[ exact phrase in "" • results by date ]

[ Google-powered • results by relevance ]


News Home

Subscribe to RSS feed

Add NWW headlines to your site (click here)

Sign up for daily updates

Keep Wind Watch online and independent!

Donate $10

Donate $5

Selected Documents

All Documents

Research Links


Press Releases


Publications & Products

Photos & Graphics


Allied Groups

Wyoming wind isn’t the best in the West, not if you do the math  

Credit:  Heather Richards | Casper Star Tribune | trib.com ~~

Wyoming wind is relentless, and anyone who lives in the state knows that the perpetual irritant that makes sagebrush shiver and wind socks live horizontal is also something that can be harnessed for power.

But the widespread belief that the wind here makes Wyoming the most economic place for a company to raise a turbine is not quite correct.

The four best wind states – in terms of the value of the wind and the cost of developing it – are New Mexico, Montana, Colorado and Wyoming, in that order.

Wyoming ranks fourth, but the three states that follow New Mexico are actually quite close, noted Rob Godby, the coauthor of a recent study that investigates how tax policy influences the economics of Western wind development. Godby is also the executive director of the Center for Energy Economics and Public Policy at the University of Wyoming.

The talk of cost is timely, as this year lawmakers again proposed increasing the state’s wind tax. Though that attempt has repeatedly failed, its persistence has rattled wind supporters and developers.

Tax proponents maintain the wind is so good in Wyoming, and development of wind is so cheap, that the increase is a fair deal. The UW study’s authors argue that increasing the existing wind tax may be a bad deal for economic diversification, scaring off development.

But they also offer a compromise.

Behind the best

The study considers Wyoming’s wind competitiveness beside its peers – the other states in the Western grid. That includes the really expensive places to develop wind, like California, and the really cheap spots, like New Mexico.

The ranking worked like this. Researchers considered the best of the best in terms of wind sites in these states. For the best locations – the top 5 percent of developable land – researchers considered the cost of development over the lifetime of a hypothetical wind farm. That includes costs like a state’s tax policy, construction and logistics. That adds up to the cheapest or most economic wind development. On the other end of the spectrum are the least favorable conditions. That’s wind producing at the bare minimum acceptable for developers, which researchers set as a 35 percent gross capacity factor.

The UW cost comparison is not the first performed for the state. Wyoming commissioned a study by a private company in 2010. Godby said he and his partner had originally tried to simply replicate that model, but found it clunky for their purposes. However, the results from the early replication of the 2010 study compared to the final remodeling both put Wyoming in fourth place, he said.

Tax bump

There’s a group of lawmakers that talk pretty regularly about raising Wyoming’s wind tax. They note the long-term impact of wind farms on Wyoming’s landscape, clean-up of steel towers down the line or point out that traditional energy industries contribute more, in revenue and in jobs, than the wind industry.

The desire to force wind to pay a “fair share” has led to annual bills in the Wyoming Legislature to increase the wind tax. This year, multiple measure raising the tax came into play, though none survived the session.

Sen. Cale Case, R-Lander, is an ardent supporter of raising wind taxes. He has noted that developers can afford an increase, in part because of the value of Wyoming’s resources, and in part because of how cheap it is to develop.

Case has gathered a group of citizens who will attempt to bring a wind tax to a popular vote. Getting a referendum on the ballot is an uphill battle by Wyoming rules, but supporters say it will put the matter to bed in Wyoming once and for all.

Another frequent supporter of raising taxes is retired state lawmaker Mike Madden, R-Buffalo, who noted in a recent column in the online news magazine Wyofile that lawmakers appeared to be coming around to his point of view.

Madden said in an interview that the approaches he’s witnessed to increase the tax have all been an attempt to make wind’s per megawatt hour contribution to Wyoming the same as other power sources like coal and natural gas.

“If I thought that wind was being curtailed because of Wyoming tax policy I would certainly be against it,” said Madden, who had not yet read the Godby study. “I just want it on terms that we are used to.”

Madden has noted, particularly during the recent economic downturn, that wind is a way for the state to diversify its economy, a necessity given the sharp downturns that occur when crude prices fall.

For Godby, the flat tax increase that’s been proposed would likely hurt the prospects of growing the wind industry here.

A $5 per megawatt hour wind tax, which is four dollars more than the current tax, was proposed in the 2019 session. Godby ran those numbers in his model and the results were unsurprising.

The tax would raise Wyoming’s wind costs, by 10 percent, making Wyoming about 21 percent more costly for development than New Mexico.

“Our conclusion is that this would make a meaningful difference in developer’s willingness to consider Wyoming for wind development … especially given other challenges in the state like its distance from major markets and need to develop transmission, as well as other concerns such as sage grouse,” Godby wrote in an email, noting the chicken-sized bird whose crucial habitat is off limits to new wind development under state standards.

At its most expensive, Wyoming wind development with a $5 wind tax is more costly than all Western states except Nevada and California. At its best, Wyoming remains in fourth place, behind Colorado, Montana and New Mexico.

Source:  Heather Richards | Casper Star Tribune | trib.com

This article is the work of the source indicated. Any opinions expressed in it are not necessarily those of National Wind Watch.

The copyright of this article resides with the author or publisher indicated. As part of its noncommercial effort to present the environmental, social, scientific, and economic issues of large-scale wind power development to a global audience seeking such information, National Wind Watch endeavors to observe “fair use” as provided for in section 107 of U.S. Copyright Law and similar “fair dealing” provisions of the copyright laws of other nations. Send requests to excerpt, general inquiries, and comments via e-mail.

Wind Watch relies entirely
on User Funding
Donate $5 PayPal Donate


News Watch Home

Get the Facts Follow Wind Watch on Twitter

Wind Watch on Facebook


© National Wind Watch, Inc.
Use of copyrighted material adheres to Fair Use.
"Wind Watch" is a registered trademark.