 divided by that comes to 3.4 cents.  In addition to that the power companies receives a subsidy of 1.5 cents from the federal government which we do actually pay, somehow or another.  That comes to a nickel over and above the regular cost of generating electricity.

I don’t know what it costs Ottertail to generate electricty but I do know that Minnkota power in North Dakota can generate electricity for 2 cents a kilowatt hour.  That would mean that we’re paying up to three and an half times for wind energy than we are for conventional coal fired electricity.

Why are we doing this.  How are we going to compete in the world wide market when we’re out to make a vital component of every business that much more expensive. 

Comments

When the leftist greens get state public utility commissions to require electric utilites to provide “green power” they don’t factor in the added cost to do so. What totally baffles me is that when they talk about “green power” they don’t consider hydroelectric generation to be included.

Wind-generated power is unreliable. When the wind does not blow, the turbines are not going, and the power does not flow. Electric utilites need “base load” generation, and coal is the cheapest way to provide it. Sure, it would be nice to have lots of windmills producing our power, but the simple matter is that it is expensive to do so. If the public utilites commissions are going to require utilites to use green power, then they better be ready to take the heat when the utilites request a rate increase.

siouxfan on November 20, 2008 at 02:40 pm

Exactly.  So how do you suppose we’re going to do in Duluth this weekend?


[W]hat you’ve just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.


The Whistler's signature
The Whistler on November 20, 2008 at 03:08 pm

East Ottertail was faced with the same aging infrastructure and rising maintenance and fuel costs that every power company in the country is faced with. The infrastructure has to be replaced and it was going to be expensive. Faced with growing public sentiment and government pressure to go to renewables, after careful consideration and evaluation of all of the present and future costs involved, they chose wind as have power companies in 34 states so far. At times when the wind is blowing, which is most of the time, they will be selling their excess power. During the few times when it’s not, they will be buying power from antiquated sources.

In the near future, you will be much better off.

ews48 on November 20, 2008 at 03:11 pm

Baloney they wouldn’t have to be charging so much extra if that were the case.

You guys just make up stuff.  If there was a market for it you wouldn’t have to mandate it.


[W]hat you’ve just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.


The Whistler's signature
The Whistler on November 20, 2008 at 03:12 pm
Rob
Rob
19961 comments
Send a private message

If there was a market for it you wouldn’t have to mandate it.

If have yet to hear a single proponent of wind energy refute that argument.


When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.

-- Thomas Jefferson

Rob’s recently listened-to songs:

robport.gif border=0

Rob on November 20, 2008 at 03:17 pm
Avatar for Razorbackfan

With all the green so called energy, do they ever take into consideration, that our electric grid cannot handle green energy.  I do not believe in global warming, this is a myth for libs to push their agenda and to break our own energy that we have now.  Our utilites will skyrocket and in the meantime they will be using our money to make green energy.  This is a no win situation.  I say drill here now, shale coal, coal, is the way to go.  But they will shut it down again.  WHAT are they afraid of energy independence, more capital gain.  I have a friend that is a coal engineer, he will be moving overseas to run a coal fired plant, why because they are not afraid of energy.

Razorbackfan on November 20, 2008 at 07:24 pm
Avatar for di butler

Is this true? Otter tail Power Co.? I have been laughing my butt off over this! And they call us here in the south rednecks, but I believe this name far surpasses Georgia Power. Maybe we can petition to get the Georgia part dropped and call it Possum Trot Power or something.

di butler on November 21, 2008 at 12:50 am

The idiots in my state approved the following rate hike:

Shall Missouri law be amended to require investor-owned electric utilities to generate or purchase electricity from renewable energy sources such as solar, wind, biomass and hydropower with the renewable energy sources equaling at least 2% of retail sales by 2011 increasing incrementally to at least 15% by 2021, including at least 2% from solar energy; and restricting to no more than 1% any rate increase to consumers for this renewable energy?

The estimated direct cost to state governmental entities is $395,183.  It is estimated there are no direct costs or savings to local governmental entities.  However, indirect costs may be incurred by state and local governmental entities if the proposal results in increased electricity retail rates.

Nowhere does this address the additional cost to consumers or the fact that the energy will likely come from out of state instead of locally produced, which is bad for the state economy and also results in additional transmission costs, both in dollars and environmental.

electnixon on November 21, 2008 at 08:05 am
Avatar for Rob B.

If have yet to hear a single proponent of wind energy refute that argument.

Why refute it when we can just point to Home mortgage loans, banking, farming subsidies, airlines and the big 3 auto makers? Why is it so bad to have a mandate on energy when you tolerate mandates on so much more?

Rob B. on November 21, 2008 at 08:49 am

Interesting point, Rob B., and given that the mandates for all those industries have done them so much good, I would presume that you’ve chosen to go into one of them.

Right? 

Oh.  You mean you didn’t go into one of those industries because they’re all tanking?  Really?

Now what was that argument for mandates again?

Bike Bubba on November 21, 2008 at 09:24 am

In the near future, you will be much better off.

Pure Marxism.  In reality, windmills are much more antiquated than modern powerplants using the stored, concentrated solar energy contained in oil, coal and natural gas.


The only legitimate role of government with regard to economics is to prevent fraud and provide a remedy- civil and criminal penalties- in case of fraud.

People have the mistaken notion that the free market has no rules.  But it most certainly does.  All our problems are due to government meddling.

robert108 on November 21, 2008 at 11:03 am
Avatar for gavin brown

“base load”

the power station where I work needs more than 30% load to run on coal. under this and it has to run on fuel oil. at 1 million litres per 24 hrs it makes it uneconomical to run it under 30%. so base load is about money not any thing else. alternative energy cant supply peak load. so like any power setup you diversify your sources of power and have a backup generator for periods when the others cant supply all your needs.

gavin brown on November 21, 2008 at 06:13 pm
Page 1 of 1        

Post a Comment


Before commenting, please recite:

Grant me the serenity to ignore the trolls,
the courage to debate with honest opponents,
and the wisdom to know the difference.

Name   
Email   
URL   
Human?
  
 

Upload Image    

Remember my personal information

Notify me of follow-up comments?

Note: Notifications will only be sent to confirmed email addresses.

    

By submitting your comment you agree to our terms of service.