Corn based Fuel. Next "gold rush": Iowa?

[katychicago]

Windfarming wouldn't work in Iowa because the farmers would have to come up with a huge investment to get the ball rolling - Why should they do that when they can convince the rest of the country that the answer is ethanol - No investment needed there - they already grow corn - and they get subsidies that would make most of the country cringe.

Originally Posted by futurecitizen

Jasper

I agree, Jasper, with the dangers of putting all the eggs in one basket. Why can't Iowa lead in all areas of sustainability? The state is poised to be a leader, rather than a follower, but we need the leadership from the top down. Iowa could innovate with sustainable wind farming incentives and solar investment opportunities and biodiesels of all stripes (and yes, crop rotations), etc. Economic vitality yielded from innovative and diversified investment.[/quote]

[katychicago]

just after I posted, I went to des moine register site - what's on the front page>>>>> not one but 2, count them 2 articles about the ethanol scam - go to DesMoinesRegister.com | Des Moines News | The Des Moines Register and check them out.

[Steve_W]

Originally Posted by katychicago

Windfarming wouldn't work in Iowa because the farmers would have to come up with a huge investment to get the ball rolling - Why should they do that when they can convince the rest of the country that the answer is ethanol - No investment needed there - they already grow corn - and they get subsidies that would make most of the country cringe.





I agree, Jasper, with the dangers of putting all the eggs in one basket. Why can't Iowa lead in all areas of sustainability? The state is poised to be a leader, rather than a follower, but we need the leadership from the top down. Iowa could innovate with sustainable wind farming incentives and solar investment opportunities and biodiesels of all stripes (and yes, crop rotations), etc. Economic vitality yielded from innovative and diversified investment.

[/quote]

Farmers aren't really known as huge energy venture capitalists. The investment would come in various forms, private/gov't/corporations, etc.

It's already being done in NW Iowa.

[runninfiend]

Windfarming wouldn't work in Iowa because the farmers would have to come up with a huge investment to get the ball rolling

Wrong.

Wind farming is already a boon for farmers in Illinois and other states. The capital comes from private companies: power companies, etc. Farmers get a payment per turbine/per year, the company takes all the risk and gets all the profit. These aren't subsidies, they are private business deals.

I have 240 acres in Missouri and was approached by Florida Light and Power about possibly putting up turbines. They are currently doing the feasibility study. I hope they do it. Would be $9,000 per turbine/per year, with a 2% increase annually.

The turbines themselves take up very little land and you can farm right up to them. This is a very good thing for farmers and landowners.

[pepe1]

Originally Posted by runninfiend

Wrong.

Wind farming is already a boon for farmers in Illinois and other states. The capital comes from private companies: power companies, etc. Farmers get a payment per turbine/per year, the company takes all the risk and gets all the profit. These aren't subsidies, they are private business deals.

I have 240 acres in Missouri and was approached by Florida Light and Power about possibly putting up turbines. They are currently doing the feasibility study. I hope they do it. Would be $9,000 per turbine/per year, with a 2% increase annually.

The turbines themselves take up very little land and you can farm right up to them. This is a very good thing for farmers and landowners.

I have always wondered one thing about these turbines - perhaps you know the answer...Is there a provision in the agreement about the removal of the turbine and its foundation should they exceed there life span or are abandoned? I guess what I'm wondering is if say 50 years from now, the turbine is no longer utilized - do these agreements include some sort of requirment that the electric company remove them?

[runninfiend]

Originally Posted by pepe1

I have always wondered one thing about these turbines - perhaps you know the answer...Is there a provision in the agreement about the removal of the turbine and its foundation should they exceed there life span or are abandoned? I guess what I'm wondering is if say 50 years from now, the turbine is no longer utilized - do these agreements include some sort of requirment that the electric company remove them?

Yes. I was told by FL and P that they are responsible for paying for any future cleanup/removal. The provision states that the land must be returned to its original condition. I wondered this myself. Companies do go bankrupt, etc., so I suppose there is no absolute guarantee (is there ever on anything?), but at least it's in writing.

The life of most leases is 25 years.

They also take up very little space. There is a small concrete pad for each turbine. They put one turbine per 40 acres, and you can farm right up to the pad.

[Iowarch]

Ethanol is not a good subtitute for conservation of a finite resource. You can not expect to maintain a system that wastes so much fuel needlessly, and yet, that is the real reason ethanol is being touted as a good thing. There is concern right now in Iowa for open heating systems that rely on ground water to maintain building heat and cooling capacities. This is because of what may happen to shallow wells since the water is not returned to the aquifer. The billions of gallons needed to create ethanol are going to make those concerns minor.
The price of food is rising which is directly related to the use of corn. Worse, the price of food in the third world is beyond many peoples capacity to pay for food, that could mean starvation for many. Recently there was an article in the news about Haitti and people finding rice, a dietary staple, have doubled in price; they are currently eatting dirt that normally is used as a nutrient supplement because it is the only thing they can afford. Prices in the first world are increasing as well, but we can afford to pay, while others who can't, do without and die. In terms of need, I think the food requirements of the world supercede the need to drive that four wheeled drive SUV anywhere you want.

[my54ford]

Originally Posted by runninfiend

Wrong.

Wind farming is already a boon for farmers in Illinois and other states. The capital comes from private companies: power companies, etc. Farmers get a payment per turbine/per year, the company takes all the risk and gets all the profit. These aren't subsidies, they are private business deals.

I have 240 acres in Missouri and was approached by Florida Light and Power about possibly putting up turbines. They are currently doing the feasibility study. I hope they do it. Would be $9,000 per turbine/per year, with a 2% increase annually.

The turbines themselves take up very little land and you can farm right up to them. This is a very good thing for farmers and landowners.

Hey you should ask for a .05 to .01 cent per kw generated thats what we get as well as the base lease