New Texas Wind Power Project Is Massive

digg Share this on Facebook Huffpost - stumble reddit del.ico.us RSS

JIM VERTUNO | July 17, 2008 05:05 PM EST | AP

Compare other versions »

In this Jan. 9, 2007 file photo, wind turbines are seen at the Horse Hollow Wind Energy Project in rural Taylor County north of Wingate, Texas. Texas is moving forward on the nation's largest wind-power project, a plan to build billions of dollars worth of new transmission lines to bring wind energy from gusty West Texas to urban areas, it was announced Thursday, July 17, 2008. (AP Photo/LM Otero, file)

AUSTIN, Texas — Texas, headquarters of America's oil industry, is about to stake a fortune on wind power.

In what experts say is the biggest investment in the clean and renewable energy in U.S. history, utility officials in the Lone Star State gave preliminary approval Thursday to a $4.9 billion plan to build new transmission lines to carry wind-generated electricity from gusty West Texas to urban areas like Dallas.

"People think about oil wells and football in Texas, but in 10 years they'll look back and say this was a brilliant thing to do," said Patrick Woodson, vice president of E.On Climate & Renewables North America, which has about 1,200 megawatts of wind projects already in use or on the drawing board in Texas.

Texas is already the national leader in wind power, generating about 5,000 megawatts. But wind-energy advocates say the lack of transmission lines has kept a lot of that power from being put to use and has hindered the building of more turbines.

Supporters say Thursday's 2-1 vote by the Texas Public Utility Commission is critical to getting that energy to more people.

"We will add more wind than the 14 states following Texas combined," said PUC Commissioner Paul Hudson. "I think that's a very extraordinary achievement. Some think we haven't gone far enough, some think we've pushed too far."

Story continues below
advertisement

Most of Texas' wind-energy production is in petroleum-producing West Texas, where nearly 4,000 wind turbines tower over oil pump jacks and capture the breeze that blows across the flat and largely barren landscape. The new plan would not directly build a slew of new turbines, but would add transmission lines capable of moving about 18,000 megawatts. One expert said that is enough to power more than 4 million Texas homes.

Supporters predict the plan will spur new wind power projects, create jobs, reduce pollution and lower energy costs. Texans pay some of the highest electric rates in the country, in part because of congested transmission lines.

Texas electric customers will bear the cost of construction over the next several years, paying about $3 or $4 more per month on their bills, according to Tom Smith, state director of the consumer group Public Citizen. But he predicted that increase would easily be offset by lower energy prices.

Smith called Texas' current transmission lines a "two-lane dirt road" compared to the "renewable energy superhighway" the plan would build.

"We have all these wind plants up and operating. What we're asking for is the superhighway to get the energy to the cities," Smith said. "This will send signals to manufacturers all across the world Texas is ready to be a world-class player in renewable energy."

The plan still needs to receive final approval later this year from the PUC. The transmission lines would not be up and running for three to five years. Who would build them and other details have yet to be worked out.

Environmentalists and landowners have launched protests against wind turbines from Cape Cod in Massachusetts to Idaho and Texas' South Padre Island, complaining that wind turbines spoil the view and threaten migrating birds.

But the turbines are already in West Texas, a sparsely populated region already pockmarked with oil drilling and exploration equipment. And this project will build only transmission lines.

PUC Commissioner Julie Caruthers Parsley was the lone dissenter, arguing the plan may add too much power for the electric grid to handle. She also worried it could delay other projects, such as construction of nuclear reactors.

The conservative Texas Public Policy Foundation said companies that build wind and solar farms should bear more of the cost of the new lines, and it warned that those power sources cannot be expected to consistently produce abundant energy.

Even with the run-up in natural gas prices, more gas plants would be a good backup "because the sun doesn't shine and the wind doesn't blow all the time," said Drew Thornley, a policy analyst for the organization.

The wind energy industry has benefited from the support of billionaire oilman T. Boone Pickens, who is planning to build the world's largest wind farm on about 200,000 acres in the Texas Panhandle. When completed, Pickens' 2,700 turbines will be capable of producing enough electricity to power 1.3 million homes.

Pickens has become an evangelist for wind power as a way to break the nation's dependence on foreign oil, launching an advertising blitz in which he warned: "I've been an oilman all my life, but this is one emergency we can't drill our way out of."

"It's a good decision," Pickens spokesman Jay Rosser said of Thursday's PUC vote. "It recognizes the important role wind in Texas will play in meeting the state's growing energy and energy stability needs."

___

Associated Press reporter Betsy Blaney in Lubbock contributed to this report.

 
Comments
247
Pending Comments
0
iPhone App Promo

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
Page: 1 2 3 4 Next › Last » (4 pages total)

Wow. For the first time in my adult life I am REALLY proud of my state.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:25 PM on 07/20/2008
- bac I'm a Fan of bac permalink

Ditto. Something I can feel very good bragging about! More than the next 14 states combined! Who would have thought. Go T. Boone Pickens! (never thought I would be saying this) ;)

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:50 AM on 07/21/2008

Wind is a great part of an overall energy strategy. Texas has its own electricity grid which strengthens the national grid by decentralizing it.. Decentralizing the grid should be a top priority for all 50 states. Along with solar, wind has helped many individuals power their homes and yes, power their electric cars. If enough American individuals would install solar panels on their homes and buy rooftop wind turbines, big oil and the big utility companies would have to find another sucker.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:07 PM on 07/20/2008

France (about the size of Texas) gets about 80% of its electrcity from nuclear power plants and actually exports it. Japan gets 30% and if anyone should be worried about radation dangers, its them. How may windmills equal that? What we dont realize is for the next few decades, like it or not, its going to take ALL OF IT - "alternate", nuclear, fossil (oil. gas coal) conservation and technology. Nuclear is techcnically proven, accessible, plugs into the grid, clean and safe. And we really need to wake up to what is currently driving the price of oil. It is a global commodity and just now supplies are tight so any blip - a refinery shutdown in Texas, a strike in Nigeria, a temper tantrum in Venezuela, a terrorist attack in Saudi and the price spikes.
But why? - because China and India on coming ONLINE. Ted Koppel ponted out to us clueless Americans the other day that China is engaged in a massive highway construction program which will be like our Interstates. What do you think they are planning to put on them??? And do we really think they will put Smart cars or just ride buses on them - especaily when the young, hip, urban AND suburban middle class will be expecting something more. Do we expect just cause we got ours first (iPods and Subarus) but now Americans like Al Gore tell them we need to "save the polar bear" they will cede the point? Wanna bet?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:22 PM on 07/20/2008

Nukes are a deadly boondoggle. They have NO place in in future energy systems.

25 years of nuke world energy then 1 Million years of waste.

Reprocessing IS NOT breeding new fuel, it only gets the last drop from the "once through" fuel cycle. Even the french say it/.s not worth it.

It multiplies the radioactive waste stream by over 100 TIMES for just 5-25% more energy.

All the links are on my profile.

We can install 100 GW worth of wind in the time it takes to build ONE nuke. Wind is cheaper to install the coal or nukes and the fuel it free.

why do you keep promoted the Nuke dead end?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:02 PM on 07/21/2008

Well done, Texas. Bravo!
Didn't think any state could lead us this well in dumping the oil/Bush albatross.
Great example, esp. considering your heritage.
Makes me proud to be an American (again) (yes, I said it).

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:54 PM on 07/20/2008

Money spent on oil and it's products support Islamic terrorists. Opium poppies grown in Afganistan support Islamic terroists. Its in America's national interest to spend less money on oil and destroy the poppies. If wind and solar help to accomplish the former it is against America's best interest not to pursue them. It's the patriotic way!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:20 AM on 07/20/2008

Texans have always been noted for their wind power! Right?
Break Wind, Tonto! attributed to the Lone Ranger

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:19 AM on 07/20/2008

To those who worry about the turbines being ugly this comment: After a lifetime of work, my husband and i and a friend toured Ireland for a week in 2006. While touring this beautiful country, which has been a tourist mecca for several hundred years, we saw a group of white wind turbines moving above the most glorious landscape of emerald green. Their beauty against a lowering North Atlantic stormy sky was breathtaking, highlighting Ireland's modernity as well as it's more rural past with little stone houses scattered about beneath the turbines. Are the turbines beautiful? It depends on your point of view and whether you think the greater good is better than you alone. Just a thought.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:50 PM on 07/19/2008

Here's a "freebee" to anyone with an engineering bent and a bit of "know-how" who has an entrepreneurial drive:

(I don't have the engineering degree, or the inclination, but I am fairly sure that it could be done)

What would it take to make a "smaller" turbine that could produce enough electricity to charge the batteries in an electric car (or hybrid)?

I'm not talking about a big, ugly, mega-watt producing turbine. How about something in the range of a 2 foot diameter rotor, that could be mounted on the backside of the roof of a house, with all the wiring to run a line to your garage?

What if the Auto Industry could include the turbine as part of the vehicle purchase?

The problem today (for a lot of people) with "electric cars" is that it takes more (gas, oil, coal) to produce enough power to motivate the car 100 miles, than it would take if you simply burned gas in it.

That isn't conservation, that's wasting the energy in a different way, and a whole lot more wasteful.

But, if you could "charge-up" your vehicle every night (at least on the nights when there is enough wind) you could offset a considerable amount of the "fossil fuel power" you might otherwise require.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:35 PM on 07/19/2008

Piston engines are at least twice as efficient as turbines, particularly in bus 2000HP installations.
Turbines cost 10x as much as piston engines.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:14 PM on 07/19/2008

As I stated, I do not have the engineering degree.

I wasn't aware that there were "piston" engines, driven by the wind, that are capable of producing electricity.

Do you have a link? I'd be very interested in learning more about them.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:29 PM on 07/19/2008

Y'know, I've been through the "plain states" and seen the ravaged land left by a previous generations inability to "see the future coming" as it bore down on them like a run-a-way train.

Question: Is there any "panoramic view" that people in these states would not be willing to "do without" that would prevent them from at least UTILIZING this land for the benefit of the Nation once again?

They can't grow anything there, it might be attractive to them to at least derive some income from leasing the land to Wind Farms.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:16 PM on 07/19/2008

Turbines have a tiny "footprint" they can still farm and grass animals.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:14 PM on 07/19/2008

Still, I wonder why there hasn't been more focus on making rooftop solar and wind the focus. If all those big rooftops were in use, we'd need a lot less land to for the wind and solar.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:22 AM on 07/20/2008

Another scam like global warming. Think! Why is T. Boone Pickens pushing it?
1. Wind Turbines do not produce electricity consistently. As a result, they must make up the shortfall through natural gas generators so that there are not spikes on the grid.
2. T. Boone owns a bunch of Nat Gas producers in the area of where he wants to set up the wind turbines that he also has an interest in. This gives him a steady buyer of his Nat Gas nearby which takes away the problems of transport and shipping.

This is a scam like Carbon Credits being pushed by Al Gore while owning a company that sells carbon credits.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:30 PM on 07/19/2008

Bet ya didn't know that nukes have to be shut down for 14 days every 18 months for refueling. Large wind farms are more consistent the nukes.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:43 PM on 07/19/2008

So you're saying that promoting "renewable resources" on a massive scale is just a scam to sell more natural gas?

And you're encouraging ME to THINK?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:27 PM on 07/19/2008

Every watt that generated by wind power, is a watt that coal, nuclear or Natural Gas doesn't have to be used, to generate it. Doesn't really matter if power plant burn natural gas to produce power, whenever wind turbines can't, in the long run less natural gas will be used to generate electrical power. Not that means, Picken's plan doesn't create a steady market for NG, as the plan shifts vehicles from using fuels refined from petroleum, to using NG.

In that Wind power means less of limited resources are used and less pollution, wind power has merit. I'm not so sure Picken's plan does. All the paradigms that exist now where pushed by somebody with the jack to influence policy for profit, in case some still believe the public good is the first consideration, it setting policy

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:16 PM on 07/20/2008

I live in/on Kansas High Plains. Certainly the land owners are more than willing to lease the land for wind turbine construction. The problem is those landowners who hadn't been approached with a lease greement and the village folk. I'm unsure what route you took through the Plains States, plenty does grow here. The most important crop being US legislators that conned the other legislators into send billions of $ in farm aid out here ;)

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:48 AM on 07/21/2008

A whole lot of good comments on this blog, and a whole lot of comments that just left me wondering WHO these people are!

I guess what really amazes me is the number of people (who seem to be of a similar political stripe) who have embraced a mantra of "it would be too hard" and "it would take too long" and "it would ruin our vista's".

We haven't even begun to scratch the surface of how far this technology MIGHT be developed with some serious injection of $$$.

I haven't seen a single reference here to a town, in west Texas, that is nearly entirely powering itself on WIND. It was all over CNN yesterday. The town manager promoted the plan and now they are selling the 7% overage that their turbines are producing, back to the utility company. On the days that their turbines don't produce enough power to meet their needs they buy back what they need.

BOTTOM LINE: They still use fossil fuel, but A HELL OF A LOT LESS THAN THEY DID BEFORE THEY INSTALLED THE TURBINES, and they are saving a bundle on the cost of electricity across the board.

Wind, solar, geo-thermal ARE NOT, of course, going to be an immediate REPLACEMENT for fossil fuels, I ADMIT IT!

Does that make some of you feel better?

It can, however, immediately reduce OUR DEPENDENCE on fossil fuels!

And that, quite simply, CAN NOT be a bad thing!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:11 PM on 07/19/2008
photo

This is great, I wish more states were doing it.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:21 AM on 07/19/2008

This is assinine only a sick artist could invision a landscape of whirling fan blades, This country has the biggest congregation of crackpots in the world.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:09 PM on 07/19/2008

Typical reply from someone that doesn't know the difference between a comma and a period. And also it would be "envision".

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:51 PM on 07/19/2008

versus those beautiful electrical transmission towers and lines?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:22 PM on 07/19/2008
photo

Assinine?... Isn't that a little harsh?

How about characterizing it as a step in the direction? In years to come we will undoubtedly find better and better alternatives. Perhaps we may even master nuclear fusion which would provide us with unlimited clean energy. In the mean time, the construction of windmills will tide us over. After so many years, they can be disassembled them leaving no trace.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:39 PM on 07/19/2008

Ironic. After bleeding amerikans of all their money with oil T-Bone is now pushing Wind Power (actually with a healthy dose of Natural Gas..which oh by the way he also has a multi-gazillion dollar stake in), and he's going to get millions of Texas government subsidies to grab land and put up wind turbines. The rick continue to get richer, while the middle class and poor will eventually pick up the tab. Now that's how Capitalism is supposed to work...or is it more a monetary dictatorship.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:15 AM on 07/19/2008

land underneath wind turbines is still used as farm and grazing land. The footprint is very small.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:18 PM on 07/19/2008
- Mort I'm a Fan of Mort permalink
photo

Texas is a good choice. Lots of hot air.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:34 AM on 07/19/2008
photo

AMERICANS: ONCE AND FOR ALL UNITE AGAINST BIG OIL !!!!!!

It's non-renewable, highly polluting, with increasingly volatile pricing, not to mention it causes war, bankrolls terrorists and keeps us dependent in way that are not in our best interest.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:52 PM on 07/18/2008

IDK, Ted Kennedy said no to wid turbines in his backyard, why should I say yes to them being placed in mine?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:18 PM on 07/18/2008
photo

If that is true, Ted Kennedy is wrong on this one.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:08 PM on 07/19/2008

As did Mitt Romney. And it looks like the wind farms off Martha's Vineyard and Nantucket are going to be built.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:10 AM on 07/21/2008
photo

In Denmark you can form groups of 12 families and borrow money to build a wind turbine for around 1.5 million dollars (Or $125,000 each.). The loan is guaranteed by the government. After paying rent to the farmers who's land you use you can pay off the turbine in about 5 years using the income from the device. After it is paid off you get a full return on your investment every year from then on, bypassing the big energy companies. Now "that" is Capitalism as it should be.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:31 PM on 07/18/2008

Hi totalLiberal,

Are we speling Socialism, starting with a "C" these days?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:58 PM on 07/18/2008
photo

So 12 families getting together is socialism? Wow your very picky aren't you.

Go build your own highway by yourself, then get back to me

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:04 PM on 07/18/2008

BS you are dishonestly trying to tie the Danish system to Soviet Socialism.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:22 PM on 07/18/2008

You're right! Let's get rid of those Socialist police and fire departments!!!! Down with public parks!!! Darned Socialists trying to prevent crime, stop fires, and have places for our children to play!!!! Down with them all!!!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:28 AM on 07/20/2008

Trust me, when you see Picken's name attached to anything; altruism is not a priority. He has also converted a nice chunk of his "raider" bucks into massive land holdings above the southern most tip of the Ogallala aquifer. He will use the wind "government tax breaks" turbines to pump water for thirsty denisons in North Texas and Southern Oklahoma.

My years of observing T Boone has shown him to be nothing short of a land shark... constantly swimming in circles looking for fresh prey and a fast buck.

Start believing Pickens when he sets up a charitable organization dedicated to helping all those he has taken to the cleaners over the years.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:29 PM on 07/18/2008
Page: 1 2 3 4 Next › Last » (4 pages total)
Comments are closed for this entry

You must be logged in to reply to this comment. Log in  or  Connect

 
Right Now on HuffPost
FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE

MOSCOW — Presidents Barack Obama and Dmitry...

STANDOFF IN HONDURAS HEATS UPMilitary Blocks Ousted President Zelaya's Plane From...

(AP) TEGUCIGALPA, Honduras — Ousted President Manuel...

Related Tags