[Vision2020] Wall Street Journal: US Fails To Supply Windmill Technology

Mon Jul 9 23:19:15 PDT 2007

Paul et. al.

Thanks for your response.

If coal plants in the USA were paying for the future costs of their CO2
emissions, how would wind power stand in the marketplace now?  This
"particular incarnation of government" I trust will be thrown out next year,
replaced by a government more oriented towards promoting green technology

The article indicated that European companies are not just supplying parts
and turbines for wind power to US wind farms, they are buying US wind
farms!  US alternative energy owned by European companies.  I have nothing
against this necessarily, but in the long run, every European owned wind
farm means less market share for this energy market for US corporations.
And more expansion for the European technology and manufacturing base for
wind power.

Given this trend, European wind farm technology companies can build
factories in the USA to manufacture the parts and turbines, just as Toyota
now has US factories to make and sell their cars in the USA.  This could
eliminate lower shipping costs for US competing wind technology companies.

Toyota may soon become the world's largest auto maker, if it has not
already, and this given the former gigantic lead held by the vaunted US auto
industry.  Wind power will likely become a very big global business, and
with US companies already apparently unable to supply the US current demand,
I see no guarantee they necessarily will stop European expansion into our
market, though I have not researched this subject in depth.

There is a potential boom economy in the Green Revolution.  The businesses
that get a foothold first have an advantage that may leave out US
corporations.  Our government's lack of recognition (or lack of will, or
more likely, politicians bought by millions in lobbying dollars by energy
corporations) of the critical need to aggressively develop and support the
roll out of green technology in the marketplace, to provide a regulatory
structure that offers stability for long term investment in alternative
energy, has been coupled with a lack of regulation of CO2 emissions, which
offers a better chance for non-CO2 emitting energy technologies to compete.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/20/business/worldbusiness/20cnd-toyota.html?ex=1292734800&en=52ce2c484a4bcbaf&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

Ted Moffett

On 7/9/07, Paul Rumelhart <godshatter at yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> This is exactly what's been missing: demand.  Sure, some European
> companies will make a mint as the suppliers race to beef up their factories
> and whatnot.  In the end, some entrepreneur will arrive who will provide
> what's needed here in the US at the appropriate rate and will have the
> advantage of a smaller distance to ship components, and lower shipping
> costs.
>
> You'll never get this particular incarnation of government to mandate
> green power.  The nice thing is that wind power is becoming economical on
> it's own.  That should mean a great surge in wind power plants in the coming
> years.  Wind power may be more costly right now on a penny per kilowatt
> basis, but you're not going to run out of wind and be left high and dry like
> you will someday with coal, even if that's a couple of hundred years away.
> Everybody complains about having a wind turbine in their back yard, but is
> it so much worse than a polluting coal plant?  As the technology progresses
> wind power plants will get quieter, safer, and more efficient.  I just read
> a few days ago about a proposal to make off-shore wind power generators that
> float in the ocean and are tethered to the sea floor.  If the equations are
> working out well enough to make that kind of thing feasible, then we are
> well on our way.
>
> Paul
>
> Ted Moffett wrote:
>
>  All-
>
> In today's Wall Street Journal, front page, an article claims US demand
> for wind energy technology is not being met domestically, resulting in a
> slow down of implementation, offering an economic opportunity for European
> corporations to supply the technology, and own the US wind farms, that can
> answer the US demand:
>
> From the article:
>
> "In recent years, improved technology has made it possible to build
> bigger, more efficient windmills. That, combined with surging political
> support for renewable energy, has driven up demand. Now, makers can't keep
> up -- mostly because they can't get the parts they need fast enough.
>
> "Numerous wind-power projects from Virginia to California have been
> stalled due to the shortage. But for some renewable-energy companies in
> Europe, where wind power has been in vogue for almost two decades, the
> logjam is a lucrative opportunity. These firms anticipated a shortage of
> turbines and locked in orders with makers. They're now using their
> considerable buying power to gobble up smaller utilities in the U.S. that
> couldn't otherwise get their hands on turbines."
>
> ------
> So in brief, in the richest nation on Earth, the shining example of the
> miracle of the marketplace to ensure the latest and best technology to
> benefit the public will receive investment and implementation, "socialist"
> Europe is ahead of the US in supplying wind power technology, with European
> companies making long term investments in owning US wind energy, that could
> instead be made by US domestic businesses. Why?
>
> From the article:
>
> "In the U.S., there's another potential threat to growth -- erratic
> government support for wind power. Even though wind power has made technical
> strides recently, energy firms still rely on subsidies because it costs more
> to generate electricity with wind turbines than other power plants such as
> coal, natural gas or nuclear. Wind power requires intensive capital
> investment in a short period of time, and has added costs like upgrading
> transmission systems. According to the International Energy Agency in Paris,
> wind farms cost between four and 14 cents to generate a kilowatt hour;
> coal-fired plants cost between 2.5 and six cents."
>
> "Some 20 states now have price supports for wind-generated electricity,
> and there is a federal tax credit to encourage new wind-park development.
> But there is no federal requirement for utilities to buy green energy, as
> there is in the United Kingdom, Denmark and Germany. And the tax credit,
> started in 1992, depends on a biannual congressional approval. An effort to
> introduce federal support for wind power was shot down this month in the
> Senate."
>
> "The lack of a stable, long-term regulatory environment has created a
> wind-power roller coaster. Developers were never sure their projects would
> make economic sense a few years down the road if the regulatory climate
> changed. Foreign turbine manufacturers were reluctant to build factories in
> the U.S. Vestas scrapped plans for a U.S. factory three times because of
> uncertainty. This spring, it announced it would build a turbine plant in
> Windsor, Colo.
>
> -----------
> This link appears to bypass the "subscription required" option for the
> whole article:
>
> http://online.wsj.com/article/SB118394439319360560.html
>
> If this fails, here is the subscription required link:
>
>
> http://online.wsj.com/article/SB118394439319360560.html?mod=todays_us_nonsub_page_one
>
> Here is discussion of the article from "public radio:"
>
> http://marketplace.publicradio.org/shows/2007/07/09/AM200707094.html
>
> ---------
> Vision2020 Post: Ted Moffett
>
> ------------------------------
>
> =======================================================
>  List services made available by First Step Internet,
>  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>                http://www.fsr.net
>           mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com <Vision2020 at moscow.com>
> =======================================================
>
>
>
>
> =======================================================
>  List services made available by First Step Internet,
>  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>               http://www.fsr.net
>          mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> =======================================================
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20070709/11fcaba5/attachment-0001.html 