Go to the mobile version of this Web site.

Login | Contact Us | Site Map | Paid archives | Electronic edition | Subscription Questions | Extras

SPEAKOUT: Wray wind turbine is no boondoggle

By Russell Simon

Published July 31, 2008 at 6:15 p.m.

Text size  

More Speakout

More stories »

Recently, Face The State broke the news that a wind turbine that was supposed to be producing clean energy to offset the emissions from the Democratic National Convention in Denver in fact produces no electricity at all. Apparently, "massive equipment malfunctions" have kept the wind turbine offline ever since its ribbon cutting in February.

The criticism from the right has been quick and fierce: One Colorado Republican lawmaker called the DNC's plan to green its convention a fraud. Another called it a sham.

Blogs on the right have labeled the plan a boondoggle and a scandal.

None of those characterizations are remotely true. The wind turbine project in Wray was third- party verified and additional - meaning the project wouldn't have been built without the funding from the sale of carbon offsets. (Ironically, had the wind turbine in Wray been producing electricity all along, critics might have attacked it for not being additional.) Even if the turbine isn't producing electricity now, it will eventually.

And viewing the money the project received from carbon offsets as anything other than a long-term investment in the future of the local community and the health of the planet would be short-sighted and narrow. NativeEnergy, the offset marketer that sources the project for the DNC (and a direct competitor of ours) deserves credit for helping get the turbine built, not criticism.

The real problem in the case of the Wray turbine is not that money spent to support it was misappropriated, but rather that one carelessly chosen project could come to taint public perception of the entire voluntary carbon market. In fact, the voluntary carbon market is booming and having a real impact on global warming, in spite of some high profile marketing blunders.

On one level, the situation highlights what people are most afraid the carbon offset industry doing - taking money and providing nothing in return. But carbon offsets exist precisely to provide that influx of capital. Without it, we're going to have a difficult time transitioning to a clean-energy economy.

NativeEnergy's statement on the episode, posted on its Web site, is essentially correct: "The situation clearly demonstrates why renewable energy projects like this project need upfront capital to overcome challenges on their path to operation."

The Wray wind turbine may need an extra part. It may need more attention from the school district, which is managing it. But this is no scandal or boondoggle.

Russell Simon is communications manager for Carbonfund.org Foundation in Washington, D.C.

Comments

  • August 1, 2008

    5:13 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    windskull writes:

    What`s a boondoggle is the ripping off of Colorado residents for "green" energy blocks sold at $2.50/kw produced at a wind farm located in the Arizona desert that was OWNED BY ENRON!

    Among the biggest obstacles to 2004 voter passed Amendment 37 where meeting 13% of Colorado`s energy production was to VOLUNTARILY come from renewables by 2010 was footdragging by our Republican Governor and Congress in tangent with www.tristategt.org inexplicably avoiding tying into either Colorado`s EXISTING or the new wind farm project.

    This in spite of transmission lines running right through the middle of both furthermore the local CO-OP subsidiary was a major factor behind monkey wrenching the Wray Turbine Project`s success from the start.

    Anyone believing Senator McCain will be rushing to change the green block energy "deal" setup between the Arizona ENRON wind farm and www.tristategt.org conveniently located in Wyoming has also forgotten a certain closed door energy meeting

  • August 1, 2008

    6:50 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    freethinker07 writes:

    A turbine is not that complicated. In fact, it is pretty old technology. Massive equipment failure in old technology usually indicates a political or managerial problem somewhere.

  • August 1, 2008

    7:04 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    windskull writes:

    Grab yourself a cheroot there freethinker07

  • August 1, 2008

    7:51 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    Darwin writes:

    Does the Wray wind turbine work or not?
    If no - why not
    If yes - case closed.
    As reethinker07 stated: A turbine is not that complicated. They are generating electricity in many parts of the country and now one either is or isn't in Wray regardless of record oil profits. Coal, steel, fertilizer, grains, etc. are seeing record profits also. Everything is always so politicized that nothing gets done. Neither the Democrats or the Republicans have our best interests at heart and those of you that name call or bastardize the name of one party or candidate add nothing to the credibility of your comments. This lack of working together to solve problems is why our country is in the condition it is. Attacking one another is easy, working together takes some effort on the part of everyone. Feel free to attack this post or resolve to be more cooperative going forward.

  • August 1, 2008

    7:54 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    pak writes:

    Renewables work only 33% of the time and have to be backed up by dispatchable gas plants which leads to higher gas demand and higher gas prices. The more we build high priced, unreliable renewables, the more we pay for gas. Renewables discrimnate against the poor who can't pay the high prices the elite left are able and willing to pay. Gore's carbon offset marketing companies are a scam and this turbine is just one example of what the future holds for us.

  • August 1, 2008

    8:56 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    FlyfishDude52 writes:

    Froward - I rest my case in pointing out that you research nothing.

    Look back... 30 years, as you suggest...
    There were federal and state programs, nationwide, regarding subsidies and tax credits for installing solar and wind-powered devices!!!

  • August 1, 2008

    9:40 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    Danchan writes:

    Interesting how many people are looking back at history to complain about renewable energy instead of looking forward to the innovations coming at us every month.
    There are important lessons about what to hold our government and corporations accountable for in the past, but their are an amazing number of advances in green energy happening right now.
    Drilling for oil is yesterdays solution to our energy needs.

  • August 1, 2008

    10:15 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    FlyfishDude52 writes:

    How can the dnc claim that (1) wind turbine is going to do much to offset the actual energy useage for their convention? Who paid for this particular unit? Surely not the dnc. They would have to find a government program to cover those costs. So then how can the dnc even lay claim to such a thing as having their very own wind turbine? So it's connected to the power grid & subject to all the same constraints that other energy producers are. By the time you sort it out the energy produced by one wind turbine in Wray will light about 1/50th of the sportslighters at mile hi. What a green convention! Maybe they should haul the energy from Wray in buckets in the back of their hybrid automobiles.

  • August 1, 2008

    10:19 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    seeingeyeseesall writes:

    Nothing but nuclear can provide the BTUs delivered by fossil fuel, that's simple physics and chemistry.

    We've grown accustomed to what, even at today's prices, is essentially free energy on a mass scale. Everything we've done is "wrong," when considering a renewable energy future.

    Renewables deliver energy in "real time," fossil fuels have concentrated eons of natural energy into compact form that wind and solar production will never be able to equal. Real time energy is not constant. Sailing ships sailed when the wind blew - sailors mended their clothes and tarred the rigging when it didn't.

    Fossil fuel energy eliminated this intermittent supply issue, but as renewable energy increases as a proportion of the national grid, utilities will not be able to provide uninterrupted power to our constant loads without building more reserve stock - coal, gas or nuclear plants - to compensate for the ever more varying supply from renewables. Unless massive numbers of backup systems; onsite, distributed, solar/battery systems for example, are deployed to make load management possible, the grid will begin to become intermittent as well. Meaning rolling blackouts, as system operators shed load to meet supply when the wind slows or it gets cloudy.

    It's not going to be easy; switching to large scale energy sources that vary in output as nature's winds change, clouds obscure the sun, etc... not when people expect power to be on 24/7/365, and not without massive changes in our grid's design.

    Concentrated solar thermal electric can provide a steady source but the US Senate has again - eight times this year alone - refused to extend tax subsidies for any form of solar or renewable energy, subsidies that pay for themselves in new jobs and the taxes they generate, while continuing billions in tax credits for oil companies.

    The reality is simple - if you enjoy your lifestyle today, begin to plan for a world where you'll have to generate the energy you need to continue it. Local solar with battery, not cheap grid-tied solar, is presently the only way to assure fixed costs and a constant supply for your needs. Government and industry cannot cahnge the laws of physics.

    This comment was composed using locally generated onsite solar and micro-hydro electric power.

  • August 1, 2008

    12:45 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    Marshdale writes:

    Sasquatch: For you information, third party verification is something that is required by the Federal Trade Commissions, and most states Public Utility Commission. Here is a link to Wiki.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_pa...

  • August 1, 2008

    12:49 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    Marshdale writes:

    Sasquatch; I would agree with one thing. Even as a dem, I can't stand Nancy Pelosi. But hey, California is the land of fruits and nuts.

  • August 1, 2008

    3:36 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    Acemon writes:

    Flyfishdude52;

    Tell us how much power the wind turbine in Wray will put out (when it finally works) versus how much electricity Taxpayer's Stadium (aka Invesco) requires, and only then your statement will have some meaning. Thanks.

  • August 1, 2008

    4:54 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    roger44 writes:

    Marshdale: first, wikipedia can be edited by a viewer, second, federal trades commissons, are the feds, and you know what kind of mess we're in because of the lack of action by this Government, third, PUC's are rubber stamps for energy companies asking to raise their rates to consumers. Our so called homeland security is hiring private security companies to work the big deal in Denver, and these guys are 9 buck an hr wanna be's. Now if we could harness all the hot air put out by this government, we could heat a lot of homes this winter!

  • August 1, 2008

    11:19 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    Castle writes:

    RUSSELL SIMON: You're full of condenced owl feathers! Carbon offsets are nothing more then a scam, that's why Owl Bore is selling off sets to a compamy her owns. The fact that the Wray project isn't producing is proof that wind power is in it's infancy. It needs many more years to be a viable producer. No amount of spin by you or the DNC will change that.

  • August 1, 2008

    11:32 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    rickg19611 writes:

    "Russell Simon is communications manager for Carbonfund.org "

    aka.... spokesman for a fraudulent scam.

    Only gullible morons support such scams.

  • August 2, 2008

    12:46 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    fatheromalley writes:

    RICKG you gotta go to www.fatheromalley.com
    Those that think man is saving the planet by decreasing CO2 needn't go there. It might take away too much of your "self esteem".

    Praise be to those that see through the shell game and socialist programs of the left.. Feel proud, you are not one of Lenin's "useful idiots" as your competitors are.. you are free thinkers. Please contact your local, state and federal representatives. The wrong people currently have their ear...
    You are our only hope... keep thinking free..

    www.fairtax.org
    www.jihadwatch.org
    www.numbersusa.org
    www.grassfire.org

    www.fatheromalley.com If you go there, click throughs to all of the above is on the Home page at www.fatheromalley.com

    Err.. did I tell you it was www.fatheromalley.com?

    New ideas! Videos and references for ALL commentary..

    Not the usual doom and gloom you find here...

    Now for me scotch.. 15 year single malt.. ah there she is...

    Love to all,
    Father O'Malley

  • August 2, 2008

    3:19 p.m.

    Suggest removal

    woodwose writes:

    If you are involved in selling carbon offsets you are nothing more than a blackmailer, swindler and cheat. All carbon cap and trade schemes do is create markets out of nothing to be manipulated by the players.

    Does this sound familiar?

    It should. Playing with semi-regulated, government-built electricity markets is the field that Jeff Skilling and Ken Lay of Enron fame pioneered.

    We've been down this primrose-lined path before and it led to disaster. Ask a Californian.

    And people running sham organizations like Carbonfund.org and NativeEnergy are nothing but slimy con-artists looking for a massive payday in a government mandated "market" while piously claiming to save the planet.