Economic Impact of Windpower

[Ross]

Ok.  So from what I understand, you're saying that the company that owns and operates the wind farm has NO obligation to provide ANY benefit to the community.  If that's the case, why are you complaining that what they are doing isn't enough?

I never said they are not doing enough! I never complained about the company's contribution to the county. The company is also donating money for 30 kids to go to Summer Camp for a week or two in Lawrence, Kansas which is really nice.

What I have said, is the same company with the same size wind farm in Oklahoma gives a community $3 Million Dollars. And I have said, that our Konnected Kounty Kommissioners did a poor job of negotiating for Elk County, and I believe that is because, they were apparently more interested in their personal interest in the land, where the wind farm was built and their profits, rather than doing the necessary home work (study) to negotiate properly on behalf of Elk County.

As I have also stated, the only non-Konnected County Commissioner Mr. Ritz could not get the Konnected Kounty Kommissioners to even consider negotiating for free electricity for all citizens of Elk County. That would have been much cheaper for the company, but most likely worth much more than 1 Million Dollars and every citizen would have benefited directly.

Oh for your information Anmar, I understand the land owners apparently negotiated 3 Million Dollars for themselves.

And Anmar, you can bet, that Elk Konnected has a person lined up to run against Mr. Ritz in November. I have heard the lady's name, but I am not at liberty to disclose it. One more Konnected member on the Elk County Commissioners board, once again will give them control of the county. Is that what Elk County needs? In my opinion, not no, but Hell no.

My only complaint's about the company are:
      1. Stimulus Money Used to Build it.
      2. Major Tax Breaks
      3. All the Profits go Directly to a Foreign Country (In this case Italy).

Number 3, can best described as a big ole funnel, for nearly free money, to a foreign entity.

Oh and Anmar it has just recently been corrected by the County Appraiser that the land, that each wind mill is on, is now taxed as commercial property, instead of being taxed as agricultural. There is a difference. I don't believe cattle can graze on the concrete pads. Fair is fair right?

[Ross]

Ok.  So from what I understand, you're saying that the company that owns and operates the wind farm has NO obligation to provide ANY benefit to the community.  If that's the case, why are you complaining that what they are doing isn't enough?

Sorry I didn't answer your question about the company's obligation.

I don't know for sure, if they had an obligation in the beginning or not.
But today they sure do, because they entered into a poorly negotiated contract with the county.

Of course Anmar everything I post is simply my opinion and nothing more.
You are welcome to ignore anything, I post and I will not be offended.

[Anmar]

Ross,

I generally don't ignore posts, and I have no reason to ignore yours.  I wonder if you've ignored the rather lengthy and well argued post from Crosstimber on page 2 of this thread. 

What I'm trying to get at is this.  When it comes to local politics, you and many other Elk County residents are actually pretty liberal.  Look at your arguments.  Business has a duty to the community, the people deserve a piece of the pie, businesses should be taxed, etc.  Nationally, the republican platform is free market, the rights of persons to use their property as they please without government interference etc. 

Locally you're a liberal.  Nationally you're a conservative.  All I'm trying to do is 1.  help you realize that and 2.  Ask you why there's a discrepancy. 

[Ross]

Ross,

I generally don't ignore posts, and I have no reason to ignore yours.  I wonder if you've ignored the rather lengthy and well argued post from Crosstimber on page 2 of this thread. 

What I'm trying to get at is this.  When it comes to local politics, you and many other Elk County residents are actually pretty liberal.  Look at your arguments.  Business has a duty to the community, the people deserve a piece of the pie, businesses should be taxed, etc.  Nationally, the republican platform is free market, the rights of persons to use their property as they please without government interference etc. 

Locally you're a liberal.  Nationally you're a conservative.  All I'm trying to do is 1.  help you realize that and 2.  Ask you why there's a discrepancy.

I had a lengthy response written and was posting it when my computer crashed and I lost it.
Right now I am posting to you on a Kindle because I can"t get my computer running.

I am in no way a liberal..

A simple response would be one community gets 3M and the other gets 1M.
There is no apples and oranges.
All the rest of that post is simply for confusing people, simple nothing more.

Sorry I can not do properly on this firm kindle.

Thank you Anmar.

[crosstimber]

Hey Ross, why don't you call up the Garfield and Grant County Oklahoma treasurers and ask them how much property tax revenue has made it's way into their office from the Chisholm View wind project.

Wait, I'll save you the dime.  The answer is $0.00!  And the answer will remain the same for five years. 

Why would that be? 

Because Oklahoma abates the ad valorem taxes on wind power development for five years. 

So for five years the owners of the Chisholm View wind farm will be collecting their state level production tax credit from the state (to the tune of $2.5 - 3.0 million, give or take a hundred thou or so) without paying a dime to the local counties, township road districts, school districts, fire districts, conservation districts, etc.

[frawin]

Crosstimber a big thank you for getting the facts on the Chisholm View wind project. Ross never likes the facts unless they agree with his always negative view. I think if the West Elk taxpayers would get the facts from the school board they would find a lot if not most of what Ross has put out there is not true.

[Ross]

Crosstimber a big thank you for getting the facts on the Chisholm View wind project. Ross never likes the facts unless they agree with his always negative view. I think if the West Elk taxpayers would get the facts from the school board they would find a lot if not most of what Ross has put out there is not true.

You right, I do have a negative attitude about all you self righteous liberals.
But facts, what facts. I haven't seen a single link to support what Crosstimber says. Not one single solitary fact.

Sorry Frawin you fail in calling me a liar. What I post is the gospel truth. But, you know what, I don't ask anyone to believe anything I post. They could go to the school board meetings and see and hear the foolishness for themselves, can't they. But can you?

You Don't see a single one of the school board members disputing a single thing I post do you. Especially the great and highly Konnected board member do you?

I feel pretty confident I have shamed those supposedly delete into cleaning up their act a little bit. HOW you may ask? By posting pictures of their picking table and the Elk Valley Schoolboy meeting room. And at the next meeting I expect to see arrangement quite similar to Elk Valley's arrangement. An dignified arrangement generally used by dignified school board's. An arrangement that is even used by the Kansas State School Board.
The next thing is to discontinue the picnic and stop looking like my cow chewing her cud. Then maybe some real conversations about REAL school business can take place.

And as I usually say it is simply my opinion and nothing more.Just like the newspaper editor writing his opinion entitled EDITORIAL.

The school board has been working on this liberal plan of construction for two years without even knowing what the class rooms looked like. And finally a couple of months ago the school principal invited them to take a tour.

When have you toured the building frawin ?
Just asking'.

[redcliffsw]

Ross, you're not in line with the liberal agenda and several here that are not.  You're on the right side so stay right in there. 

[Ross]

Ross, you're not in line with the liberal agenda and several here that are not.  You're on the right side so stay right in there.

Thank you !

[Ross]

Our wind farm nor any other wind farm is not doing any one any favors.
They are subsidized by the taxpayer in more ways than one.
The measly 1 million  dollars paid in lieu of taxes is a great big gift to the tax farm.
And the 3 million Dollars paid to the land owners is thanks to each and every one of us that pay taxes, but do we get a thank you from them, do they pay it back to the Elk County  Community,    Hell no. They are laughing all the way to the bank. They are most likely laughing at our ignorance of the subject and our gullibility of the lies they tell us.

Critical Thinking needs applied here, questions asked until the truth is realized.

As I have said in the past our wind farm has caused my electric bill to increase drastically.

But check it out for your self, please carefully read the following:


On Tuesday, May 20, 2014 11:28 AM, Forrest Knox <Forrest.Knox@senate.ks.gov> wrote:

Listed following is an editorial coauthored by Rep. Dennis Hedke, Chairman of the House Energy & Environment Committee, and myself.

Straight Talk from Senator Knox

Wind Energy in Kansas – Who Pays?

Now that the 2014 Kansas legislative session is complete and the media is offering its commentary with respect to energy policy, we feel compelled to offer a couple clarifications.

First, let us be clear that we are in no way opposed to renewable energy resources, but rather are opposed to the market distortions that certain policies have produced.  Mandates on Kansas's electric utilities were passed by the Kansas legislature in 2009 requiring that 15% of nameplate electric generation capacity be from renewable resources by 2015, and 20% by 2020.  The federal government put into play production tax credits amounting to 2.2 cents/kilowatt hour, (on average, about 45% of the wholesale cost of electricity in Kansas.)  This direct federal subsidy to the wind industry, amounting to over $12 billion nationwide last year and hundreds of millions of dollars in Kansas, together with state subsidies, is what has built the wind industry.  However, on December 31, 2013 those federal tax credits 'expired' leaving ratepayers to cover future costs of meeting the mandate.  There is a 10-year lifetime for the credit on all existing systems and on those "in construction."  Present renewable developments will still have that significant advantage until December 31, 2023.

Kansas has given further subsidies to this industry as a result of the lifetime exemption from ad valorem property taxes, which last year amounted to a tax advantage, as measured against Payments in Lieu of Taxes (PILOT), of more than $117 million across the state.  No other industry has ever been granted a lifetime exemption from these property taxes.

The claim is made that the Kansas Corporation Commission (KCC) only sees an approximate 2% rate impact due the RPS.  There is a question, however, of whether the KCC is taking into account all costs.  We are working with the KCC to fully examine all costs associated with the mandates.  Multiple studies demonstrate that the true 'levelized cost' of wind power is substantially higher than what is estimated based on Energy Information Agency figures.  One such study released in late 2012 ( American Tradition Institute, Taylor & Tanton) shows that the true cost of wind measured against coal on standby is approximately twice as expensive as dispatchable coal, and approximately 50% higher than natural gas on standby.  You cannot deliver wind energy standalone; rather it must 'merge' into existing base load, whatever the source.  That merging and 'demerging' when the wind dies suddenly, presents special grid balancing challenges to base load providers, which adds to the cost of electricity.

Kansas ratepayers across a blended spectrum of delivery by Westar have seen electricity prices escalate by 41% since 2008.  We have certainly been hearing from the business community, the fixed-income community and others who have simply been astounded by these rate increases.  The claim that RPS only accounts for a small portion of that increase simply does not stand against the facts.  RPS, according to Westar numbers provided, actually nearly matches the rate impact related to EPA regulations, which have been substantial, many billions of dollars over that period mentioned.  Additionally, moving the power from turbine to the electrical outlet is not cheap.  Newly added transmission costs in the Westar case are very significant in that 41% price run-up.

We feel more strongly than ever that the RPS has no place in the economy of electricity delivery.  If renewable power is so effective and cheap, then why should it have to be mandated?

Rep. Dennis Hedke, Chairman of the House Energy & Environment Committee
Senator Forrest Knox, Vice-Chair Senate Utilities Committee

 
Forrest Knox
Kansas Senate,  District  14
17120 Udall Road,   Altoona,  KS    66710
Office: 785 296 7678
Home: 785 783 5564    Cellular: 620 636 0051
Email:  forrest.knox@senate.ks.gov
             senatorforrestknox@gmail.com