Article

Cost-benefit Analysis for the two windplants targeting Garrett County

However, because of the intermittent, unpredictable nature of wind, no homes would be powered by the wind industry. Given this limitation and the fact that industrial electricity must be consumed immediately, wind can generate only energy – not capacity – to the electricity grid.

Here's a cost-benefit analysis for the two windplants targeting Garrett County. With a combined rated capacity of 140 MWs and a generous capacity factor of 30 percent, these facilities will likely contribute 42 MWs of electricity annually to our regional grid – .000026 percent of the grid's annual production, an amount that would be engulfed in the first minutes of our increasing demand for electricity (at two percent per year). If this power were generated by coal or nuclear, with capacity factors approaching 90 percent and with a predictable and constant stream of energy, it would service about 30,000 homes. However, because of the intermittent, unpredictable nature of wind, no homes would be powered by the wind industry. Given this limitation and the fact that industrial electricity must be consumed immediately, wind can generate only energy – not capacity – to the electricity grid.

Because of federal and state subsidies to the wind industry, these two windplants should expect:

•$15 million annually from the sale of electricity, given state laws requiring utilities to purchase “green” energy at prices beyond competitive rates. The wind industry will likely charge utilities at least 5 cents per kW hour... more [truncated due to possible copyright]  

Here's a cost-benefit analysis for the two windplants targeting Garrett County. With a combined rated capacity of 140 MWs and a generous capacity factor of 30 percent, these facilities will likely contribute 42 MWs of electricity annually to our regional grid – .000026 percent of the grid's annual production, an amount that would be engulfed in the first minutes of our increasing demand for electricity (at two percent per year). If this power were generated by coal or nuclear, with capacity factors approaching 90 percent and with a predictable and constant stream of energy, it would service about 30,000 homes. However, because of the intermittent, unpredictable nature of wind, no homes would be powered by the wind industry. Given this limitation and the fact that industrial electricity must be consumed immediately, wind can generate only energy – not capacity – to the electricity grid.
 
Because of federal and state subsidies to the wind industry, these two windplants should expect:
 
•$15 million annually from the sale of electricity, given state laws requiring utilities to purchase “green” energy at prices beyond competitive rates. The wind industry will likely charge utilities at least 5 cents per kW hour – twice the cost of coal. This cost will ultimately be borne by ratepayers.
 
Over $200 million leveraged over the 10-year life of the wind industry's congressional production tax credits, currently at 1.9 cents per kW hour. Since production tax credits will result in a deficit to the federal treasury, this loss will have to be made up by taxpayers.
 
Equity investors such as AES and Florida Power and Light will have access to wind's double declining capital depreciation schedule, paying off the capital costs totaling about $140 million in little more than five years. Altogether, publicly funded tax avoidance schemes reimburse wind developers as much as two-thirds of the capital costs of each wind turbine.
 
Our two wind companies might employ three or four maintenance employees at a salary of about $18,500, with no mention of additional benefits and no guarantee they would be county or state residents. Their contracts with property owners offer unsecured promises of a few thousand dollars per year. Their promises about adding more than a million dollars annually to the county treasury did not withstand the scrutiny of the Maryland Public Service Commission and will likely result in the same relatively empty pockets experienced in West Virginia and Pennsylvania.


Source: http://www.therepublicannew...

MAR 3 2006
https://www.windaction.org/posts/1505-cost-benefit-analysis-for-the-two-windplants-targeting-garrett-county
back to top