Current Activities
Competition and resource depletion are reducing the contribution Kansas fossil fuels are able to make to the Kansas economy and energy needs. Maturing renewable energy technology and the need to reduce the environmental impact fossil fuel production and use should lead us to a phased orderly development of our renewable resources. According to the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Kansas ranks third in wind energy resources behind Texas and North Dakota. Wind represents a developable natural resource of significant economic value for Kansas landowners. A good wind site of one square mile could yield wind lease revenues of around $60/acre/year with only a few percent of land area lost to turbines and service roads. A now closed research consortium of Kansas electric utilities conducted field measurements of wind resources during the early 1980’s and again at six potential wind farm sites in the late 1990’s.
No further activities to develop these sites are currently taking place, although two turbines were installed in 1999 near the Jeffrey Energy Center. A premium of $0.05/kWh is being solicited from utility customers interested in supporting "green energy." Nationally the "green energy" cost premium averages $0.02/jWh. Private developers are thought to be evaluating sites, but no projects have been announced. The Kansas Corporation Commission is considering applying for federal funds for a Kansas Wind Atlas that could be used to promote the states resources.
Future Activities
Electricity produced from wind energy is generally valued based on the cost of fossil energy displaced. Because of its seasonal and intermittent nature little if any credit is given for capacity value. In Kansas, and much of the Great Plains, this usually means wind must compete with extremely inexpensive coal. With wind energy costs from large wind farms on premium (class 5) sites in the $0.04 - .05/kWh, range, a renewable PTC of $.018 and coal at $0.015 or less, and the absence of mandated programs like Iowa and Minnesota, a gap of at least $0.01 - $0.02 or more must be bridged by "green pricing." Two studies and the existing two wind turbine project indicate interest in green pricing is not particularly high in Kansas and green markets in other states tend to be very parochial. Wind might fair better if a strategy could be identified in which it competed in a higher value market.
Our greatest near term energy dilemma remains oil, and more specifically fuels for transportation. Globally car manufacturers know that oil production will likely peak in the next decade forcing prices up. They are racing to bring more efficient and less polluting fuel cell vehicles to market, with commercial roll out expected in 2004. Fuel cells require hydrogen. Vehicles may carry hydrogen or a liquid hydrocarbon that is reformed near the fuel cell to provide it. The cheapest hydrogen will come from natural gas, but green hydrogen can be produced via electrolysis with electricity produced from renewable resources. Competition for the renewable transportation fuel of the future may be between Great Plains wind and Canadian or even Latin American hydroelectricity. The Germans are looking at Iceland.
The feasibility of construction large wind farms in Kansas dedicated to hydrogen production for export to regions of the country where poor air-quality will drive the rapid adoption of fuel cell vehicles should be evaluated. Phase one estimated cost: $200,000.
KSU Contact: Dr. Richard Nelson, College of Engineering, 785-532-6026, rnelson@ksu.edu