Connie Krapp's May 8 commentary (Cost/benefit of wind energy must be publicized) makes her conclusion without carefully weighing the costs and benefits of wind energy. As a North Dakota taxpayer who did fully analyze the details when I considered leasing some of my land for a proposed wind farm, here's what I concluded: Agreeing to host wind turbines is a no-brainer.
It means we won't have to worry about being able to pass the ranch on to the next generation; lease payments will ensure our lifestyle. Older people can look forward to this income in retirement. For middle-aged ranchers with children, wind lease payments offer a security net, allowing them to upgrade operations or pay for their kids' college.
Our proposed wind project won't be good for just my family, it will help my entire community. It will boost our local tax base significantly, giving the town new resources to help our schools and fix roads.
Like Connie I'm concerned about costs of energy, but studies show wind is the cheapest source of electricity in places like North Dakota, even accounting for incentives. Look at Iowa - the state blows away the competition by using wind to generate over 35 percent of its electricity. And yet, it has some of the cheapest electric rates in the country, sitting far below the national average.
If your readers want to contact the Public Service Commission at ndpsc@nd.gov , they should let it know the cost benefit analysis of wind has already been done. Wind works for North Dakota taxpayers.
