Wind Energy is Fraught with Dilemmas

This NY Times piece fairly evaluates the problems associated with wind power on a national level. The fundamental problem with wind energy is the wind is not reliable and is not generally available when energy demand is greatest.

"Engineers have cut the price of electricity derived from wind by about 80 percent in the last 20 years, setting up this renewable technology for a major share of the electricity market.

But for all its promise, wind also generates a big problem: because it is unpredictable and often fails to blow when electricity is most needed, wind is not reliable enough to assure supplies for an electric grid that must be prepared to deliver power to everybody who wants it--even when it is in greatest demand."

Most people do not realize, I'm reasonable sure, that energy cannot be stored effectively or efficiently except as potential energy, e.g., water behind hydro dams that can released to generate electricity when needed.

Wind only becomes economically viable if a carbon tax is imposed on fossil fuels like coal, yet cannot in the foreseeable future realistically compete with nuclear as a source of electricity.

Vermont's windmill debate will continue, I'm afraid, chewing up valuable human energy when we really need to focus on continuation of our electricity contact with HydroQuebec and extending the operation of Vermont Yankee for as long as safely possible. Together, they produce two thirds of Vermont's electricity.

Good news in the Burlington Free Press today. The Vermont Public Service Board effectively prevented the removal of the Peterson Dam, voiding an agreement between Central Vermont Public Service (CVPS), the Vermont Natural Resources Council and the Vermont Chapter of Trout Unlimited. The PSB refused to allow CVPS to recover from ratepayers the difference in cost for replacement electricity and other costs (“As for Peterson Station, if the PSB approves the deal we signed, and all other approvals are received andconditions of the agreement are met, we would remove the dam in 2025,” Young said. Under the agreement, the PSB must approve recovery from ratepayers of costs of a decommissioning fund, payments to Milton, the dam’s removal, an environmental enhancement fund, and replacement power.“The FERC decision leaves one primary question for the PSB: Are the costs of Peterson Station’s removal, when weighed against any environmental benefits, ultimately good for the state?” CVPS spokesman Steve Costello said. [2005 statement from CVPS]).

The dam produces enough power for 3,000 homes at 2 cents per kilowatt-hour, very inexpensive energy, indeed. This was a tough decision in such an enviro-focused state, but the correct one as we look down the barrel of much higher future energy costs.

The hydro complex on the lower Lamoille River produces about 16 MW of electricity. Compared to the 6 MW proposed (since rejected) for East Haven Wind Farm and the 30 MW proposed for Sheffield wind, one can easily see the wisdom of keeping the Peterson Dam.