“Businesses that are planning to provide equipment or services to the wind industry especially need objective information about wind energy.… Participating in industries that are dependent on federal tax breaks and subsidies can be dangerous, particularly at a time of massive federal deficits and a national debt of about $17 trillion.”
A highly misleading article, “Winds of change blow across Ohio,” by the CEO of the Van Wert (OH) Area Chamber of Commerce, Susan Munroe, was published by the Fort Wayne (IN) Journal Gazette on October 7, 2013. Such reflects a new battlefront in the politics of wind with local chambers of commerce arguing for wind projects in their areas.
However, her claims appear to be based heavily on information from Iberdrola, not on an objective analysis of facts about wind energy. Those facts call into question key points made in the article. For example, Ms. Munroe appears not know that:
Ms. Munroe’s article cites $5 million in lease payments and local tax payments by the “wind farm” owner, Iberdrola, as having a favorable economic impact but she seems not to recognize that these payments pale in comparison to:
Ms. Munroe’s speaks of the “private investment” of $600 million in the Blue Creek Wind Farm, apparently without recognizing that:
1. Nearly $173 million of that money came from the US Treasury grant mentioned above, or
2. That very little of the $600 million represents economic value added to the local or state economy. Except for the temporary construction jobs, a few permanent jobs, and some local purchases, most of the $600 million was spent elsewhere – i.e., in other states or countries — for the turbines, turbine components, blades, towers and electrical equipment used in the project.
Ms. Munroe correctly states that “businesses everywhere are deeply concerned about the cost and security of energy” and but, as noted above, she apparently is unaware of the high true cost of electricity from wind and the fact that electricity from wind turbines is low in real value because it is available only intermittently, volatile and highly unreliable. Wind turbines produce electricity only when wind speeds are in the “right” range. 
Other generating units, powered by conventional energy sources (such as natural gas, coal, oil, hydropower, nuclear energy and, perhaps, biomass) must always be immediately available to compensate for the intermittent, volatile output from wind turbines. This necessity adds to the true cost of using wind energy and the unreliability of output from wind turbines adds to the burden on grid managers in keeping electric grids in balance (supply and demand, voltage, frequency).
Electricity from wind turbines is low in value because it can’t be counted on to be available when needed and it is most likely to be produced at times when it is least needed. Wind turbines tend to produce most of their electricity at night in cold and shoulder months, not on hot weekday afternoons in July and August when demand for electricity is highest.
Furthermore, the electricity from wind tends to be low in value because the output can’t be counted upon to be available at the time of peak demand, unlike reliable (“dispatchable”) generating units that can be called upon to produce whenever needed.
Undoubtedly, Ms. Munroe is correct in asserting that members of her local Chamber of Commerce are interested in reducing monthly utility bills. Business owners and their association leaders need accurate information about energy, both to understand the costs that businesses will bear and the impact of government requirements on energy reliability and costs.
Businesses that are planning to provide equipment or services to the wind industry especially need objective information about wind energy. In fact, there is very little evidence to suggest that electricity from wind will ever be commercially viable; i.e., be able to compete with other energy sources without government tax breaks and subsidies.
Participating in industries that are dependent on federal tax breaks and subsidies can be dangerous, particularly at a time of massive federal deficits and a national debt of about $17 trillion.
NOTE on Iberdrola. Spain-based Iberdrola is a substantial recipient of US government tax breaks and subsidies. Iberdrola’s February 24, 2011, press release announcing 2010 earnings (“highest ever”) included the following: “The Group has benefited from more than $1 billion in U.S. government incentives for wind power, the largest obtained to date by any renewables company.” Press releases on 2011 and 2012 earnings do not state the amount of Iberdrola’s US wind tax breaks and subsidies but the company continues to receive them for each of its U.S. “wind farms” either as Production Tax Credits ($0.023 per kWh of electricity produced, a 10% Investment Tax Credit, or a U.S. Treasury cash grant such as that shown above for Blue Creek. Iberdrola is also eligible for 5-year depreciation deductions.
 The high cost and low value of electricity from wind is explained here.
 Adverse impacts of “wind farms” often ignored by wind energy advocates include noise, turbine blade shadow flicker, killing of birds and bats, interference of migration patterns, destruction of natural resources and animal habitat during construction, destroying property values and quality of life for those living near wind turbines.
 Wind turbines start producing when wind speeds reach approximately 6 MPH, reach rated capacity around 32 MPH and cut out around 55 MPH.