Letter to the Editor (4-13-19)

With the promotion of wind farms in Kansas, and more specifically in Marion and McPherson counties, it deserves some serious investigation. The hype needs to be sorted out.

Where did this all begin? It began in 1992 in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. A product of the “Earth Summit” (UN Conference on Environment and Development). It was labeled “Agenda 21” and refers to the 21st century. It has been affirmed at subsequent UN conferences and its aim was to achieve globally sustainable development goals (SDGs). The 17 SDGs included #7 and #13 related to purported affordable clean energy, and climate action. On the surface the various goals may sound noble, however, specifically to renewable energy, it has been debunked by “Climategate” (November 2009) and other studies as to the misrepresentation of data to support their agenda.

Fast forward to the politics of the matter worldwide. Supposed green energy has been heavily subsidized by governments, especially early on in Europe. However, reality has at least partially set in there, and growth in onshore wind in 2018 fell by more than half in Germany and “collapsed in the U.K.” Twelve countries in the European Union (EU) failed to install a single wind turbine last year. This was due in a large part by a decrease in state aid. Over the period of 2006 to 2016, electricity prices have increased in Germany by 51%, over 100% in Denmark since 1995. So, if renewable energy (solar and wind) is so much cheaper, then why did the price of electricity dramatically increase, instead of decline? It appears that a young German economist, Leon Hirth, may have the answer in a 2013 paper in, “Energy Policy”. The reason?-Renewable energy’s fundamentally unreliable nature. Both solar and wind sources produce too much energy when societies don’t need it, and not enough when they do. Electricity is thought of as a commodity when it is, in fact, a service – like eating at a restaurant. The price of the service like eating out, and electricity, reflect the cost not only of a few ingredients but also their preparation and delivery.

In the USA, lobbyists have been busy on the federal and state level promoting green energy.

The result is massive government subsidies and mandates (renewable portfolio standard, RPS) in the form of Production Tax Credits (PTC), Investment tax credits and legislation with tax abatements, construction costs by utility companies that may be passed on in their entirety to end users, or ratepayers (that’s us), and other perks. In Kansas, initial property tax abatements for wind turbines was for life, then in May 2015, it was amended by SB 91 to be for only 10 years; however, within SB 91 there is an amendment that allows for the future tax to be ultimately passed on to the ratepayers. Congress has created 82 initiatives overseen by nine different federal agencies to promote the production of wind energy. Warren Buffett, who has invested billions in renewable energy, stated, “We get a tax credit if we build a lot of wind farms. That’s the only reason to build them. They don’t make sense without the tax credit. These Federal subsidies for wind power lead to an economic phenomenon called “negative pricing”, which is when the seller pays the buyer to receive their wind energy.

So, who are the winners from this propagated lie of CO2 supposedly being a hazardous gas and aggressive green energy development from the political heavy-weights? It sure isn’t the consumer, or our state or county. The residents only get to view these behemoth edifices that have very real health and environmental issues. The schools miss out on property tax revenue and may get a pittance via the payment in lieu of tax program (PILOT). Animosity among family members and neighbors may escalate. Property values may decrease as it is hard to imagine that folks would want to move into a blighted area of a “wind farm”. Hard pressed rural landowners may consider it an economic boon initially, however long-term issues no doubt dwarf the initial economic benefits.

What do you do with an aging wind farm or if technology renders them obsolete? The gag order in the contracts would make one feel helpless as issues crop up. The only obvious winner is the energy/utility company that receives government subsidies, construction costs that will be passed on to the ratepayer (that’s us), plus the unreliable nature of their service.

So, scrutiny should be given before a decision to move forward on such a project in our area, regardless of who is promoting it. The moral of the story is, “Don’t sell your birthright (farm) for a bowl of lentil soup”.

David Marsh

Hillsboro

More from Hillsboro Free Press
Hillsboro City Council looking to sell Lincoln St. residential lots
The Hillsboro City Council authorized its city administrator at its Jan. 19...
Read More