EDITORIAL: Kansas

Mar 7, 2010 — The Kansas City Star

Mar. 7, 2010 (McClatchy-Tribune Regional News delivered by Newstex) -- Is Kansas the new Texas?

Not physically, and nothing to do with big hats or hubris, but in energy? The answer right now is a big "maybe" that has state officials and industry insiders salivating. And it's a maybe that should have legislators and other leaders pushing forward.

In the midst of budget and recession turmoil, Kansans got some great news recently. Their state's wind energy potential was reassessed because of a simple technological innovation -- wind turbine heights were increased from 50 meters to 80 meters to catch the increased wind flow up there.

While that change generally puffed up all wind-generation potential, the new federal assessment moves Kansas from third to second in the nation.

The key raw numbers: Kansas, and specifically western Kansas, has the potential to produce 3.6 million gigawatt hours, enough to power about 260 million homes. While no one sees wind as a primary power source, even a fraction of that potential could exceed Kansas' needs.

But it's not just the wind in western Kansas, it's the wind strength that is perfect for power production -- not too fast, not too slow. In estimating the nation's wind-power potential, the National Renewable Energy Laboratory produced a color-coded map, and the sweet spot was purple. All of western Kansas is purple, a bigger percentage of the color than any other state (Texas has more capacity, but the state is of course much larger).

Wind power has its challenges, and Kansas is unlikely to ever reach its peak potential. The biggest issue is transmission. Wind energy is not a commodity like coal, which can be stacked on the ground and burned in greater or lesser amounts as demand warrants. Wind generates energy when it blows, and that doesn't necessarily match up with peak usage times.

And the current electrical grid in the state and region isn't set up to handle more than 20 percent "variable" power, including wind. Experts believe a smarter grid could handle 40 percent variable power, meaning dialing back coal-fired production when wind production peaks, and switching back when wind ceases.

To get to that point, the United States will need a new energy policy, one demanding more carbon-free, green energy production.

Critics claim those changes would send costs spiraling upward, but such fears are based on older technology. Today, the generally accepted total cost for nuclear power is 11.1 to 14.5 cents a kilowatt hour. Coal is cheaper, about 4.8 cents to 5.5 cents a kilowatt hour. Natural gas is a bit cheaper yet, right around 3.9 to 4.9 cents a kilowatt hour. In Kansas, the cost of wind is close to the low end of an overall range of 4 to 6 cents a kilowatt hour.

There's hope that with increased energy storage capacity -- think really big batteries -- wind will become more marketable, but that's hope, not reality, at this point.

Still, Kansas officials note the state already uses wind to create 10 percent of its electricity, and the plan is to reach 20 percent by 2020.

Kansas has the potential to supply much more than its energy needs with wind. Gov. Mark Parkinson thinks plans can be in place by the time he leaves office in January for the "V-plan," a transmission plan for the Southwest Power Pool, a power grid connecting Nebraska through Louisiana.

This must remain a priority. As long as officials lay the proper groundwork, there's no reason Kansas can't become the nation's new energy capital in the coming century.

The data is exciting for energy consumers, environmentalists and those who want to increase national security by reducing reliance on foreign energy. The return is years off, but Kansas stands to reap an economic boon if it moves forward now.

Newstex ID: KRTB-0102-42645649