What's the problem with the Pickens Plan? We've been told that the main obstacles to wind power are financial and technological. The Pickens Plan buys into this logic. But senior wind leaders know more. They have revealed that while technology and investment matter, one of their biggest challenges to installing large wind farms is building social acceptance. Don't Americans love wind power? A 2008 Zogby International public poll reported that 85 percent of the 7,000 Americans surveyed agreed that federal incentives should support wind-energy development. While polls show that most Americans overwhelmingly support wind power in theory, few communities are asking for large-scale wind projects in their back yards. ...While the Pickens Plan is bold, it lacks a nuanced understanding about the obstacles to wind power. Where there is a lack of social acceptance, it is often the result of industry players who assume that "green" power is always welcome and can operate outside the bounds of the democratic process. The Pickens Plan shares some of this hubris.

Coal mines always have been big business. Wind farms are getting to be. And when heavy-hitting companies such as North American Coal Corp., Minnesota Power and Florida Power and Light are eyeing an area of real estate, you bet it's consequential. The real estate isn't paltry; it's a lot of acreage in Oliver and Morton counties. Minnesota Power and FPL want to build separate wind farms. But the coal company says, "Wait a minute, we may want to mine where you guys are talking about putting up wind turbines. That won't work."

North Dakota Public Service Commissioner Kevin Cramer has the right idea when he said this week it is time to bring coal and wind-power industries together to talk about development in the state. FPL Energy of Juno Beach, Fla., is being joined by Minnesota Power of Duluth, Minn., in pursuing wind farms in Oliver and Mercer counties. FLP Energy already has filed papers with the state PSC for its 250 square-mile proposal in the two counties. Minnesota Power is expressing a desire for its own wind farm in Oliver County. The primary problem arises, however, if these wind projects with their expensive turbines are targeted for land that holds coal to be mined.

Wind energy is not an alternative for baseload generation, and the Big Stone II plant will meet Minnesota's increasing demand for baseload electricity. There still is a place for wind energy. The co-owners plan to purchase or install 850 megawatts of wind energy by 2015 in addition to constructing Big Stone II. But Minnesota will need baseload power - power that is available 24 hours a day/seven days a week - and wind energy cannot meet that reliability standard. ...Baseload generation is needed to help justify the million-dollars-a-mile that it costs to construct these transmission lines.

Fortunately, it appears that the seven-member Rochester School Board won't face a similar moment, now that they've backed out of a proposal that would have involved the district in the creation of a new wind-energy farm. It seemed like a good idea at the time, which was last year. The district, supposedly at no financial risk, would team up with developer Johnson Controls and more than 20 other school districts statewide to become owners of a 10- to 20-megawatt wind farm. The schools would send a positive message by becoming stakeholders in the growing clean-energy movement, and down the road it was possible that some financial windfalls would come Rochester's way. But the devil's in the details, and it didn't take long for serious doubts to arise about the project. Almost from day one, the funding mechanism for the wind farm has been puzzling to the point of being inexplicable, as have Johnson Controls' claims that the district would likely make a little money while incurring no financial risk.

More than 100 years ago, erratic wind was replaced by more-dependable coal, then oil, as a means to propel us across oceans. The same dependability is needed for electric power plants. A look at the State Wind Map reveals another wind problem for the Duluth area. Northeastern Minnesota has the lowest average wind velocity in the state. The best winds are far off, on Buffalo Ridge, in the southwest, requiring long and expensive transmission lines.

Nuclear energy is a renewable, reliable, stable, homegrown energy source that does not emit greenhouse gasses, which many believe cause global warming. It works where other renewable sources are limited. It is impossible to produce solar or wind energy when the sun doesn't shine and the wind doesn't blow, and Minnesota's climate can be inconsistent in meeting those needs. Nuclear energy does not share those same limitations.

Passing paper laws is easy; the laws of nature are a little tougher to amend.

America’s growing wind power industry is now facing new challenges — resistance to the wind turbines. Wind power critics have raised concerns about visual pollution, such as on Cape Cod and upstate New York where rows of wind turbines constructed or proposed can impact scenic skylines. America’s Defense Department has raised concern about the impact of multiple wind turbines on defense radar systems. Now, conservationists and coal advocates have asked Congress to seek an assessment of how many bats and birds are maimed or killed by wind turbines’ blades before the industry grows too large.

As a layperson researching what Minnesota calls a: "Wind Energy Conversion System" (WECS) or also known as a Wind Turbine, there is one issue that always rears its ugly head, "Noise". I found that Minnesota is one of the many states to specify maximum exposure levels of noise to its citizens. The Minnesota Rules Chapter 7030 describes the limiting levels of sound established on the basis of present knowledge for the preservation of public health and welfare. Within this article I will attempt to provide a logical trace of the sound limiting requirements, along with some possible "delta" areas at the County Zoning Ordinance Levels with regards to a WECS application.

Recently, Gov. Pawlenty signed a renewable energy standard in Minnesota. While proponents claim this standard will protect Minnesota’s environment and resources and help reduce global warming is only rhetoric and not fact. This initiative will cost you the taxpayer millions and produce no positive impact in Minnesota.