Noteworthy in the Feb. 8 article “Feds push East Coast offshore wind farms” was the fact no mention was made of the projected cost per megawatt of the energy provided. In other words, the reader has no idea how to compare the cost of the energy provided by those projects with the cost of energy from more conventional plants.
I suspect this omission was due, at least in part, to the fact that the projected full life-cycle cost of these facilities is significantly higher, especially because the projects were to be located 20 miles offshore and, therefore, would require an additional investment in underwater transmission lines to deliver the power to onshore facilities.
In my opinion, this is vital information for all of us as consumers of electricity, particularly when we are all cutting back on expenditures due to budgetary constraints.
Presumably, the filings made by the developers included cost information and the resulting prices that consumers would have to shoulder. The article should have included this data so the reader could make an informed decision as to whether the offshore wind farms were a good or bad idea.
R. A. Zanoni, New Vernon
|Wind Watch relies entirely
on User Funding