The Worlds #1 Renewable Energy Network for News & Information
Sign In or Register
Renewable Energy World Logo
Saturday, May 18, 2013
  • Sections
    • Home
      • News
      • Opinion & Commentary
      • Featured Blogs
      • Research & Reports
      • Video
      • Press Releases
      • All Blogs
      • Events
      • Products
      • Finance
    • Solar
      • News
      • Opinion & Commentary
      • Featured Blogs
      • Research & Reports
      • Video
      • Press Releases
      • All Blogs
      • Events
      • Products
      • Finance
    • Wind
      • News
      • Opinion & Commentary
      • Featured Blogs
      • Research & Reports
      • Video
      • Press Releases
      • All Blogs
      • Events
      • Products
      • Finance
    • Geothermal
      • News
      • Opinion & Commentary
      • Featured Blogs
      • Research & Reports
      • Video
      • Press Releases
      • All Blogs
      • Events
      • Products
      • Finance
    • Bio
      • News
      • Opinion & Commentary
      • Featured Blogs
      • Research & Reports
      • Video
      • Press Releases
      • All Blogs
      • Events
      • Products
      • Finance
    • Hydro
      • News
      • Opinion & Commentary
      • Featured Blogs
      • Research & Reports
      • Video
      • Press Releases
      • All Blogs
      • Events
      • Products
      • Finance
    • Careers
    • Companies
      • Company Directory
      • Press Releases
      • Products
      • Events Calendar
      • White Papers
    • Webcasts
      • All Webcasts
      • Featured Webcasts
      • Upcoming Webcasts
      • Archived Webcasts
      • Events Calendar
    • White Papers
    • Magazines
      • Renewable Energy World
      • Wind Technology
      • Large Scale Solar
      • Hydro Review
      • HRW - Hydro Review Worldwide
      • Renewable Energy World (North America Edition)
      • Photovoltaics World
    • Awards
  • Account
    • Sign In
    • Register
  • Search

In Iowa, Most GOP Nominees Back Wind

Steve Leone, Associate Editor, RenewableEnergyWorld.com
August 15, 2011  |  16 Comments

In most Republican circles, support for wind energy can be heard as little more than a faint echo in the call for energy independence.

But in Iowa this weekend, support resonated with many of the top Republicans — minus Rep. Michele Bachmann, the winner of Saturday’s presidential straw poll.

So why does wind energy get such strong GOP support in Des Moines, while struggling to get top Republican backing in Washington? Well, because wind energy is big business in Iowa, and it has brought a strong manufacturing base to the region.

Wind energy advocates carved out a corner of the straw poll’s spotlight by having GOP candidates and state officials sign a 130-foot long wind turbine blade manufactured in Iowa. Among those signing their names were Newt Gingrich, Mitt Romney, Ron Paul, Herman Cain and Tim Pawlenty, who has since dropped out of the race. Bachmann, according to Iowa Wind Energy Association Executive Director Harold Prior, has signaled support for wind energy in Iowa during recent campaigning, but did not stop by to sign the blade.

Gingrich, who said wind energy was indeed part of his energy plan (though he didn’t say to what extent), said the business community needs the Production Tax Credit to be extended well past its December 2012 expiration.

“If you’re going to have tax credits that are designed to create investment, they have to have a long enough time horizon that people who invest believe that they’ll be there,” said Gingrich, who favors a 10-year extension.

The credit allows for 2 cents per kilowatt hour to be returned to developers of new wind farms. Critics have lamented that such credits amount to the federal government picking winners in the race for energy independence. Prior, however, answers that the support the wind industry receives is more transparent than support received by industries such as coal, natural gas and nuclear power.

“Unlike other established industries, our subsidies are not incorporated into the tax code. The industry would benefit from longer-term commitment,” said Prior, who would like to see an extension in the 5- to 10-year range since most projects take 3 to 5 years to build.

The Word from the People

Wind projects have come under fierce debate in many parts of the U.S. and Europe, often times from neighbors who fear that the development will infringe on their quality of life. Supporters in those communities often say that wind projects have wide support -- but it’s usually a quiet majority. In Iowa, the support for wind energy has been striking, and it’s measured across party lines. Among those signing the blade were Republican Sen. Chuck Grassley, GOP Reps. Steve King and Tom Latham, and Gov. Terry Branstad, also a Republican. 

Their support is backed by voters in their state, according to a Newhouse poll released this summer. A poll of 400 likely 2012 voters found that 85 percent had a favorable image of wind energy companies, higher than companies in solar (76 percent), natural gas (68 percent), nuclear power (51 percent), coal (48 percent) and oil (30 percent). The margin of error is plus or minus four percentage points.

When voters were asked, “Which one of the following types of energy would you prefer the state rely on most?” over half of voters (51 percent) chose wind energy, well ahead of natural gas (15 percent), nuclear power (13 percent), solar (8 percent), coal (5 percent) and oil (2 percent).

Support and the Future

In Iowa, wind has a long history of support. It all started during the first term of current Gov. Branstad, way back in 1983 when the state adopted a Renewable Energy Standard. That legislation called for Iowa to produced 105 megawatts (MW) of clean energy by no specific date. Iowa now has 3,675 MW of installed wind capacity, with another 1,000 MW under construction and set to come online by the end of 2012. The IWEA is proposing state commitments to reach 10,000 MW by 2020 and 20,000 by 2030.

Currently, Iowa gets 20 percent of its energy from wind, making it the first state in the country to reach the 20-percent threshold. The state is second to Texas in installed capacity, and it’s goal is to become a wind exporter.

But the biggest reason that wind has become so popular in Iowa is jobs — the issue that promises to define the 2012 presidential election.

According to the American Wind Energy Association (AWEA), wind power has been a growing contributor to Iowa’s economy for the last 30 years, helping the state to become a national leader in wind energy installations and manufacturing. The industry has brought more than $5 billion in investment into Iowa, making it one of the state’s fastest-growing sources of manufacturing jobs.

Latham credited wind energy for creating 700 manufacturing jobs at the TPI Composites wind blade plant in Newton, Iowa. The site was formerly headquarters for Maytag before those jobs moved overseas. TPI manufactured the blade that was signed at the straw poll.

“Wind energy and manufacturing have been one of the clear bright spots,” said Prior. “The support we’ve received is because our leaders all have a clear understanding to what wind contributes to Iowa — energy, manufacturing, a growing tax base.”

That’s perhaps why GOP candidates all indicated their support. On Monday, Prior recounted an interesting exchange at the blade signing involving candidate Herman Cain and a member of the audience who yelled, “Don’t sign it. It’s a subsidy.”

Cain signed it, turned around and said, “It’s free enterprise.”

16 Comments

Register To Comment
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
August 26, 2011
Selective stuff there though, John! Saying wind "needs to be located where the resource is" assumes we know now where it will 'always' be, given the original value calculation. that's precisely what the Chinese have begun to realize is a very expensive assumption.
John Giannasca
John Giannasca
August 25, 2011
Doc, all large scale generation needs to be located where the resource is (or in the case of nuclear far away so people don't get paranoid)so your transmission argument is annoying. Lots of 2kW rooftops is not going to cut it (well not overnight it wont) so large scale generation is going to be needed.
Having said that I like the 16th Century army bit...cute!!
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
August 25, 2011
For Paul, some exercise businesses actually have generators on the machines and run their light, etc. One is in Berkeley Calif. of course. Then there are Tritium batteries for teeny stuff.

For vertical-axis machines this recent study is interesting...
http://cleantechnica.com/2011/07/14/caltech-vertical-axis-wind-turbines-boost-wind-farm-power-efficiency-10x/

But all wind 'farms' waste in transmission and are like 16th Century armies -- placed in pretty uniforms to fight a similar enemy in a certain valley, while royals watch in comfort from above. The Chinese already see what such fixed allocation of land has in store, as climate changes...
http://spectrum.ieee.org/green-tech/wind/a-less-mighty-wind
www.nytimes.com/2011/01/21/us/21tttransmission.html?_r=1&hpw

Who's gonna move all those machines & foundations? All that in the ROI?
John Erb, P.E.
John Erb, P.E.
August 25, 2011
HAWG's are expensive to build,maintain and operate. VAWG's are largely with fixed louvers and small diameters. Large VAWG's with moveable louvers, using magnetic levitation, etc. are much more efficient, and less expensive to build, maintain and operate. As we are inching away from reciprocating engines in cars, and heading towards electrically powered cars; let's leave the inefficient HAWG's to the pig pen where they belong.
John Erb, P.E.
John Erb, P.E.
August 25, 2011
HAWG's are expensive to build,maintain and operate. VAWG's are largely with fixed louvers and small diameters. Large VAWG's with moveable louvers, using magnetic levitation, etc. are much more efficient, and less expensive to build, maintain and operate. As we are inching away from reciprocating engines in cars, and heading towards electrically powered cars; let's leave the inefficient HAWG's to the pig pen where they belong.
Paul Sullivan
Paul Sullivan
August 25, 2011
A differet approach might be to penalize those companies that produce energy from fossil fuels. Most agree that they are profitable, but they are not really paying for the damage that their production causes. It should also be applied to the manufacturing companies that pollute water and air resources. The real costs to health and well-being of humanity are being ignored, and should come out of their profits. It is hard to determine, I agree, but should be investigated, in my opinion. Regarding subsidizing fossil fuel development/exploration, etc., that should also stop.

While I am ranting, I also think that we need to consume less. Those who use products that pollute should pay. The more product used, the more should be paid. Does not some country charge more for power when more power is used, instead of reducing the costs when more is used? Someone needs to directly pay for the ill effects of power generation, but consumers do not want to do so.

Last, is there much/any information available on generating minute amounts of electricity on a personal scale? I am thinking of an exercycle that is hooked up to a battery storage and might provide nighttime lighting for a home. Healthy exercise and power generation - maybe it is viable? I am not an engineer, and have no idea of the amounts of power involved, costs, etc..
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
August 17, 2011
That's all nice John, but the 'farms' still waste energy on the input side and every day from erection on. Australians doing erections, oh my!

The Aussies have plenty of roofs & parking lots to do PV more efficiently than any wind, and are working that way, like many others, and more every day.

Don't worry, it'll take a while to close down the wind subsidies, as it did with our corn-ethanol give-aways here.
;]
Hope those "demobilization" include yanking out all the concrete, roads, etc., and adding that processing to the cost & energy debt.
John Giannasca
John Giannasca
August 17, 2011
When we build wind farms the lease or purchase of the land, transmission losses, capital and maintenance costs are all accounted for. In addition all newly approved wind farms in Australia have consent conditions that take into account flora and fauna, noise and visuals, and demobilization at end of life. We have has this conversation I'm sure and that is wind power pays back the energy used to build the farm (not just the turbine) in a short period. Better than most other renewable forms. The issue for you guys is to make sure wind farms are built in the way that you want them (or in your case not at all).
Surely that is a lobbying issue with the legislators. The issue is proper management of the renewable agenda. You do recall the early debate about PV when the price was $10/W and the subsidies were huge. The true believers rode through the storm and now we are on the other side PV have emerged as a truly great solution in our efforts to displace fossils. It would not have got there is we had made that decision on how much energy did it take to manufacture a watt of PV or if we looked at the efficiency of the cells. Wind power has a long way to go in terms of managing find farm developments. The network owners have a long way to go in accepting all the wind that could be produced. Given that it doesn't mean it shouldn't happen.
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
August 17, 2011
Tell you what John, call up your local PV leaser/installer & have a cost-benefit discussion about not having to buy some land outside of town, or pay for your share of miles of transmission, or deduct the power-loss penalty, or pay for the 700tons/MW of whatever wind 'farm' you buy a share in, say for insurance, maintenance, yadda yadda.

Then mention the $1000 kickback WWF, Sierra Club & others will give you to get 8 or 10 standard PV panels put up (no charge) and leased for the excess power you can't use. All that for no wasted land, no wasted power, no wasted fossil-fuels-processing of materiel at 70t/MW vs 700t/MW -- remember?) and no maintenance costs.

Maybe your house is big enough & sunny enough to do as well as this church?!... http://tinyurl.com/3znad4b

And, current PV cells are only 20% efficient, but still 50% better than wind! Such a deal.
lawrence elliott
lawrence elliott
August 17, 2011
Not sure exactly what John is trying to say here. Renewable's are the 'spawn of Satan'? The best thing since sliced bread?

Rolf is partially correct. I'm not a big fan of how the renewable energy industry has shaken out since I first got involved in the 70's. On one hand there is the usual graft and corruption and waste anytime large tax credits and subsidies are involved.Ultimately the majority of the wealth goes to the already wealthy. That goes for any industry that is subsidized. On the other hand those subsidies have accelerated the technology to new heights. I think what we need is a better balance with far more installations being smaller and localized rather than these silly mega systems that just continue to feed into a broken and severely inefficient system.As for the GOP vs the Democrats and how the 'subsidy pie' is sliced up there's little if any difference,just as there is little difference in the fundamental policies of both parties in spite of how the shell game is presented to the uninformed masses. If politicians and true leaders had any real courage they would be calling for energy prices to rise across the board (remove the subsidize) in all areas so that renewable's could compete on a level playing field. Would the economy feel a real shock in trying to adjust to a new paradigm? Certainly. But what will the shock be like when the inevitable rapid decline in fossil fuels catches up to all of us. We have essentially painted ourselves into an energy corner and to get out there will be a mess. Better to quit painting now while there is still a path that avoids the mess. Of course expecting any real far sighted leaders to emerge is not something that's happened in prior history so why expect it now. One thing is certain though. Betting on anything the GOP suggests will only guarantee that mess I spoke of will come sooner than later. And faith in Democrats? God help us?
Russell Judge
Russell Judge
August 17, 2011
If oil and gas companies are making big bucks, and they are, how about they start paying their fair share of taxes. They certainly don't need any tax breaks. I can't help but think that people that argue this basic fact are getting paid off by Big Oil.
rolf westgard
rolf westgard
August 17, 2011
Oil and gas companies are profitable and make big bucks. Wind and solar ventures are not profitable and require direct cash subsidies.
John Giannasca
John Giannasca
August 17, 2011
Go on DrAlexC. Tell em what it takes to make and install PV (no cheating now). Tell em how much energy it takes to make it and then tellem how much energy we get out of them. Then tellem how much energy it takes to make and install a wind turbine and then tellem how much energy we get out of it over its lifetime. Go on include demobilization as well. I'd love to know.
Russell Judge
Russell Judge
August 17, 2011
How about the oil scam??? When a company pumps oil off of my land (public) and makes billions of dollars and doesn't pay their fair share, I get a little miffed! When one man, retired CEO Mobil exec, Lee Raymond, takes a retirement of, $400,000,000 (that is the correct number of zeros!) something stinks. How many politicians do you think that he bought off?
rolf westgard
rolf westgard
August 17, 2011
Republican candidate are just as confused by the wind power scam as the Democrats are.
Dr. A. Cannara
Dr. A. Cannara
August 17, 2011
Indeed, to the GOP subsidy = free enterprise, just ask the top few hundred who control 1/2 our assets and are subsidized by the lowest tax rates since 1928.

Hmmmm, what happened the next year? Was it something like what happened after the GOP led the late '90s overturn of the Glass-Steagall Act?

Yep, subsidies are good, even at only ~100W/sq meter, or 700 tons of concrete, steel... per occasional MW!

And what about those corn subsidies for ethanol (at <1% efficiency)? They were so good they about tripled corn prices worldwide leading more into malnutrition. Yes indeed, subsidies work.
;]

Add Your Comments

To add your comments you must sign-in or create a free account.

  • Create a Free Account!
  • Sign-In
Steve Leone

Steve Leone

Steve Leone has been a journalist for more than 15 years and has worked for news organizations in Rhode Island, Maine, New Hampshire, Virginia and California.
  • About
  • Articles
  • Blog
  • Contact
  • FOLLOW
  • CONTACT
Stay Connected
         
To register for our free e-Newsletters, create your free account here:

Editors' Picks

  • EU Debate Over Climate Change Policy Could Dampen Renewable Energy Growth
  • Wind Power — Even without the Wind

Most Commented

  • 17
    The Economic Case for Divesting from Fossil Fuels
  • 9
    Breakdown: Penetration of Renewable Energy in Selected Markets
  • 5
    Ireland Keen to Hit 2030 Renewable Targets, Says EU Ambassador
  • 1
    No Easy Fix for Broken Wind Turbine at US High School

Total Access Partners

Growing Your Business? Learn More about Total Access
  • SolarInsure, Inc.
  • ExxonMobil Lubricants & Specialties Europe
  • North American Board of Certified Energy Practitioners
  • DNV KEMA Energy & Sustainability
  • Eaton
  • Renewable Energy World Magazine
  • The Interstate Renewable Energy Council, Inc.
  • The Stella Group, Ltd.
News
  • Renewable Energy
  • Solar Energy
  • Wind Energy
  • Bioenergy
  • Geothermal Energy
  • Hyrdo Power
  • Blogs
  • Video
  • Finance
Resources
  • Companies
  • Products
  • Careers
  • Events
  • Webcasts
  • White Papers
  • Magazines
  • Press Releases
  • e-Newsletters
Company
  • About Us
  • Our Team
  • Contact Us
  • Advertising & Services
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms & Conditions
  • Site Map
  • News
  • Conference & Expo
Network Partners - Magazines
  • Hydro Review Magazine
  • Hydro Review Worldwide Magazine
  • Renewable Energy World Magazine
Network Partners - Events
  • Power-Gen International
  • Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo North America
  • Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Europe
  • Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Asia
  • Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Africa
  • Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo India
  • HydroVision International
  • HydroVision Brazil
  • HydroVision India
  • HydroVision Russia
© Copyright 1999-2013 RenewableEnergyWorld.com - All rights reserved.
RenewableEnergyWorld.com - World's #1 Renewable Energy Network for news & Information