Response to Kerhoven Banner article
Editor, Kerhoven Banner -
I'm responding to an article that appeared in your Wednesday, June 27, 2007 issue ("Wind energy is a great opportunity - but the road is long says Falk"). I want to clarify a point Mr. Falk made regarding Big Stone II and the use of coal to generate electricity.
He says that wind is proving to be less expensive than coal - that simply is not true. At first blush, the cost of installing a megawatt of wind energy capacity (about $1.8 million) compared to the cost per installed megawatt at Big Stone II (about $2.2 million) makes wind a better deal. But there is more to the story.
In our region, wind energy has an expected output (known as "capacity factor") of about 40 percent. The capacity factor of Big Stone II will be about 88 percent. So, an investment of $1.8 million in wind buys less than half the energy of a $2.2 million investment in Big Stone II.
Because the wind resource is not reliable, it must be backed up by either a fossil fuel source (usually natural gas) or hydro-electric generation (if available). A natural gas turbine will have an installed-megawatt cost of about $500, depending on the plant size. That investment (plus the relatively high cost of fuel, and operation and maintenance) has to be added to the cost of backing up wind generation, which makes wind uneconomical when compared to coal.
We had a good example of the need to back-up wind on February 5, 2007. The temperature in Minneapolis averaged -7 degrees. The wind speed on the Buffalo Ridge averaged 3.4 miles per hour. The wind resource was only contributing 5 percent of its potential output. In fact, on that date, Minnesota came close to exhausting its reserve capacity. Many utilities asked customers to cut back on usage.
I totally agree with Mr. Falk that wind energy is a clean, viable way of producing electricity. It can be a source of economic development for rural areas that have a favorable wind resource - and western Minnesota certainly fits that mold.
The seven participating Big Stone II utilities include wind energy in their generation plans. The Big Stone Transmission project, in conjunction with other planned transmission projects, will upgrade several transmission lines and add or enhance six substations to accommodate the energy from the new plant and allow for the development of up to 1,000 additional megawatts of renewable energy development.
We are clearly in favor of the development of wind energy. But, that development must come in tandem with placing on-line additional reliable, least cost generating stations like Big Stone II.
Sincerely,
Daniel Sharp
Communication Manager
Big Stone II Project
(218) 739-8576
(701) 426-3650 (Cellular)
| << Return to viewpoints page |  |
Download pdf |
