Not in the Kennedys' Backyard - New York Times

Not in the Kennedys' Backyard - New York Times

Four cheers for Tierney for exposing the truth behind the Kennedys' hypocritical positions supporting wind energy and wind farms generally and their opposition to the Cape Wind project, specifically. The crux of this debate, it seems to me, is this: Are we willing to trade one externality for another? Wind generated electricity is far more expensive than electricity generated by other means at today's prices, therefore it is a poor economic choice. If we believe that the paltry effect of wind energy on global warming (an externality) is worth trading for scenic degradation (an externality), then choose wind.

I'm not prepared to make that choice. When considering subsidies and investment dollars in the energy realm the best choice may lie in conservation. I wonder if anyone has provided an economic study for Vermont on electricity price effects of conservation vs. the total economic costs of wind energy?

In any event, we must have an increased supply of reliable electricity for baseline demands in the future. That cannot be supplied by wind. Only a mix of nuclear, hydro, natural gas and coal can provide our needs.

Vermont take note of this (emphasis added):

"To be fair, there are good arguments against the wind farm in Nantucket Sound. Robert Kennedy rightly complained that it wouldn't be feasible without hefty state and federal subsidies. But neither would the other renewable-energy projects promoted by him and his uncle.

Environmentalists have been promising for more than three decades that wind energy would be competitive if there was a "level playing field," but it survives only because the field has been tilted in its favor.

When you add up the tax breaks and other federal aid to wind farms, the subsidy per unit of energy produced is more than double the subsidy given to nuclear and fossil-fuel power plants, according to Thomas Tanton, a fellow at the Institute for Energy Research.

"Wind power is at least twice as expensive as power from conventional sources," Tanton says, "and it's less than half as valuable because it's not always available when you need it." Even when Tanton makes allowances for what economists call externalities - like the benefits of slowing global warming by emitting less carbon dioxide - he finds that wind power is still nowhere close to competitive.

Besides the federal dollars, wind farms get extra help from states, particularly states like New York and California, which have ordered utilities to generate a certain percentage of their power from renewable energy. This amounts to a hidden surcharge on consumers - the kind of subsidy that economists loathe. If state officials want to direct money to the owners of wind farms, they should at least dole it out openly."