Nebraska Rural Electric Association Advocates Against Benefit of Members

August 2010

Wind energy presents a unique opportunity to create new jobs and income in rural communities. So we’re disappointed in the strident opposition of Nebraska’s Rural Electric Association to federal legislation to create a 20 percent Renewable Electricity Standard. Whether or not you are from Nebraska, please read on so as not to be misled by opponents of a proactive approach to developing our own renewable energy sources.

The Renewable Electricity Standard would require large electric retailers to get at least 20 percent of electricity from a combination of renewable sources and energy conservation. The 15 percent that would be required from renewable sources could include wind, solar, biomass, new hydropower generation, etc.

The Nebraska Rural Electric Association recently took a broadside at supporters of the standard for creating unrealistic expectations for job creation, based on a Department of Energy study completed during the Bush administration. The study concluded that producing 20 percent of the nation’s electricity from wind in 2030 would create 3,500 permanent jobs in rural Nebraska.

The association criticized the study, saying jobs on wind farms would be about one-fourth of that. It’s too bad they didn’t study the Department of Energy report because it reached essentially the same conclusion – jobs on wind farms would account for about one-fourth of the 3,500 permanent jobs. Over three-fourths would be in supply and service industries and spinoff jobs created by more people employed and spending money in local communities.

The report projects similar new job numbers for Kansas, Minnesota, Montana and South Dakota, and over 9,000 new permanent jobs in Iowa. The Center for Rural Affairs is launching a project with organizations in Kansas and South Dakota to enable rural small businesses to capture the opportunities in supplying and servicing the wind industry.

Of course, these are just potential jobs. To become reality, the wind industry needs a kick start – just like the ethanol industry needed tax incentives and renewable fuel standards before it gave a boost to the rural economy. A 20 percent Renewable Electricity Standard would provide that boost.

We ask board members and customers of Rural Electric Districts to guide their association to a more open-minded approach to wind energy, one that considers its benefits as well as its costs.

The districts are right to serve as watchdogs over rural electricity rates. But the Renewable Electricity Standard would not apply to a single Nebraska rural electric district. They all fall under the exemption for small utilities. That puts the districts in the curious position of advocating against legislation that would benefit their members and their communities to protect ratepayers in cities.

Urban ratepayers don’t need their protection. The same Department of Energy study projects that the cost of the new wind turbines and transmission lines would be covered by savings in fuel costs, plus about 50 cents per U.S. household per month.

That’s a small price to pay for revitalizing rural America, strengthening America’s competitiveness and ensuring American energy security.

Agree or disagree? Contact Chuck Hassebrook, chuckh@cfra.org or 402.687.2103 x 1018 to express your views.

Comments

Renewable energy vs. our current options

Mon, 08/09/2010 - 14:47 — Robert B Haigh (not verified)

It is imperative that, as a nation, we move away from environmentally destructive methods of energy production and towards those sources that can be researched, developed, produced and maintained by Americans FOR Americans. Energy conservation alone would save taxpayers billions of dollars a year. I know. As a small business owner I have converted all of my lights in our gift shop in Colorado to CFLs (The first month we were in business, they were standard bulbs). This small change has resulted on cutting our electric bill by nearly 3/4. Imagine if, as a nation, we all did the same. We would be less dependent on foreign oil and would save American lives -- on and off the battlefield. Here's an idea: Make oil producers who operate abroad pay the full cost of the military protection of their shipments, oil fields and workers. After all, they are the ones profitting at everyone else's expense. The costs of this "protection" is never taken into consideration when we look at replacing their sources of energy with renewables created here in this country. According to an article at energyandcapital.com (http://www.energyandcapital.com/articles/oil-gas-crude/461), the true cost of oil is over $480 a barrel. The article is well worth reading. Keep fighting the good fight for new, clean jobs HERE in America. If we don't stsrt developing these industries here (with justifiable protections against "dumping" of products by China and others) we will eventually become a third world country, drowning in debt with an education deficit, continued job losses and unsustainable debt.

Wind farms

Tue, 02/01/2011 - 20:56 — 21st Century Goods (not verified)

Somewhere over in Europe they are completely switching over to renewable energy. They have wind farms set up all over the bay outside their country. Wind farms are the way of the future if only we can store the energy better it could create a lot of jobs.