County, state will lose if wind projects are halted
Star-Tribune Editorial Board | Posted: Thursday, February 2, 2012
It's hardly surprising that opponents of a proposed wind farm south of Glenrock said they plan to take their case to the Wyoming Supreme Court.
But in light of the economic opportunities the project would bring to Converse County, as well as the chance to add renewable energy resources to the state's energy portfolio, it is disappointing.
Earlier this month, a Wyoming District Court judge affirmed state and county permits for Wasatch Wind's planned 62-turbine, 100-megawatt Pioneer Wind Park.
The permits were granted by the Converse County Commission in May and the Industrial Siting Council in June. County officials followed the new regulations they adopted to deal with wind projects, and the Industrial Siting Council placed significant conditions on its permit, including requiring Wasatch Wind to put up an $18.8 million bond and install radar-controlled turbine safety lights.
Wasatch Wind, according to the judge, met all of the requirements. Michelle Stevens, spokeswoman for the Park City, Utah company, added, "We've followed every rule, law and statute and went above and beyond in many cases."
The Northern Laramie Range Alliance, a group of nearby landowners, announced it will appeal the lower court's decision to the Wyoming Supreme Court.
While opponents generally cite the negative impact of the wind turbines on pristine local viewsheds as their primary objection, some members - including Casper oil and gas businessman Diemer True - are just as focused on bashing the development of wind power and other types of renewable energy.
True has described wind energy as a "fool's errand" because it provides only a fraction of the nation's energy supply and relies on subsidies.
Can anyone in the oil and gas business say with a straight face that it hasn't benefited from government subsidies over the years?
The fact is that many states, including several in the West, have determined that a significant portion of their electricity will come from wind and other renewable sources. With Wyoming's abundant wind resources, it would be foolish not to develop them.
We agree that there are special places that are not suitable for wind energy development that need to be protected. But we also support the long-held Wyoming principle that a private landowner has the right to use his land as he wishes, as long as it doesn't unduly harm his neighbors.
In addition to the monetary benefits for the landowners, the wind project would provide a much-needed economic boost to the area. The two wind farms, each with 31 turbines, would cost an estimated $180 million to $200 million. They would require a construction force of 100 to 200 workers.
The Northern Laramie Range Alliance maintains Wasatch Wind hasn't met an Industrial Siting Council requirement that the company show it is financially capable of building, operating and eventually tearing down the wind farms. Obviously the ISC and the district court judge disagreed.
Besides using its deep pockets to keep fighting the project in court, the group has petitioned the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to reject the company's claim that it is really two smaller facilities to help reach deals to sell its power.
The NLRA has also appealed to the state court a Wyoming Public Service Commission ruling that allowed Wasatch more time to start delivering power from the project beyond 2011.
It's ironic, to say the least, that a group with members who have long decried environmental groups that have sued to stall fossil fuel energy projects are using the same strategy to keep wind resources in Wyoming from being developed.
The NLRA may yet find a venue to keep the Converse County project from being built. But if it is successful, it will be at the expense of private landowners, the county's economy and the state's commitment to providing energy to the nation.
