State’s Future is Blowin’ in the Wind April 24, 2009
Posted by Gary Glynn in Uncategorized.Tags: Wind Energy, windfarm, windmills
add a comment
Commercial wind power in Montana dates back to the early 1980s, when a half dozen windmills were erected south of Livingston. Although windmills have been used to pump water and generate power on Montana farms and ranches for decades, the Livingston windmills were part of a demonstration project designed to test the feasibility of commercial wind power in Montana. Unfortunately, those early windmills, plagued by weak propeller blades and exploding turbines, soon fell victim to the relentless winds of the upper Yellowstone Valley.
Windmill technology has advanced considerably since then, and the state’s first industrial wind farm opened at Judith Gap in 2005. This operation, which is now slated for expansion, produces 135-megawatts (MW) of electricity. Montana ranks fifth among the states in potential wind energy production, but only 18th in actual generating capacity. However, wind generation in the state nearly doubled last year, and similar growth is expected in 2009. Currently the state’s wind turbines generate 271 MW, enough to power approximately 75,000 homes.
Wind energy in America has enjoyed a 25% annual growth rate over the past five years, and within 20 years could provide as much as one-fifth of the country’s electricity. The US Department of Energy predicts that Montana alone may produce 10,000 MW of wind energy by 2035, which would result in an annual reduction of almost 30 million tons of CO2 pumped into the atmosphere.
Approximately 17 million acres (one-fifth of the state) are suitable for wind development, with most of this land located east of the Continental Divide. The highest wind speeds are often found near relatively pristine areas like the Rocky Mountain Front and the Absaroka, Beartooth and Crazy Mountains, but millions of acres of suitable land lie in less-sensitive areas as well.
There are several downsides to wind farms. They are noisy, detract from the Treasure State’s scenery, and are often deadly to migratory birds and bats. The numerous roads needed for large wind farms fragment wildlife habitat, although this can be minimized by siting wind farms on the 9 million acres of suitable cropland in the state. Another disadvantage of wind is that no electricity is produced when the wind doesn’t blow, so dams or conventional coal and gas plants are needed to “firm up” the unpredictable load.
An Irish company thinks they have found a partial solution to this problem. Gaelectric is interested in building several large-scale wind farms in Montana, and is also planning to test a Compressed-Air Energy Storage system (CAES) in the state. CAES is a method of storing energy by using electricity to compress air, which is then stored in underground caverns until needed, when it is converted back into electricity.
Gaelectric is not the only foreign company interested in Montana’s wind. Last fall a Spanish company named NaturEner finished construction of 71 wind turbines at the Glacier Wind Project southeast of Cut Bank, the first phase of a planned 210-megawatt wind farm, and a German company has announced plans to break ground this spring on a plant to manufacture wind turbines in Butte.
A number of proposed large-scale wind developments got a boost last fall when a new 214-mile-long power-line between Great Falls and Lethbridge received final approval. Gov. Brian Scheweitzer has predicted that this power-line could spur construction of an additional 600 MW of wind-power, and an infusion of nearly $1 billion into the Montana economy.
Every 100 MW of new wind generation supports up to 500 jobs, and both the Wind Applications Center (WAC) at Montana State University and the Great Falls College of Technology are developing programs to train technicians and engineers. The WAC has already installed a small wind turbine on the MSU campus, and plans to install windmills at schools in Livingston, Stanford, Cascade, and Fairfield as part of a national pilot program called Wind for Schools.
By next year Montana utilities will be required to obtain 10% of their total energy production from renewable energy, up from the current 5%. Montana also has specific tax breaks for installing wind turbines, and small generators are exempted from property taxes for 5 years. However, local wind producers recently suffered a setback when a House committee in the state legislature killed HB 491, a bill that would have required Northwestern Energy to buy wind-power from small wind farms.
Large-scale commercial wind farms, which didn’t exist in Montana five years ago, face a brighter future however, and it appears they will play an increasingly important part of the state’s economy for many years to come.
Links:
Montana wind farms – http://dnrc.mt.gov/trust/wind
Montana Wind Working Group – http://www.deq.mt.gov/Energy/
Wind powering America (US Dept. of Energy) – http://www.windpoweringamerica.gov
American Wind Energy Association – http://www.awea.org/
Energy Conservation Tax Credits – http://mt.gov/revenue/energyconservation.asp
Montana Wind Action Center – http://www.coe.montana.edu/wind/
Wind for Schools Program – http://www.westerncommunityenergy.com
Tax credits and rebates encourage conservation April 24, 2009
Posted by Gary Glynn in Uncategorized.Tags: energy conservation; tax credit;
add a comment
Whether or not you were farsighted enough to invest in energy conservation during the past year, there may be some good news come tax time. Both the Federal government and Montana state offer homeowners tax breaks for improving energy efficiency. In addition, many utility companies offer rebates for conservation. Homeowners who have taken a deduction on their Federal tax credits in year’s past may find there are a few changes since last year. And if you haven’t yet upgraded the efficiency of your home, don’t despair. The 2009 tax year comes with new tax breaks.
Federal tax credits can help homeowners who have installed solar panels or fuel cells during the past year. The credits are applied 30% of the cost, although there are caps on the total amount applicable for a credit. There are still Federal tax credits for the installation of solar, wind, and fuel cell systems. There are deductions allowed for a variety of alternative fuel vehicles, including a new tax credit for plug-in electric hybrid cars, which will underwrite up to $7,500 of the purchase price.
In previous years homeowners could also get Federal tax credits for improving the energy efficiency of their homes, including such things as upgrading windows and doors, purchasing more energy efficient furnaces and air conditioners, and adding insulation to roofs, walls, and water heaters. This tax credit covered 10% of the purchase price for these improvements, but expired at the end of 2007, so any improvements made during the 2008 tax year do not qualify. The good news is that the tax credits have been renewed for 2009, now may be a good time to consider upgrading.
The state of Montana offers homeowners a variety of tax breaks for undertaking a wide variety of energy conservation projects. The Montana Dept of Public Health & Human Services administers the Low-Income Energy Assistance Program (LIEAP), which provides help with utility bills and weatherization costs to both homeowners and renters. In order to qualify for this program, your income should be less than 175% of the Federal poverty level. A family of 4 making less than $37,100 qualifies for the program.
The state of Montana now offers a 25% credit to promote a wide variety of energy improvements, including new doors, windows, insulation, weatherstripping, caulking, water heaters and furnaces. A couple who own their home jointly can receive up to $1,000 in rebates under this program. To qualify you will need to complete Form ENRG-C.
A similar tax credit is also available for installing alternative energy systems such as pellet stoves, wind and solar systems, and others. Form ENRG-B. Businesses can qualify for credits related to residential installation of geothermal
Various utility companies have programs to help conserve energy. Northwestern Energy’s e-plus program offers rebates for everything from purchasing compact fluorescent light bulbs to purchasing programmable thermostats. They also offer rebates for the purchase of Energy Star rated appliances and conversion of electric furnaces to gas-fired. Also new home rebate, insulation, efficient water measures.
Montana Dakota Utilities has several different incentive programs that promote installation of programmable thermostats, efficient Energy Star gas furnaces, commercial lighting programs, Their electrical incentive program helps defray the cost of replacing an inefficient air-conditioner with an Energy Star one. They also have a commercial lighting incentive that assists commercial establishments install more efficient lighting.
The Montana Electrical Cooperative Association (MECA) supports Energy Share of Montana, a non-profit organization that raises donations to help pay power bills for low-income homeowners and renters. Much of the funding for this program comes from the Universal Systems Benefit (USB) program, which distributes funds contributed by electrical cooperatives, utility companies, mining and petroleum companies, and large users of electricity.
Large wind farms on the drawing board February 22, 2008
Posted by Gary Glynn in Alternate energy, Uncategorized.add a comment
Montana ranks fifth among the states for its potential wind power. Only the Dakotas, Texas, and Kansas are windier. The largest wind farm in the state opened in 2005 at Judith Gap. This farm has 90 1.5 megawatt turbines which extend more than 260 feet in the air. A Texas company is proposing a 300-megawatt wind farm near Martinsdale with more than 100 towers. At least 6 other major wind farms are being planned for Montana, with a total production of 900 megawatt if all of the projects are approved. Large wind farms are also being considered for Shelby and Glasgow.
Ethanol may actually worsen global warming February 8, 2008
Posted by Gary Glynn in Uncategorized.Tags: Alternate energy, ethanol, global warming
add a comment
The Associated Press is reporting that a new research study claims that widespread ethanol production will lead to more global warming, due to an increased amount of land converted from forests and grassland into crop production. Researchers from Princeton University’s Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs estimated that using corn to produce ethanol will lead to an increase in greenhouse gases of 93%. The impact of using switchgrass to produce ethanol is less, but still significant. A spokesman for the Renewable Fuels Association called the study by “simplistic.”
MECA plans for future February 7, 2008
Posted by Gary Glynn in Uncategorized.add a comment
The Montana Electric Cooperatives Association, which represents 29 coops and 250,000 customers, has a plan to cut carbon dioxide emissions back to 1990 levels using alternate energy, increased efficiency, carbon capture, clean coal plants, and light-water nuclear reactors.
Air Force plans synthetic fuel plant February 3, 2008
Posted by Gary Glynn in Uncategorized.Tags: synthetic fuels
add a comment
The U.S. Air Force proposes to spend between $1 to 4 billion to build a synthetic fuel plant at Malmstrom Air Force Base in Great Falls Montana. The Air Force has a goal of using 50% synthetic jet fuel within 8 years. Assistant Air Force Sec. William Anderson said that whoever builds the plant would need to be able to capture the CO2 given off. Companies interested in building the plant include Chevron, Shell, Rentech, ConocoPhilips and Sasol, a South African company. Only 3 synthetic fuels plants are in operation worldwide, and all are in South Africa, although a plant is under construction in China.
Cascade coal plant is rezoned February 1, 2008
Posted by Gary Glynn in Uncategorized.add a comment
A proposed 250-megawatt coal-fired plant planned east of Great Falls won rezoning approval from the Cascade County Commissioners. The Montana Historic Preservation Review Board is concerned that a portage route used by Lewis and Clark will be endangered by construction of the $720 million plant. It would provide power to 120,000 residentsinn central Montana and northern Wyoming.
Light bulbs can save money and the planet at the same time. January 19, 2008
Posted by Gary Glynn in Alternate energy, energy technology.add a comment
One of the easiest ways to reduce your electric bill is to replace old-fashioned incandescent light bulbs with compact fluorescent (CFL) bulbs. It may also be the most cost-effective and practical way for the average American to contribute to the fight against global warming. And soon you’ll have no choice. Under terms of the recently signed Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007, standard incandescent bulbs will be phased out within the next five years.
Incandescent bulbs, which have changed little from the days of Thomas Edison, have a fragile filament that when heated to the point of glowing emits a bright yellow light. The disadvantage is that most of the electricity used by this kind of bulb is wasted as heat, enough heat in fact that incandescent bulbs can significantly raise room temperature, leading to even more electricity use in the form of air conditioning.
Compact fluorescents are capable of producing the same amount of light as an incandescent bulb, while using only one quarter of the electricity. Unlike the fluorescent tubes common in office buildings, compact fluorescents use different phosphors, and typically give off a natural, warm light that is comparable to incandescent bulbs. A standard 100-watt incandescent bulb produces about 1600 lumens of light, while a compact fluorescent giving off the same amount of light uses only 23 watts of electricity.
Some manufacturers claim that compact fluorescents have a lifespan six to ten times as long as a comparable incandescent light, although in my experience the first generation bulbs did not last nearly as long as manufacturers claimed. While the initial cost of purchasing compact fluorescents is generally higher than buying a comparable incandescent, the energy savings combined with the longer life adds up to a significant savings over time. The cost of CFLs has been steadily dropping as well, and I’ve recently found CFL bulbs in Missoula priced at less than a dollar apiece.
While I’m not a huge fan of Walmart, I do applaud their corporate commitment to promoting compact fluorescents. According to Walmart, if every one of their 100 million customers bought just one CFL bulb, it would eliminate the need to burn 11 million tons of coal. Walmart.com has a calculator that estimates shoppers who purchase one CFL bulb will save $35 on their electric bill over the life of the bulb.
Approximately 25% of the average homeowner’s energy bill represents the cost of lighting. At my house I figure we spend about $100 per month just to keep the lights on. (Disclaimer: my two teenaged children figured out how to turn a light switch on when they were toddlers, but still haven’t realized that lights can be turned off as well.)
I’ve been buying compact fluorescents since the now defunct Montana Power Company began its “Switch ‘N Save” program in the 1990s, and routinely install compact fluorescents every time an incandescent light burns out. Although I’ve replaced the most commonly used lights in my house with CFLs, I still have quite a number of incandescent bulbs that need replacing.
Frequently turning CFL bulbs on and off reduces their life span, so for maximum efficiency and lifespan they should be used in fixtures that are on for several hours at a time. Most compact fluorescents come in a double spiral shape that provides the best light distribution, but they are available in numerous other shapes as well, including decorative globes and candelabras. There are also special bulbs for use with dimmer switches and 3-way fixtures. Locally, the best selection of styles, sizes and shapes that I have found are at Ace Hardware, Western Montana Lighting, Lowes, and Walmart.
Although compact fluorescents make sense from both a financial and environmental standpoint, there is a downside. Fluorescent lights contain mercury vapor, and are classified by the EPA as Universal Waste. Any fluorescent bulb should be recycled rather than thrown in the trash. Palmer Electric in Missoula (406-543-3086) will recycle fluorescent bulbs for a small fee. Although a single bulb contains only a very small amount of mercury, if you break one inside your home you should follow government cleanup guidelines (see www.lamprecycle.org). In addition, many people who suffer from migraines and epilepsy believe that compact fluorescents, particularly the older bulbs, can cause headaches and seizures.
In spite if these drawbacks, installing compact fluorescent bulbs is good for both your pocketbook, and for the planet, and there aren’t a lot of products on the market that can make that claim.
Blackout January 17, 2008
Posted by Gary Glynn in blackout, energy technology, power outage.add a comment
Like most Montanans, when I stumble to the kitchen first thing in the morning for a cup of coffee, I take it for granted that I can flip a switch, the lights will come on and a pot of fresh coffee will be already brewed and waiting for me.
The fact that the electrons that light my way to the coffee pot may have come from a hydroelectric dam in western Montana, a coal-fired plant in Colstrip, or a wind farm in central Montana never enters my mind. Americans born in the years after World War II have grown to expect that electricity will always be just a flip of a switch away. It’s something we all take for granted, because for most of us, it’s always been there.
But what if the flip of the switch brings no light? What if the coffee pot, toaster and microwave sit dark and inanimate on the counter? On occasion, everyone in Montana endures the inevitable short-term power outages caused by lightning, car-crashes, wayward backhoes, and amorous squirrels, but in general we are blessed with a reliable power supply.
In the past decade, the longest power outage I can remember was the result of a heavy June snowstorm that snapped power lines and trees all over Missoula. Even so, the power at my house was back on in four or five hours. While an inconvenience, it was by no means a tragedy.
In 2003 a much larger and more serious outage occurred in the Northeastern US and the Canadian province of Ontario. Overgrown trees shorted out a power line and started a cascading blackout that ultimately left 50 million people in the dark for up to 48 hours. The outage shut down hundreds of generators at 265 separate power plants, including 22 nuclear reactors. Subway trains screeched to a halt, airplanes were grounded, water and sewer pumps failed, and phone systems were overwhelmed. For most people affected by this blackout, the power was off for less than 24 hours, yet it cost the US and Canadian economies an estimated $6 billion.
More recently, a December ice storm in Oklahoma left hundreds of thousands of residents of that state without power for up to week. If overgrown trees and storms can cause that kind of impact, think of the consequences if people determined to cause mischief (or worse) gained access to the control systems of our electric grid.
Electric utilities control their power-lines and generators using a type of software known as SCADA (Supervisory Control And Data Acquisition). This same type of software is used to control the operations of oil & gas refineries, pipelines, water and sewage treatment plants, manufacturing plants, and communication networks worldwide. SCADA systems control security alarms, air conditioning, heating, energy consumption, and all sorts of other processes in public and private buildings.
A hacker with an understanding of SCADA systems could potentially turn off alarms, and then wreak havoc on our electric generation and transportation network without fear of discovery. This was dramatically demonstrated last March, when scientists at the Idaho National Library exposed the serious threat posed by computer hackers (or terrorists) to the nation’s power grid. Using an obsolete diesel-electric generator as their guinea pig, scientists demonstrated that they could not only hack into the control system of America’s electric power grid via the internet, they could turn a multi-million dollar generator into a shuddering, smoking piece of junk at the click of a mouse.
In a recent interview with CNN, O. Sami Saydjari of the nonprofit Professionals for Cyber Defense said, “For about $5 million and between three to five years of preparation, an organization, whether it be transnational terrorist groups or nation states, could mount a strategic attack against the United States.” Scott Borg, an economist and security analyst with the U.S. Cyber Consequences Unit has predicted that if a third of the country lost power for three months, the impact would be equivalent to 40 or 50 Katrina-size hurricanes striking the country at the same time.
The SCADA loophole exploited by the Idaho National Library has reportedly been fixed and utilities are working to limit their vulnerability to cyber attacks, but most Americans have done little to prepare for a widespread power outage, and still take it for granted that electricity will always be available at their fingerprints. The folks in Oklahoma who spent a week shivering in December temperatures may have a different perspective.
Next week we’ll look at what utilities are doing to prevent power outages.
