The Denver Post reported recently that the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR) will build its new climate modeling supercomputer – not in Colorado – but in Wyoming. Why? Because of the huge amounts of comparatively inexpensive ELECTRICITY and space required for the $500 million computer upgrade. Well, I can certainly understand why space in Wyoming (outside of Jackson Hole) might be a bit less expensive than the real estate in Boulder, but the other even more significant reason for the relocation is the relatively low cost of electricity in our neighbor to the north – a state that gets 94% of its electricity from COAL.
So in other words, the climate supercomputer, certainly a part of the New Energy Economy, will not be built in Colorado. Instead, we will export the jobs associated with running the project to Wyoming – in fact, NCAR so acknowledges in the article. Technicians from the Table Mesa laboratory will move to Wyoming soon; I imagine they are thrilled at the prospect.
“Cheaper and more plentiful electricity from Wyoming’s relatively untapped grid, including wind power, is a key factor,” said an NCAR spokesman. Who are they kidding? Wind accounts for an insignificant portion of Wyoming’s electricity. It’s coal that is responsible for keeping rates at about 6.03 cents per kilowatt-hour in Wyoming; as opposed to Colorado, where the rates are above 8 cents, according to the article. In fact, here is a map showing that states that use coal to generate the bulk of their electricity needs enjoy lower rates:
Colorado still uses coal to generate about two-thirds of its electricity; and that is the only reason why rates have not shot much higher. Coal mining has also been a mainstay of Colorado’s economy since 1864. Meanwhile, Vestas Wind Systems has announced its decision to lay off 500 workers at its Windsor plant – despite tax credits, subsidies and stimulus money. Notwithstanding the so-called promises of the “new” energy economy, unemployment is a very old problem, especially if it’s your job that’s on the chopping block. It’s time to send our elected leaders a strong message – energy policy is not a zero sum game; Colorado needs all the power it can get and we should not favor one energy source over another.
This obviously hits the nail right on the head; the new energy economy will exact an enormous price on energy consumers if coal is not kept in the mix.
ReplyDeleteI remember reading the article in The Denver Post and thinking it odd that NCAR, a key employer in Boulder, needed to move well-paying jobs to Wyoming. But it's so true the power demands of our expanding technology-based society needs affordable electricity.
ReplyDeleteI'm sure we'll see similar decisions in the future as our growing reliance on technology in everyday life demands cost-effective energy supplies. You are absolutely right, we need energy from all available sources - coal, wind, solar, hydroelectric, natural gas and nuclear - if America is to have energy security.
The real irony is that with all the talk from Ritter, Salazar and Obama and the einvors about how important renewables are (and I agree that they must be part of the mix - the right answer is 'all of the above"), the biggest hurdle at the moment is getting the renewables on-line is getting them sited. The NIMBYs and BANANAs may say they want renewables, but they sure don't want them in their backyards! Wind has problems with visual impacts and birds; solar has huge visual issues in the Mojave (the best place in the US for solar...),and footprint issues; geothermal - well, we saw what happened when BLM tried to lease goethermal in the Piceance area last week; hydro makes lots of sense, but no one even talkes about new hydro plants because they know they will get buzz-sawed by the enviros as unfriendly to the fish. And then therer's the issue of transmission...as we are seeing in the San Luis Valley and elsewhere. So........at the end of the day, you can't get renewables built any easier than any other power plant. Talk about a train wreck!
ReplyDelete