U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > South Dakota
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Jump to a detailed profile or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Business Search - 14 Million verified businesses
Search for:  near: 
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 03-10-2011, 10:43 PM
 
Location: Eastern SD
2,409 posts, read 1,778,716 times
Reputation: 2097
Default wind power

I'm curious to what South Dakotans think of the drastic increase in creation of wind generating power plants. Personally I think it's one great thing to come out of the Bush era, the tax credits that were passed and have been extended for another year for the creation of wind generating plants.

Clean energy grants extended for a year; still a dumb way to do things | Grist

I live around where lots are being created, the high elevation area in extreme eastern SD and western MN known as the buffalo ridge. Driving from Brookings to Lake Benton you will see quite a number, they also show up on weather radar from time to time.

Interested to see what others think. I'd rather spend money on wind then on wars. But I'm amazed how expensive their construction is.. 350 million for a 150 megawatt setup by chamberlain they just completed. They have a hard enough time funding a few extra million to get an interchange put in by 20th street south here in BK. Lots of private investment money seems to be pouring into the construction of these, largely thanks to the tax credits. For what it's worth, there is huge untapped potential here not just in SD, but you can see from the map...

http://www.windpoweringamerica.gov/p...p_80meters.pdf

Newest projects just completed.. I have not driven up to the northern part of the county to take a look.. gonna in a couple weeks.

http://www.brighterenergy.org/12644/...n-green-light/

The last time I drove to Lake Benton a couple weeks back they were still putting up new ones. MN must have some projects of their own in progress.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-11-2011, 09:28 AM
 
Location: The Black Hills, South Dakota
412 posts, read 478,519 times
Reputation: 585
They are expensive to put up, but so are coal-fired plants. Once they're up, they're much cheaper to run and much cleaner. I hope they build plenty more wind farms. If there's one thing we have a lot of here, it's wind. Why not put it to work?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-12-2011, 12:51 AM
 
18,612 posts, read 14,204,171 times
Reputation: 15319
We are not set up for wind power... Well except for the wind. It always blows in eastern south dakota. There is not near enough in transmission lines to carry the current out for sale.

The other concern with wind, if it is not strong enough no power. If it too windy the generator shuts down. There is also the subsidy that, if taken away, would make the wind farms far from being a money making venture. If it can't pay for itself it needs to be reevaluated.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-12-2011, 11:16 AM
 
Location: Madison, WI Metro Area
15,193 posts, read 20,714,966 times
Reputation: 7664
Quote:
Originally Posted by SD4020 View Post
We are not set up for wind power... Well except for the wind. It always blows in eastern south dakota. There is not near enough in transmission lines to carry the current out for sale.

The other concern with wind, if it is not strong enough no power. If it too windy the generator shuts down. There is also the subsidy that, if taken away, would make the wind farms far from being a money making venture. If it can't pay for itself it needs to be reevaluated.
Every energy source is subsidized including big oil and big coal. Construction of roads are often govt subsidized. Wind is cheaper because the externalized costs of burning coal in terms of environment and health are far more expensive.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-12-2011, 01:34 PM
 
18,612 posts, read 14,204,171 times
Reputation: 15319
Quote:
Originally Posted by GraniteStater View Post
Every energy source is subsidized including big oil and big coal. Construction of roads are often govt subsidized. Wind is cheaper because the externalized costs of burning coal in terms of environment and health are far more expensive.
Are you able to substantiate that statement? Roads being highways and used by more than power company and used by public for transportation.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-12-2011, 05:58 PM
 
Location: S.F.
509 posts, read 830,932 times
Reputation: 602
Roads are subsidized by the government, its the transportation bill they pass every year, big oil and big coal are subsidized as well I believe. I'm not sure about the wind being cheaper, maybe in the way he has stated it, a round about sort of way, it may be cheaper, but I can't remember the last time I went to the doctor for coal or oil poisoning
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-12-2011, 06:28 PM
 
18,612 posts, read 14,204,171 times
Reputation: 15319
Roads offer an advantage to more than the power company and are owned by the government and maintained by the government for all to use. Everyone who owns a vehicle or drives a car pays for roads. Not really the same thing as funding a utility.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-01-2011, 04:29 PM
 
Location: Nebraska
2,671 posts, read 3,716,759 times
Reputation: 2666
Quote:
Originally Posted by SD4020 View Post
We are not set up for wind power... Well except for the wind. It always blows in eastern south dakota. There is not near enough in transmission lines to carry the current out for sale.

The other concern with wind, if it is not strong enough no power. If it too windy the generator shuts down. There is also the subsidy that, if taken away, would make the wind farms far from being a money making venture. If it can't pay for itself it needs to be reevaluated.
************************************************** *****
The huge aircraft propeller type wind towers are an engineers wet dream but too expensive and complex. There are methods of collecting wind power that are a lot less expensive. They may be a little less efficient but a lot more cost effective. K.I.S.S is a concept that very few engineers understand.

GL2
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-02-2011, 09:07 AM
 
Location: South Dakota
1,961 posts, read 4,369,694 times
Reputation: 912
The feasable way is to have wind power go along with cleaner burning coal in this area. The two can share transmission lines. Tranmission lines are expensive to put up and may run into conflicts with landonwers. But we need to partner up with our neighbors and others to tap into a potential that could benefit many people: cities that need more power, Upper Midwesterners for the jobs and economic activity, and our country for a more diverse and reliable energy system. There needs to be more cooperation from different interests to catapult wind power from a cottage industry into a true industry that goes hand and hand with the other lines of energy production to significantly boost the economies of South Dakota and other Midwestern, Great Plains, and other wind-prone states.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-02-2011, 10:05 AM
 
Location: Madison, WI Metro Area
15,193 posts, read 20,714,966 times
Reputation: 7664
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris19 View Post
The feasable way is to have wind power go along with cleaner burning coal in this area. The two can share transmission lines. Tranmission lines are expensive to put up and may run into conflicts with landonwers. But we need to partner up with our neighbors and others to tap into a potential that could benefit many people: cities that need more power, Upper Midwesterners for the jobs and economic activity, and our country for a more diverse and reliable energy system. There needs to be more cooperation from different interests to catapult wind power from a cottage industry into a true industry that goes hand and hand with the other lines of energy production to significantly boost the economies of South Dakota and other Midwestern, Great Plains, and other wind-prone states.
Disagree. The govt needs to subsidize the wind energy industry much more heavily than the coal industry in the Great Plains region. I have seen studies where most areas of the Plains and Midwest can produce a huge majority of their electricity through wind generation w/ a decent transmission infrastructure in place. A prime example of a state that is not doing much with its wind resources is North Dakota. North Dakota is a big oil and coal state and has a higher number of coal power plants based on its population size. Wind energy should be much bigger there then what currently exists.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:



Over $84,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > South Dakota
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2014, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 - Top