Asche has doubts on wind power

By Eric Freeman efreeman@columbustelegram.com
Thursday, Apr 23, 2009 - 09:37:11 am CDT

COLUMBUS -- “Wind for export” and carbon emissions regulations are fast becoming the hot topics in the energy industry, according to Ron Asche, NPPD president/CEO.

Asche addressed the Loup Power District Board of Directors Wednesday telling them the most likely outcome of the industry-wide discussion would be to avoid jeopardizing the reliability of the energy grid and controlling rates for the customer.

“Wind for export and carbon emission regulations are certainly the two most important issues facing the power industry today,” Asche said. “For the idea of wind for export to happen, there is going to have to be a fundamental policy change in public power. In 2008, the NPPD board adopted a ‘slow go’ approach that aims at 10 percent generation from renewables by 2020.”

He said last year the statewide electric utility’s generation resources were made up of just more than 1 percent from wind power, nearly 55 percent from coal, 32.8 percent from nuclear, 5 percent from gas and oil, 2.5 percent from hydro, and the remaining 6 percent from Western Area Power Association (WAPA) purchases.

Asche discussed challenges that face the public power industry from the current push toward wind for export.

“Policy considerations include public power’s legal and statutory issues, location of wind farms, transmission planning, financials and cost recovery, and whether there even is an out-of-state market for wind energy,” Asche said.

He said the current public power model is based on the concept that power generated is for Nebraska customers with any excess power then made available for sale to other markets. Under the “wind for export” model, power would be generated for the sole purpose of selling it outside the state.

“This is a great idea for economic development,” Asche said. “But the challenges of reliability and transmission immediately come to mind when you may have contracts to meet and you’re depending on an uncertain and intermittent generation source to generate power to fulfill those contracts.”

Asche said the questions don’t stop there. He told the directors that at this point there is no way to even estimate what the out-of-state market for wind energy may be. In addition he said the size and location of potential wind farms is going to be key to planning for transmission of the power generated.

Asche also identified the following as important:

n what are the environmental or land use issues that may affect where a wind farm can be?

n should wind farms be concentrated in one area to maximize ease of transmission or should they be dispersed across the state to enhance the potential economic benefits to a greater number of communities?

Asche said transmission planning is a real and challenging concern. He said he believes if national renewable goals are to be met, a national energy transmission plan will have to be designed and implemented.

“Finally, how is this going to be financed, and who will be ultimately responsible for the debt incurred in the development of this system,” Asche asked. “Will Nebraska ratepayers be asked to guarantee the debt, or will capital be available to private developers?

“I think the federal government is going to have to be involved in providing government financing if the renewable energy goals are to be met in a similar way that the government was responsible for financing the nation’s interstate highway system.

“There are a lot of issues here, and it’s going to take time to work it all out. In spite of impatience on the part of some policymakers, this won’t happen overnight ” it can’t happen that way.”

The second part of Asche’s presentation to the directors had to do with the potential effect carbon reduction legislation could have on Nebraska’s utilities if it is passed.

“One of President Obama’s campaign goals was for the reduction of carbon emissions to 1990 levels by 2020 and for a reduction in carbon emissions to be 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050,” Asche said.

Asche said today, 60 percent of NPPD’s total generation resources come from carbon emitting resources. He told the directors that the utility’s emissions in 2008 were about 10.6 million metric tons. To reduce that to 1990 levels, an approximate 40 percent reduction, would require bringing the levels down to 6.3 million metric tons and by 2050 to just 1.3 million metric tons to reach the 80 percent below 1990 levels.

He said current discussions most often do not acknowledge the probability of increases in the energy load or use of consumers. He said the approximate 40 percent increase from 1990 levels of carbon emissions to the current levels is consistent with energy load growth in the same time period.

Asche said before “wind for export” can be a viable option for economic development, wind and other renewables or increased nuclear power would first have to replace the reduction in carbon based generation sources.

“How do we get to 1990 levels by 2020? The only way would be to reduce NPPD’s coal fired generation, reduce non-firm energy sales (sales to out-state customers), significantly increase wind generation and customers’ energy efficiency practices and increase the energy output of the nuclear generation plant,” Asche said.

Asche said the utility would have to increase wind generation to 20 percent of the generation resources by 2020 but that wind is an intermittent and essentially unreliable power generation source.

“Integrating wind power into the generation resource mix presents huge challenges to reliability,” Asche said. “We may be able to meet the 2020 carbon emission reduction goals set by the president, but not without huge challenges to overcome.

“In the long term to meet the 2050 goals there will have to be more nuclear power or clean coal technologies in the mix and for that to work there would have to be virtually no opposition to building new nuclear plants.”

Asche said a 20 to 30 percent increase in the cost of energy to the rate payers might be on the low end of costs to meet the possible outcomes of the legislation being proposed. He said when you add in the potential for additional carbon reduction taxes customers could see their rates double or triple.

“It’s all very speculative at this time,” Asche said. “But I believe these mandates will have huge impacts on low and moderate income families, and it could very well make us non competitive in the rest of the world.”

Comment on this story at columbustelegram.com.

Leave a Comment

All posts are subject to our Terms and Standards.
Your posted comment will appear after it has been approved.
   
factoid
Apr 23, 2009 10:48 AM
A guy who's business is dealing in a power source other then wind trying to cast doubts on it. No surprises here. That's what NPPD CEO's give themselves big raises for, to misinform and dumb down the masses. In Nebraska, that's not very hard at all.
Put some facts in your post
Apr 23, 2009 12:30 PM
Hey Factoid...put some facts into your post so you won't be labled as another kook.

Start with...are the issues raised in this article true? If they aren't...then what is the truth?

Have you an idea for a path to the 2020 or 2050 limits for Nebraska? Please, no general hand waving...anyone can do that...just a few facts would be great.

Are there going to be costs that we will have to pay? If so...any idea how much?

I would like to know if you are just a grumpy person or actually have some facts to support your factoid name.
sgw
Apr 23, 2009 12:38 PM
The equation is simnple no wind no electricity. If the people who think this is a good idea will exclusively rely on wind generated electricity fine. When it is 90 degrees 70% humidity and not a breath of wind or 10 degrees below. I would not want to be their house guest.
Past NPPD Employee
Apr 23, 2009 1:02 PM
Wrong factoid.
Mr. Asche presented the facts NPPD and most electric unities are dealing with. Unless the wind turbans can be driven at a constant speed the output will not be a stable source of power. Depending on power generated by wind would be like delivering coal to a power generating station by semi truck versus a railroad. The input coal via a semi truck would not be enough to run the plant 24X7X365. Some days you have coal and some days you don’t. Just about like the wind.
Dispatching power would be most difficult by throttling NPPD’s power plants depending on the wind and power output they generate. On top of that issue, NPPD will need to ensure the limit set for carbon emissions is not exceeded all while providing citizens the low cost electricity they do. Sounds like a huge challenge to me so I believe Mr. Asche and his team is worth every dollar they are paid. Public Power certainly is better for Nebraskans versus a private utility with paid shareholders and an executive staff that demands wages much higher than the NPPD staff is paid.
Dont Know
Apr 23, 2009 3:29 PM
I don't know about Loup and NPPD using wind generation, but I want a wind turbine for my personal use. However, I would still be "plugged" into the grid for those days when the wind doesn't cooperate. If you've ever checked into personal wind generation, they don't even suggest you take yourself completely offline. Besides, in Nebraska, I would say wind power would be more reliable than solar power.
balance
Apr 23, 2009 4:17 PM
Is it too much to ask for a better balance of energy generation? Fact is, the wind blows, the sun shines, and we do need to plan for the future. Change will happen whether you're involved or not. If you sit by, it will pass you by. Oh, let's not have any more viaducts, or there isn't any gang problems, deal with reality and try to make tomorrow better. Otherwise, bury your head in the sand and wish it was yesterday instead of trying to make tomorrow a better day. Let's support logical, fact-driven balanced approaches to the challenges of tomorrow. There's a lot of coal, wind and sun. Nuclear anyone ?? I'll pass.
Involved
Apr 23, 2009 7:56 PM
The only ones not facing reality are those who do not believe or understand what Mr. Asche presented. No one is stopping anyone from putting in solar, wind or whatever. When you install and maintain the system for a couple of weeks, you will disconnect and go back to your local utility. Plus, you will want low rates. Like many of you complained about a few weeks ago.

I have seen all the same things in the late '70's and early '80's. There were passive solar installations and windmills and now they are in the junk pile.

Back to the green people, please build it, operate it and than try to leave for a two week vacation and come back to a mess because the bearing went out on your wind mill or a hail storm destroyed you solar panels. You cannot burn methane because will will need carbon credits for the CO2. I want my power on demand and maintained by someone else.

I have seen information on NPPD 's Ainsworth wind farm and after the first year, it is is not meeting monthly load production. Not a knock against NPPD but just the reality of the technology.

Also, for those believing in global warming, I have a bridge in New York you might be interested in purchasing.
Jim
Apr 23, 2009 10:10 PM
Mr. Asche makes it sound like wind generation is not possible. Ever been to north central Iowa? They have wind turbines there by hundreds. If they make it work there, why won't it work here????
Good Stuff
Apr 23, 2009 11:07 PM
Interesting article. Only 2.5% of our states electricity is hydro? I would have guessed more like 35%+.

I hope the Telegram does more articles like this. It would be interesting to see the differences in kW output per capital investment dollar for each of the power sources. Maybe they could even ask how many wind towers it would take to reduce emissions by the stated 20% to give this all some magnitude.

Good stuff. I am glad that Asche and his crew are hashing all this out now.
involved
Apr 24, 2009 7:21 AM
Jim;

this is Mid-America and Mr. Buffet getting tax credits, and depreciation that makes it viable. Plus he will be selling carbon credits.

Public Power does not get this tax and depreciation benefit. Public Power can offset some of the carbon they generate with wind.

If you invest with Mr. Buffet great. If you do not you are paying for it.
billp37
Apr 24, 2009 10:13 AM
Wind and solar may have problems.

"Chairman, President and CEO Questar Corporation Keith O. Rattie said on April 2, 2009

Why did my generation fail to develop wind and solar? Because our energy choices are ruthlessly ruled, not by political judgments, but by the immutable laws of thermodynamics. In engineer-speak, turning diffused sources of energy such as photons in sunlight or the kinetic energy in wind requires massive investment to concentrate that energy into a form that's usable on any meaningful scale."

http://home.comcast.net/~bpayne37/pnmelectric/donbrown/algodones.htm#solararray
balanced approach
Apr 24, 2009 3:18 PM
Kudos to Mr. Asche for his thoughtful, balanced approach to a rather complex issue. The public power model has served our state in a remarkable way, and we have confidence in CEO Asche's judgement on the subject.

We would like to see Nebraska's public power districts continue to maintain control of our state's energy projects, to continue to deliver cost effective, reliable service.

Frankly, the public power system does not receive the credit it should, as we take immediate power for granted.

If we lose public power control, are the residents of Nebraska ready to enter into a "bidding war" for a portion of energy from renewables with more metropolitan populations?

And by the way, did we forget the amazing service during the ice storms that crippled lines, and how hard the power employees worked to restore service? Will a Chicago based company care about your energy needs in this scenerio?

Mr.Asche discussed environmental issues, and this is a topic that is valid, as Central Nebraska is a major migration corridor for the remaining 240 endangered whooping cranes that use the area, as witnessed just last week in Custer County when a whooping crane pair spent three days near a wetland playa.

We support wind energy, but would like to see a balance with our renewable energy needs, Nebraksa's wildlife heritage, and sensible rates.

Thank you to Mr. Asche for evaluating all aspects of this issue, to serve our state in a wonderful, common sense approach.
Tim
Apr 25, 2009 7:48 AM
Go nuke!! If the French can do it, so can we!!!
Print This Story Email This Story

Hot Topics

Calendar of Events

Photos