Bismarck Tribune - North Dakota News - Mathern's wind energy plan needed

Mathern's wind energy plan needed

Sep 02, 2008 - 04:07:06 CDT

By DEAN HULSE
Fargo

T. Boone Pickens is generating a lot of national interest on the issue of wind power development, and North Dakota stands to benefit greatly from Pickens' plan. However, of the two candidates for North Dakota governor, only Sen. Tim Mathern recognizes this tremendous opportunity.

According to the American Wind Energy Association, North Dakota's wind energy potential is 138,400 megawatts. Mathern has set a practical goal for North Dakota of having 10,000 megawatts of electricity coming from wind power by 2020 and 15,000 megawatts by 2030. By contrast, Gov. John Hoeven has suggested the state should generate at least 1,500 megawatts of electricity from wind by 2020. Mathern's goal is 10 times that of Hoeven's.

More important, Mathern's goal could mean a $60-billion investment in North Dakota, much of which would benefit rural North Dakota. Here's how that number adds up: According to Pickens' Web site, "Building wind facilities in the corridor that stretches from the Texas panhandle to North Dakota could produce 20 percent of the electricity for the U.S. at a cost of $1 trillion. It would take another $200 billion to build the capacity to transmit that energy to cities and towns."

A May 2008 U.S. Department of Energy report, titled "20% Wind Energy by 2030: Increasing Wind Energy's Contribution to U.S. Electricity Supply," is calling for an increase of about 290,000 megawatts of wind energy in order to have 20 percent of U.S. electricity coming from wind by 2030.

Mathern's wind energy goal for North Dakota represents about 5 percent of DOE's megawatt increase. And, 5 percent of Pickens' estimated $1.2 trillion wind energy investment equals $60 billion. Just imagine what a $60-billion infusion would mean for North Dakota's economy, especially if the wind farms were locally owned. Mathern's vision for wind energy development is what North Dakota needs.

News > Opinion

Printer friendly version Mathern's wind energy plan needed

Comments

lutefisk wrote on Sep 2, 2008 2:40 PM:

" Razor - the point is that when the wind isn't blowing you will be the first person to complain about low capacity because you will freeze to death or not be able to make toast. Unless Americans are willing to abide by peak usage and time usage restrictions than you need the systems in place to produce 100% of the power continuously. "

Razors Edge wrote on Sep 2, 2008 12:41 PM:

" Well if you want your coal plants be prepared for a long winter. BOTH candidates want a cap and trade system. So that means any electricity from those is going to go through the roof. Give me a windmill and I'll put it in my backyard. "

Deb wrote on Sep 2, 2008 12:41 PM:

" YESSS! I totally missed Nick Schlickenmeyer's commentary! "

to npschlickenmayer wrote on Sep 2, 2008 10:52 AM:

" Nature hmmm when was the last time you turned on your tv, coffee pot, or anything that use electricity. The last time I did the power came form power company. Nature has electricity but it is called lighting. I don't know about your house. But, I have seen what lighting does to a house. It is not pretty. Nature has given us the poewer of fire. Does your house run on a wood burning electrical producing plant. I think not. "

lutefisk wrote on Sep 2, 2008 9:43 AM:

" It really gets old listening to the same conversation over and over. Halatbis has it correct. More wind power is OK, but everyone needs to understand it's limitations. Unless you are willing to sit in the dark when the wind isn't blowing, we can never rely on wind energy to the level that some are advocating. Sounds good when you are running for office and most of the people don't understand. "

npschlickenmayer wrote on Sep 2, 2008 9:10 AM:

" As I have stated publicly many times in my blog I am adamantly against wasting money and resources on more wind generation in North Dakota. Can't we all just be happy with what nature provides for us? "

Nickel Trophy wrote on Sep 2, 2008 8:20 AM:

" Drive down to western MN and see the thousands of wind turbines lined up as far as the eye can see. A very ugly addition to what used to be a pristine view. I'd rather have one or two coal more plants dot the state than fill it with wind turbines. Plus (and here's what you don't hear very often), a coal or nuclear plant generates power almost 24/7/365. A wind turbine? About 35% of the year on a good year -- and most of the time, when people REALLY need power in the hottest part of the summer and coldest part of the winter, the wind isn't at it's strongest. Yes, I agree wind energy has it's niche, but it should never be expected to replace baseload coal or nuclear generation. "

Halatbis wrote on Sep 2, 2008 7:41 AM:

" Aside from the fact that there is a bit of one-upsmanship going on here, Mathern is free to say what ever he thinks will work in his bid to be governor. There are some hard realities that must be faced in the quest for wind generation: 1--the transmission line shortage is critical, and ND has virtually no free capacity to serve any new towers. 2--There is huge resistance, and growing, to the acquisition of rights-of-way and construction of transmission lines in many states. See the Wall Street Journal of Aug. 18 opinion page "Windjammers".
The August issue of the Dakota Beacon has a good article about wind generation---take a look at it. 3----Electricity from wind is not a reliable source 24--7---365; hence it must be backed up by another source which is coal fired, gas fired, Nuke or whatever. Wind is part of the mix for the future, some say maybe up to 20%.
I do not oppose wind generation, but we need to be realistic about its possibilities.
As to nukes: it is an energy source of the coming decades and the U.S. had better get on with it; somehow France and other European nations have handled it just fine. It would seem that we can also. "

here we go wrote on Sep 2, 2008 6:13 AM:

" People People When are we going get over this. I want clean energy. But, I do not want to see it. North and South Dakota have enough wind to power the country. It is alot better then nuke energy were you have to find a place to put the waste. Big deal that ou see wind trubines as you drive. Not to long ago you would have windmills on every farm. Did people back then complian about them? No, they were part of everyday life. So, learn to live with it. Wind turbines are going to come like it or not. Or else you are going to have a nuke plant setting in your back yard. "

farmgirl wrote on Sep 2, 2008 4:55 AM:

" That would mean thousands more wind turbInes on the beautiful prairies of ND and that I would rather not see. "

Post Your Own Comment

All online comments are limited to 350 words total.
Comments are reviewed for taste, tone and language before posting.
Some comments may be used in the Tribune's print edition.
We value and respect your privacy, but The Bismarck Tribune might
disclose certain information to governmental entities if served with subpoena.