logo
Article

Did wind mandate worsen pollution?

Denver Post|John Andrews|May 16, 2010
ColoradoGeneralEnergy Policy

"Cleaner air and cheaper energy" was the slogan when voters mandated wind and other renewable sources for 10 percent of the state's electric generation with Amendment 37 in 2004. Democratic legislators liked the idea so much that they upped the mandate to 20 percent in 2007 and boosted it this year to 30 percent. One small problem: Neither half of the slogan is true.


Wind velocity abated in Colorado last week when the legislature adjourned for 2010. Noxious air masses continue moving across the state, however, flattening better judgment. Hang on to your hats and your wallets.

"Cleaner air and cheaper energy" was the slogan when voters mandated wind and other renewable sources for 10 percent of the state's electric generation with Amendment 37 in 2004. Democratic legislators liked the idea so much that they upped the mandate to 20 percent in 2007 and boosted it this year to 30 percent.

One small problem: Neither half of the slogan is true. You know what's already happened to your rates from Xcel. Will costs level off with more reliance on renewables? Not according to the Energy Information …

... more [truncated due to possible copyright]

Wind velocity abated in Colorado last week when the legislature adjourned for 2010. Noxious air masses continue moving across the state, however, flattening better judgment. Hang on to your hats and your wallets.

"Cleaner air and cheaper energy" was the slogan when voters mandated wind and other renewable sources for 10 percent of the state's electric generation with Amendment 37 in 2004. Democratic legislators liked the idea so much that they upped the mandate to 20 percent in 2007 and boosted it this year to 30 percent.

One small problem: Neither half of the slogan is true. You know what's already happened to your rates from Xcel. Will costs level off with more reliance on renewables? Not according to the Energy Information Administration, which says in the coming decade wind will cost about 75 percent more than natural gas, 50 percent more than coal, and 25 percent more than nuclear. And solar will be twice the cost of wind.

But pollution is a different story, right? Surely a silently whirring wind turbine is better for air quality than a plant burning fossil fuels and belching carbon. You'd think so, but you'd be wrong.

During the years 2006-2009 here in metro Denver (designated a non-attainment area for special monitoring of our air pollution by the EPA), forcing wind into the electric-generation mix actually resulted in higher emission levels of sulfur dioxide and nitrous oxide, the principal components of ozone and smog, as well as higher emission levels of CO2, widely feared as a greenhouse gas. Oops.

Two obvious questions follow: How so? And says who? The "how" is a consequence of wind power's intermittent reliability (online only about a third of the time), which requires coal-fired plants to cycle on and off more frequently and burn much dirtier as a result. The "who" is a consultancy called BENTEK Energy, based in Evergreen and nationally respected for such research as the wind study I'm citing.

"How Less Became More: Wind, Power, and Unintended Consequences in the Colorado Energy Market" is BENTEK's report, commissioned by Independent Petroleum Association of Mountain States and available at www.ipams.org. The methodology looks solid to this layman, though potential bias stemming from the study's natural-gas sponsorship was fairly noted in the industry press after its April 19 release.

To cross-check the research, sponsors are seeking peer review from such institutions as MIT, Stanford and the Colorado School of Mines. On the other hand, as a savvy oilman reminded me, "those guys are all on big federal grants for green research," so their scientific impartiality can't be taken for granted, either. After East Anglia and Climategate, peer review isn't what it once was.

"How Less Became More" takes a sensible tone emphasizing tradeoffs instead of silver bullets or gotcha points. It recommends that electric utilities can avoid the wind-related emissions spikes by shifting generation from coal plants to natural gas as soon as possible. And this takes on national significance amid the current discussion of a federal mandate for renewables.

The trouble with mandates is that they beget more mandates. The meddling worsens and liberty weakens. So this year's misbegotten generation conversion bill, HB 1365, sweetens the deal for Xcel at the expense of electric consumers for a speedy switch from coal to gas, was far from the clean green winner that some of my Republican friends believed. More mischief will follow.

Conservatives (so-called) who attempt to engineer kilowatts and particulates forfeit credibility in criticizing liberals who attempt to engineer health care. Legislators trying to micromanage an industry will never get it right. They're delusional, like the Indiana House years ago when it decreed the value of Pi.

Markets, yes; mandates, no. Amendment 37 was backwards from the start.


Source:http://www.denverpost.com/hea…

Share this post
Follow Us
RSS:XMLAtomJSON
Donate
Donate
Stay Updated

We respect your privacy and never share your contact information. | LEGAL NOTICES

Contact Us

WindAction.org
Lisa Linowes, Executive Director
phone: 603.838.6588

Email contact

General Copyright Statement: Most of the sourced material posted to WindAction.org is posted according to the Fair Use doctrine of copyright law for non-commercial news reporting, education and discussion purposes. Some articles we only show excerpts, and provide links to the original published material. Any article will be removed by request from copyright owner, please send takedown requests to: info@windaction.org

© 2024 INDUSTRIAL WIND ACTION GROUP CORP. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
WEBSITE GENEROUSLY DONATED BY PARKERHILL TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION