Wind power...South Dakota's new specialty crop

Why Wind Makes Sense

Demand for new generating capacity in South Dakota is estimated to be 20 to 40 MW per year for the next 10 to 15 years (SDEIA, Nov 2006, Electric Industry Interviews, Schulte Associates LLC).

Community based wind development and renewable energy could easily meet this demand, and be up and running before the proposed Big Stone II, benefiting South Dakotan farmers, local entrepreneurs and Native tribes.

In the 1930s, Leroy Ratzlaff and his family built a small wind turbine to take advantage of the high winds that blow across the ridge...today, the turbines provide more than $10,000 annually. (Wind Power Today and Tomorrow, U.S. Department of Energy—Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (pdf), p.1).

Tribal wind projects are already underway in the Dakotas with 110 MWs of renewable wind energy on the intertribal drawing boards - 30 MWs at Rosebud Sioux reservation and an 80 MW project to be distributed on eight reservations along the Missouri River!

Conservative estimates show that South Dakota's generating capacity currently exceeds in-state use by an estimated 40% (Nov 2006, SDEIA).

South Dakota already produces more generation than it needs. Building and exporting new wind power, rather than coal, means protection and preservation of South Dakota water resources and not having to pay to transport and burn millions of tons of more coal.

Big Stone II is estimated to draw 3.2 billion gallons of water annually from Big Stone Lake; stirring cross-border squabbles and calls for reconvening of the South Dakota-Minnesota Boundary Waters Commission. Additionally, BSII Co-owners recently notified the SD Public Utilities Commission that they plan to also apply for a groundwater permit, having dismissed early on a dry cooling option, which would have required no additional water use. This, in spite of their own tri-state groundwater study by Burns and McDonnell, which showed that regardless of the source aquifer or use, groundwater levels are declining in most areas and that the only other potential option for securing a groundwater supply would be to purchase and retire irrigated farmland with existing water rights, some 6,000-12,000 acres!