Name: Jessie Gee Scoring Grid assignment #2 2013 1.

Addressing the requirements in the assignment 20% Write at the level of college audience Follow the outline in discussing effects Abide by space constraints for your submission (about 2 pages single spaced, up to 3 pages, not counting references and quotes) Include the assignment sheet to your submission 2. Evaluation of the environmental effects of the energy technology and comparison to coal 50%

Good background is given on current status (how much is produced, where does production occur, and what is the energy potential of this source in the US) Evaluation of effects is as follows: Identify the main environmental and public health effects according to assignment (land use, air, etc.) Consider whole fuel cycle, accident/normal, kwh etc. (use grid shown in class as a guide) Weigh the costs with the benefits ( effects per kwh produced) Comparison is well reasoned, and follows from preceding discussion

3. Writing style and form 30% Each assertion is supported by cogent evidence: logical reasoning, statistics, examples, credible references Clear connections exist between sentences in each paragraph and between paragraphs in each section Each sentence consists of one main idea, and each paragraph consists of a wellconnected group of ideas Language is precise, clear, and direct Proper form is followed for grammar, punctuation, usage, quotations, and spelling

Wind power is an up-and-coming renewable energy source that is drawing more attention than ever. In the United States, 84,919 thousand megawatt-hours were produced in the year 2012, which equates to 2.09% of the electricity generated that year. Texas and Iowa (being planar regions which experience predictable wind) contributed the most to this total, generating 19,364 and 8,929 thousand megawatt-hours respectively (1). As of July of this year, these numbers have grown by 20% and continue to rise. The US Department of Energy even projected a plant to generate 20% of the countrys power by wind energy by the year 2030 (2). There is plenty of space in windy states where wind energy could be harnessed, but we are not quite ready to tap into that potential. While the government promotes renewable energy and has provided production tax credits in the past, these credits are expiring which has reduced the incentive to develop and maintain wind energy technologies (3). In addition to construction and maintenance costs, public opinion has made it difficult for wind energy to expand. Many consider the turbines to be unsightly and would prefer they not be built around their residences (4). Also, not all land is suitable for wind farms. Areas with unreliable wind as well as very urban areas do not meet the environmental needs of wind energy. These obstacles must be overcome if wind energy is to be considered as a growing source of energy. Assuming 250 megawatts can be produced from 100 turbines (5), the number of turbines in the US would have to increase from around 3.4 million turbines to 1.6 billion to produce 10% of the countrys energy. However, according to the DOEs 20% by 2030 plan, the turbines will only require half the space of Rhode Island (2). The reasonable amount of space necessary to complete this task, along with the minimal construction considerations makes wind energy a good contender for increased energy production. As with any form of energy, construction would include the cost of building the turbines, and installation of access roads and machinery. These areas would have to be cleared (if not already), and pre-existing ecosystems would be disturbed by construction activities. Financially, it only takes 6-8 months for a wind farm to pay for itself, which is comparable to the current timeframe taken by a coal plant to reach the same goal (7). The ease of construction and quick pay-off makes wind energy attractive, despite recognizable (although minimal) environmental costs. One of the overwhelming positives of wind energy is the free fuel. After the turbines are built, there is no cost associated with mining or refueling the wind farm. As long as there is wind, electricity can be produced. Normal operation is also fairly selfgoverning. Maintenance activities are required by wind turbine service technicians, but these activities are done safety and turbine activity is closely monitored (4). After the initial construction is completed, much of the land in a wind farm may be used as pasture land, where livestock can graze. Although farmers animals may benefit from wind farms, other animals are negatively affected by wind energy. Birds and bats have been known to collide with the blades, resulting in their deaths (8). Mortality rates vary with location and bird migratory paths, but these factors are considered in all construction of new turbines. In addition, reflective paint and reduction of perching locations can help bring down the mortalities (7).

Other wind turbine accidents are extremely rare, and their effect on the general public is localized as well as minimal. There are .031 deaths per terawatt hour (globally), though a majority of the fatalities occur in the United States (9). These accidents are more likely to occur during construction than any other phase of the wind turbines lifetime, which helps to minimize the long-term effects of the wind farms. Wind turbines last for 20-25 years, and site requirements ensure that land is restored to its original condition (7). Therefore, long term effects are minimal as wind power is non-intrusive and leaves no chemical trace. Coal, on the other hand, has a much larger impact. Although coal and wind power may have similar construction concerns (both require connections to the grid, facilities, and access roads), that is where the similarities end. Coal mining not only affects the landscape, but also is harmful to miners health. It destroys vegetation, degrades air quality, and over time causes minors to develop lung complications (10). Mining must be done constantly throughout the life of the coal plant, so that the plant can continue to operate. Normal operation of a coal plant also has its drawbacks. The burning of fossil fuels results in carbon emissions, a greenhouse gas that contributes to acid rain (11). Such emissions affect not only the air, but also the water and land. For this reason, coal-fired power plants have emission restrictions that wind farms do not need to consider. Accidents related to energy generated by coal-fired plants are often highly publicized, due to their extreme health and environmental costs. Many of the hazardous materials produced by coal-fired plants must be properly taken care of, and if they are incorrectly handled wildlife as well as the general population takes the toll. Water sources can become contaminated with lead, mercury, and arsenic, which not only make otherwise potable water unusable, but also kill local fish and disrupts the surrounding ecosystem for decades (12). Maintenance activities in coal plants can also be quiet hazardous, with an approximate .001 deaths per megawatt; much greater than winds .031 per terawatt (13). Wind energy produces no emissions, releases no hazardous chemicals, and does not endanger its workers the way coal does. Even the long term effects of coalfired plants have a larger impact than wind farms. Worker health effects persist long after retirement, and the environmental damage is lasting as well. Greenhouse gases continue to build over time, contributing to global warming (13). Continued emissions means continued effects and even with improving technologies (such as scrubbers that help to limit harmful chemical releases), there is a reason coal is called a dirty source of energy. Overall, wind energy is a much healthier form of energy than coal. Coal-fired power plants are based on a chemical process, and therefore result in chemical side effects that have numerous and far-reaching repercussions. The simple mechanical process that allows us to harness energy from wind is clean, renewable, and basic, which makes it easier to excuse its ramifications when compared to coal. For these reasons wind power will continue to grow, especially as coal power is phased out in the coming decades. The longer we continue to use coal instead of cleaner alternatives, the more irreparable damage will be done to the environment that could have been avoided.

References 1) "EIA - Electricity Data." U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA). N.p., n.d. Web. 5 Oct. 2013. <http://www.eia.gov/electricity/monthly/epm_table_grapher.cfm?t=epmt_1_17_b >. 2) US Department of Energy. "20% Wind Energy by 2030 Increasing Wind Energy's Contribution to the US Electricity Supply."Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy[Oak Ridge] 1 May 2008: n. pag. Wind Powering America. Web. 5 Oct. 2013. 3) US Department of Energy. "Wind Power Today 2010." Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy [Oak Ridge] 1 May 2010: n. pag. National Renewable Energy Laboratory. Web. 5 Oct. 2013. 4) "Careers in Wind Energy." U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. N.p., n.d. Web. 5 Oct. 2013. <http://www.bls.gov/green/wind_energy/#projdev>. 5) "NRDC: Renewable Energy for America: Wind." Natural Resources Defense Council The Earth s Best Defense | NRDC. N.p., n.d. Web. 5 Oct. 2013. <http://www.nrdc.org/energy/renewables/wind.asp>. 6) "Wind Energy." Wind Measurement. N.p., n.d. Web. 5 Oct. 2013. <http://www.windmeasurementinternational.com/wind-info/windenergy_faq.php>. 7) "Wind Energy America - FAQs." Wind Energy America. N.p., n.d. Web. 5 Oct. 2013. <http://www.windenergyamerica.com/faqs.html>. 8) "Wind Turbine Interactions with Birds, Bats, and their Habitats: A Summary of Research Results and Priority Questions."National Wind Coordinating Collaborative1 (2010): n. pag. www.nationalwind.org. Web. 5 Oct. 2013. 9) Gipe, Paul. "A Summary of Fatal Accidents in Wind Energy." WIND-WORKS. N.p., 1 May 2013. Web. 7 Oct. 2013. <http://www.windworks.org/cms/index.php?id=43&tx_ttnews%5Btt_news%5D=414&cH 10) US Department of the Interior. 1979. Permanent Regulatory Program Implementing Section 501(b) of the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of1977: Enviromental Impact Statement. Washington DC: US Department of the Interior. 11) "Inventory of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions and sinks: 19902006" (PDF). U.S. EPA. April 15, 2008. Retrieved 2013-10-07

12) Colley, Julie. "EcoHearth - The Dangers of Coal-Burning Power Plants Are Much Worse Than You Think." EcoHearth - Environmental Website. N.p., 20 Nov. 2012. Web. 5 Oct. 2013. <http://www.ecohearth.com/eco-zine/green-issues/401the-dangers-of-coal-burning-power-plants-.html>. 13) "How Coal Works | Union of Concerned Scientists." UCS: Independent Science, Practical Solutions | Union of Concerned Scientists. N.p., n.d. Web. 7 Oct. 2013. <http://www.ucsusa.org/clean_energy/coalvswind/brief_coal.html>.