iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Martin O'Malley, Maryland Governor, Proposes Wind Power Mandate

Wind Power

TOM LoBIANCO   02/ 9/11 06:51 PM ET   AP

ANNAPOLIS, Md. — Maryland utilities would have to sign multi-decade contracts to buy offshore wind energy under a proposal Gov. Martin O'Malley could introduce as soon as Thursday.

A draft of O'Malley's offshore wind bill, a copy of which was obtained by The Associated Press, would require the state's four utilities to sign fixed-price contracts of at least 20 years with offshore wind developers who are expected to build wind turbines a dozen miles off the coast of Ocean City.

The measure will likely cost Maryland ratepayers an additional $1.60 a month on their utility bills, said Malcolm Woolf, director of the Maryland Energy Administration.

The wind turbines would take years to develop.

"If all goes well, we're hoping to have wind turbines spinning in 2016," Woolf said Wednesday.

Under the O'Malley proposal, Maryland's Public Service Commission would help negotiate the purchase of 400 megawatts to 600 megawatts of wind power generated by offshore turbines.

A spokesman for Constellation Energy Group Inc., the parent company of Baltimore-based utility BGE, declined comment. A spokesman for Pepco, a unit of Pepco Holdings Inc. that provides electricity throughout the Washington suburbs, said the company would not take a position until it sees the final bill filed by O'Malley.

Woolf and energy administration staffers have been working closely with the U.S. Interior Department to define an area of about 207 square nautical miles east of Ocean City where the wind turbines would be erected.

The Obama administration has focused on speeding the development of offshore wind turbines along the Atlantic Outer Continental Shelf, although turbines have not yet been erected in federal waters.

Maryland Senate Finance Chairman Thomas "Mac" Middleton, D-Charles, said locking utilities into fixed prices for decades could keep them from getting better rates later, when wind energy becomes cheaper and more abundant.

"The biggest issue is going to be cost," said Middleton, who is set to lead Senate deliberation on the measure.

Senate Minority Leader Nancy Jacobs, R-Harford, said Wednesday she was skeptical of any measure that sets a new mandate.

"What happened to competition?" Jacobs asked.

A coalition of Maryland steelworkers and environmentalists has formed to help Woolf and the O'Malley administration move the measure through the General Assembly.

"Some things we have heard, as far an impact on electricity rates, as far as in manufacturing and residential rates, we are concerned about. But the overall concept of wind turbines – we support that," said Jim Strong, a sub-district director for the United Steelworkers in Maryland.

He said O'Malley approached him in the fall, seeking union support for his offshore wind bill.

Woolf cited U.S. Energy Department estimates that a 500-megawatt offshore wind project could generate 2,000 construction jobs over five years and 400 long-term jobs maintaining the turbines.

The coalition of labor and environmental groups in Maryland mirrors the national BlueGreen Alliance that is lobbying Congress in support of renewable energy projects with national mandates and funding.

"In order to really get our economy back on track, we believe we have to have a strategy of making things again," Strong said.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST GREEN

ANNAPOLIS, Md. — Maryland utilities would have to sign multi-decade contracts to buy offshore wind energy under a proposal Gov. Martin O'Malley could introduce as soon as Thursday. A draft of O...
ANNAPOLIS, Md. — Maryland utilities would have to sign multi-decade contracts to buy offshore wind energy under a proposal Gov. Martin O'Malley could introduce as soon as Thursday. A draft of O...
Filed by Joanna Zelman  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 183
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
02:25 PM on 03/31/2011
If we had enough Electric Cars we could store the Intermiten solar and wind power in the CAR Batteries.
12:25 PM on 02/13/2011
Good news from Holland!

http://www.maggiesnotebook.com/2011/02/holland-dumps-wind-solar-carbon-credits-holland-goes-nuclear/#comments

http://www.nucleartownhall.com/blog/tag/holland/

They can't afford the scam anymore so its back to reality.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
08:10 PM on 02/12/2011
That's the only way you green nazis are ever going to be able to force your evangelistic hysteria on the public - by forcing it down everybody's throat.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ArjenBoatsma
No such thing as too much coffee.
10:23 PM on 02/14/2011
Don't whine when a gallon of gas goes to $5, $8, or well above $10!
04:04 PM on 02/12/2011
The comment about adding $1.60 to the average monthly bill is meaningless unless you indicate what percentage of total power generation will be from wind. More revealing would be the average cost increase if "all" power supplied in Maryland were to come from wind.

Wind power is very unpredictable and intermittent, therefore requiring some sort of back-up for the times the wind is not at full force. In many cases the back-up must be operating constantly, significantly reducing the benefits of wind generation. Until we find a feasible means to store large quantities of intermittent energy it will be impossible to make wind power economical.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
aligatorhardt
Cut on the bias
08:39 AM on 02/12/2011
An increase of $1.60 per month is similar to Cape wind cost analysis. Wind power is competitive with coal power and without all the pollution. Compare that with the power cost adjustments we are all familiar with, which raise costs every time oil prices go up. Even with this extended recession, oil prices are still going up and many predict $5 per gallon prices in a year. Coal use depends on railroad delivery and mining, both of which depend on diesel for all the machinery and transportation. Any increase in oil prices will be accompanied by increases in electric rates. But with the wind turbines, freedom from rising prices can be found. Within the first year, the wind power will be cheaper than coal power, and stay at that level for it's life span. Waiting for prices to fall further on wind turbines is like waiting for any sale, you miss out on the use of the item and waste more money in the long run. I think they would be wise to lock in this good deal and I expect rising fossil fuel prices will show the investment was sensible.
photo
maslin
At 6 bn km, it's mostly small stuff.
03:19 PM on 02/12/2011
Let's examine Denmark. According to a 2009 critique of the Danish wind industry,

http://www.cepos.dk/fileadmin/user_upload/Arkiv/PDF/Wind_energy_-_the_case_of_Denmark.pdf

From the Executive Summary:

'Denmark generates the equivalent of about 19% of its electricity demand with wind turbines, but wind power contributes far less than 19% of the Nation’s electricity demand.

The claim that Denmark derives about 20% of its electricity from wind overstates matters. Being highly intermittent, wind power has recently (2006) met as little as 5% of Denmark’s annual electricity consumption with an average over the last five years of 9.7%.

In the absence of large-scale electricity storage, any modern electricity system must continuously balance electricity supply and demand, because even small variations in system voltage and frequency can cause damage to modern electronic equipment and other electrical equipment.

...snip...

Denmark manages to keep the electricity systems balanced due to having the benefit of its particular neighbors and their electricity mix. Norway and Sweden provide Denmark, Germany and Netherlands access to significant amounts of fast, short term balancing reserve, via inter-connectors.

They effectively act as Denmark’s “electricity storage batteries”. Norwegian and Swedish hydro-power can be rapidly turned up and down, and Norway’s lakes effectively “store” some portion of Danish wind power.

Cont'd
photo
maslin
At 6 bn km, it's mostly small stuff.
03:23 PM on 02/12/2011
'Over the last eight years West Denmark has exported (couldn’t use), on average, 57% of the wind power it generated and East Denmark an average of 45%.The correlation between high wind output and net outflows makes the case that there is a large component of wind energy in the outflow indisputable.

The exported wind power, paid for by Danish householders, brings material benefits in the form of cheap electricity and delayed investment in new generation equipment for consumers in Sweden and Norway but nothing for Danish consumers. Taxes and charges on electricity for Danish household consumers make their electricity by far the most expensive in the European Union (EU)1. The total probable value of exported subsidies between 2001 and 2008 was DKK 6.8 billion (€916 million) during this period. A similar amount was probably exported prior to 2012 and larger quantities will be exported following the commissioning of 800 MW of new offshore wind capacity in 2013.

The wind power that is exported from Denmark saves neither fossil fuel consumption nor CO2 emissions in Denmark, where it is all paid for. By necessity, wind power exported to Norway and Sweden supplants largely carbon neutral electricity in the Nordic countries. No coal is used nor are there power-related CO2 emissions in Sweden and Norway.'

Cont'd
12:29 PM on 02/13/2011
Yeah those overwhelming costs involved in maintaining a archaic method of generating power that is incapable of paying for itself.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
StansDad
Guy who eats food
04:39 PM on 02/11/2011
What's cheaper,
A) A few windmills
or
B) Trillions and trillions spent on wars of death and destruction for oil in the middle east?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Moder8tion
01:02 AM on 02/12/2011
C) Use our own gas and oil resources.

D) All of the above
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Rucio
07:51 AM on 02/14/2011
Oil is used for only 1% of our electricity. These two choices have nothing to do with each other.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Aleks Hunter
Dear God, please save us from Your followers.
04:00 PM on 02/14/2011
So you drive an electric car Rucio? Sweeet.
photo
maslin
At 6 bn km, it's mostly small stuff.
03:32 PM on 02/11/2011
http://www.wind-watch.org/news/2011/02/11/holland-slashes-carbon-targets-shuns-wind-for-nuclear/

Holland slashes carbon targets, shuns wind for nuclear.

'In a radical change of policy, the Netherlands is reducing its targets for renewable energy and slashing the subsidies for wind and solar power. It’s also given the green light for the country’s first new nuclear power plants for almost 40 years.

Why the change? Wind and solar subsidies are too expensive, the Financial Times Deutschland , reports.

Holland thus becomes the first country to abandon the EU-wide target of producing 20 per cent of its domestic power from renewables. This is a remarkable turnaround from a state that took the Kyoto Agreement seriously and chivvied other EU members into adopting renewable energy strategies. The FT reports that instead of the €4bn annual subsidy, it will be slashed to €1.5bn.'
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
aligatorhardt
Cut on the bias
08:44 AM on 02/12/2011
Wow, making up the news? Renewable power goals are being surpassed and all the world's economies are in recession. So subsidies are being reduced. Where are all the orders for nuclear plants? Where is the European waste storage?  Hopefully people will read the news themselves instead of listening to distortion like this.
photo
maslin
At 6 bn km, it's mostly small stuff.
02:34 PM on 02/12/2011
I recommend you take all your criticisms up with the reporter and/or the Dutch government.

The report may be in error, but I doubt it.

I am amused that your only defense is to attack the messenger. It doesn't speak well for the strength of your position.
photo
maslin
At 6 bn km, it's mostly small stuff.
02:50 PM on 02/12/2011
Orders for nuclear plants:

In US (DOE)
http://www.ne.doe.gov/np2010/neScorecard/neScorecard_newplant.html

Worldwide (WNA)
http://www.world-nuclear.org/info/inf17.html

IAEA Projections (from WNA site):

'The International Atomic Energy Agency in its 2010 report significantly increased its projection of world nuclear generating capacity. It now anticipates at least 73 GWe in net new capacity by 2020, and then 546 to 803 GWe in place in 2030 – much more than projected previously, and 45% to 113% more than 377 GWe actually operating at the end of 2010. OECD estimates range up to 816 GWe in 2030. The change is based on specific plans and actions in a number of countries, including China, India, Russia, Finland and France, coupled with the changed outlook due to constraints on carbon emissions. The IAEA projections would give nuclear power a 13.5 to 14.6% share in electricity production in 2020, and 12.6 to 15.9% in 2030. The fastest growth is in Asia.'
photo
TexasTreader
Fluffy, the yard dog
10:27 AM on 02/11/2011
Another hit for the climate change crowd:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704422204576130300992126630.html
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
spqesq
10:57 AM on 02/11/2011
Another crank from Texas that hates his environment.
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
JScott
John Galt's last name is McGuffin-Smithee
05:28 PM on 02/11/2011
Seems to me a lotta them crowd sourced their postings on here.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
12:59 PM on 02/11/2011
Another research study that shows the computer models used by the IPCC don't work.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
alvdh1
01:57 PM on 02/11/2011
It doesn't show jack fella. These are their initial findings and there is zero mention if the initial findings were peer reviewed. Having the story come from the editorial section from the Wall Street Journal immediately makes it suspect. Conveniently not interviewing someone from NASA or the IPCC also makes the story even more suspect aside from the fact that Rupert Murdock owns and controls the content of the WSJ. In addition, there is no mention of who is funding the 20th Century Reananlysis Project.
This is just another convenient omission on the part of the author of the story.

Good try though to confuse the issue with bogus reporting.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
spqesq
06:39 PM on 02/11/2011
Not really a research study was it. More like a newspaper hit piece talking about weather instead of climate. Knowing the difference is important to critical thinking.
09:07 AM on 02/11/2011
This sounds like a discouragement to stay in that state. I thought Wisconsin was bad with all of the wasteful taxes going to places that really isn't needed. Just politics.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
alvdh1
02:03 PM on 02/11/2011
Having clean energy at a fixed rate over a 20 year period is a discouragement to stay in the state. If you believe that, I have some swamp land for sale that you might be iinterested in at a fixed price.
Since you seem to be so knowledgeable in utility rates, why not provide us with some information regarding the growth of utility rates over the past 20 years in Maryland, a business analysis of the impact of rising rates in Maryland over the next 20 years and what the current and projected externalized cost of dirty electricity will be in Maryland over the next 20 years that doesn't show up on their utility bills including, but not limited to the health, social, property and environmental costs.
02:42 PM on 02/11/2011
Ok, i agree with you sum what. In the long run, somethings will be an investment. For instance, my parents have geothermal business, so it wasn't terribably expensive to install. But if you hire one to put it in for a 2 ton or so house, it could cost around $25,000 just to install. After that though, your right its very cheap. The payback time for a small house is between 40 - 50 years. Im saying that the busnusses and people are close to bankrupt. Having mandates could push them over into bankruptcy. They might as well move out of state and servive since the up front cost is outrageous compared to the HVAC that is not geothermal. Im sure everything goes the same way with wind and other energy efficient ways. BTW I would love to buy your swamp land, if I can do anything with it. In wisconsin, swamp land is considered the same as a lake. you can't build within 75 feet of it, can't build road through it, and DNR pretty much owns it. Even though I love swamp land, it is a pain to own it.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
03:01 PM on 02/11/2011
Yeah I am sure those people who got fixed rate loans 10 years ago really are just so happy to be locked in 7+% while new loans are going for about 5%.

Locking in is only a good deal if prices stay the same or increase, if they go down then being locked in sucks. And the greenies keep claiming that with expanded wind and solar the economies of scale will bring the cost down plus R&D will further reduce the cost of renewable energy.

So if we are to believe the greenies, then it would be stupid to lock in todays higher rate when they claim the rate will decrease with time.

The only ones the locked in rates help are the owners who have a guaranteed income stream for 20 years. Add in the subsidies they will get and the government might as well let them print their own money.
Genders
Love, Tolerance, Enlightenment
04:33 PM on 02/11/2011
yeah, but more oil war is just great.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
fireofenergy
Promote freedom AND science
11:11 PM on 02/10/2011
I would gladly pay the extra few pennies to help promote offshore wind! Now, I know we don't have a cheap enough electrical storage yet, but with continued pressure for (robotically mass produced) solar and wind, we will HAVE to find a way that's cheap enough to store ALL the excess! The LiFePO4 battery seems to have little raw materials supply issues and should be able to be mass produced in such robotic factories. It would be a lot easier than building thousands of dams for pumped hydro storage... Or maybe, they can use giant bladders in the deep ocean for such pumped air storage. Whatever it is, we need to prepare for the OD (oil decline) and GW because they are inevitable.
Genders
Love, Tolerance, Enlightenment
04:35 PM on 02/11/2011
Those batteries should be used for plug in hybrid commuter cars. Waste Bio fuels can supply all the backup energy wind and solar needed, without competing for food.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
aligatorhardt
Cut on the bias
08:54 AM on 02/12/2011
Visit www.renewableenergyworld,com    to find actual energy storage systems and reports of their use. The wind is variable, but as more locations utilize wind, the variability of one location is offset by another location. This issue is not a big problem.
photo
maslin
At 6 bn km, it's mostly small stuff.
01:30 PM on 02/14/2011
Example of Denmark shows otherwise.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
inkhosi
10:25 PM on 02/10/2011
As a former resident of Maryland I have a tremendous amount of respect for Governor O'Malley. He is keeping Maryland strong, wealthy, healthy, environmentally-conscious, well-educated, and most importantly egalitarian.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
10:08 PM on 02/10/2011
fossil fuel corporations and the fossil fuel fas*cists (FFF) have monopolized energy in this country for 150 years....and have been blocking alternatives at least this long..."competition is a sin".....john d rockefeller....and then they say...."we have no alternatives we have to stick with fossil fuels"....hypocrites one and all....legislate them out of business !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
alvdh1
02:08 PM on 02/11/2011
Okiemon,

In addition, 48 states, including Maryland, have the investor owned guaranteed rate of return model (GROR) that ensures that there will be no competition. If the utility doesn't earn their GROR, they just go to the PUC and request a rate increase. In Missouri, this has led Ameren to get an additonal $600,000,000 in rate increases since 2007. If Senate Minority Leader Nancy Jacobs was truly concerned about competition, she would work endlessly to end the GROR monopoly the utlities so enjoy at the expense of the rate payers. The last thing she wants is competition.
07:59 AM on 02/14/2011
"In Missouri, this has led Ameren to get an additonal $600,000,000 in rate increases since 2007."

Please put numbers in context. In this case $600M comes to about 1 cent/kWh. The GROR model works fine for me. My monthly electric bill is pretty far down the list of my monthly expenses; down close to my monthly Starbucks bill.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
10:02 PM on 02/10/2011
if all the govt....state....federal.....local....ratepayers subsidies of nuclear power since the 1950s been placed in clean solar...wind...geothermal energy...today electricity would be too cheap to meter...
03:23 PM on 02/11/2011
I bet you don't even know how much in subsidies have been applied to nuclear power generation. Most of the subsidies were on the R&D side and for the last two decades the subsidies have been going the other direction, from the nuclear plants to the feds in the form of a spent fuel disposal fee of 1/10 cent per kWh.

...and how is a rate payer (customer) buying electricity from a utility considered a subsidy?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
04:28 PM on 02/11/2011
are you kidding? if it takes 10 years to build a nuc plant the ratepayers are paying for it every month during all that time...just ask the electricity customers on long island...they paid for shorem for 10 years and then never got a watt of power out of it....
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
aligatorhardt
Cut on the bias
08:56 AM on 02/12/2011
Refusing to answer by changing the question. Typical.
Genders
Love, Tolerance, Enlightenment
04:37 PM on 02/11/2011
Yes! FF. BUt even better, now is the time. Rooftop solar, Offshore wind and waste bio char are already the cheapest energy for millions of Americans and billions of people world wide. Green energy has reached about 1% of our energy mix, and is doubling every year or three, at that rate it can replace fossil and nukes in 10-20 years. clean, cheaper in the long run and forever.
07:08 PM on 02/10/2011
I would have to agree, they do look pretty even though they don't work. Lets find other ways to waste taxpayer dollars. Its so exciting.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
08:39 PM on 02/10/2011
....... crickets .......
08:49 PM on 02/10/2011
Lettuce...
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
spqesq
09:43 AM on 02/11/2011
You mean like endless multi-trillion dollar wars in the desert.
06:24 PM on 02/10/2011
I saw the wind turbines in California for the first time a couple weeks ago... man, it is an awesome sight.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
spqesq
09:48 AM on 02/11/2011
Same here in Pennsylvania. Nothing cooler than driving past enormous, ominous nuke plants belching towering plumes of steam into the atmosphere along the Susquehanna River only to find wind turbines spinning away up on the mountain tops. Totally awesome. Yes we can!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Moder8tion
01:00 AM on 02/12/2011
I think both are cool. What's so bad about towering plumes of steam? There is a milk processing factory near me that does the same thing. Should we ban milk now?
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
JScott
John Galt's last name is McGuffin-Smithee
05:31 PM on 02/11/2011
I guess they have to be pretty much offshore Maryland is pretty densely populated so there's not much in the way of large tracts of land to put them altho I think there's one or two in Lewes MD.