IBJNews

Indiana's wind power industry faces unclear future

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Indiana's once-promising wind-power industry is facing an uncertain future as Congress debates whether to renew a tax credit that's set to expire by the end of the year.

A few years ago, Indiana had one of the nation's fastest-growing wind-energy industries with turbines along the rural horizon in north and central counties. In 2009, the state had the second highest power capacity for new wind of any state, according to the American Wind Energy Association.

But the recession slowed growth and a federal production tax credit that aids the industry's growth is set to expire Dec. 31 unless Congress acts to renew that credit in a heated election year.

"There's such uncertainty in the market right now, it just causes these people to go berserk," said Laura Arnold, who is on the board of directors of the Indiana Renewable Energy Association. "Uncertainty is not a positive stimulus for the growth of the industry."

Arnold told the Journal & Courier for a Monday story that if the tax credit abruptly ends then the wind energy sector will likely cool off, and that a gradual phasing out of the credit was preferable.

The credit is worth 2.2 cents per kilowatt hour produced or a payment of 30 percent of the project's eligible costs.

Arnold said one issue is certain to slow the decision-making process — the federal tax credit's expiration date falls during the upcoming lame duck session of Congress. She said she doubts the matter will be taken up before the election.

Indiana currently has 799 turbines producing 1,339.2 megawatts of power, according to the Indiana Office of Energy Development.

Expansions to the once rapidly growing 303-turbine, 500-megawatt capacity Meadow Lake Wind Farm in White County — and two smaller projects there — are stalled on the federal tax credit issue.

In Tipton and Madison counties, the first phase of a 200-megawatt and 125-turbine project is under construction and planned to be complete by the end of the year, but developer E-on Climate & Renewables said growth beyond that is uncertain.

Construction on the farm's first phase started this summer. But E-on Climate & Renewables product manager Andy Melka said the tax credit's expiration could hinder the wind farm's growth.

"The expiring tax credit does not affect Phase One, but it could affect the expansion phases we had planned," Melka said.

Indianapolis-based Performance Services, the developer on the wind farm project on land owned by Purdue University, said his project will move forward without a tax credit.

"That's clearly out of our control so if it happens, it happens," said Scott Zigmond, the company's vice president of sales and marketing. "We've invested a great amount of money and time. We're not going anywhere."

Wind farm projects usually contribute to economic growth in rural areas, typically bringing an influx of temporary construction jobs and millions or billions of dollars in capital investment.

Sen. Richard Lugar, R-Ind., said Friday at the fourth annual Collegiate Energy Summit at Purdue University that he supports the extension of the credit but acknowledged that wind farms "are not everyone's cup of tea."

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Whoops
    "failure" should have been "in favor"
  • Always Has Been Dependent on the Government
    The wind industry is a political animal. It never has made sense economically, that's why every time the tax credits go away the industry dies. If you want to be a failure renewables, have at it. However, don't ever try to make the case that it makes sense economically.

    Post a comment to this story

    COMMENTS POLICY
    We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
     
    You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
     
    Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
     
    No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
     
    We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
     

    Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

    Sponsored by
    ADVERTISEMENT

    facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

    Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
    Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
     
    Subscribe to IBJ
    1. I am not by any means judging whether this is a good or bad project. It's pretty simple, the developers are not showing a hardship or need for this economic incentive. It is a vacant field, the easiest for development, and the developer already has the money to invest $26 million for construction. If they can afford that, they can afford to pay property taxes just like the rest of the residents do. As well, an average of $15/hour is an absolute joke in terms of economic development. Get in high paying jobs and maybe there's a different story. But that's the problem with this ask, it is speculative and users are just not known.

    2. Shouldn't this be a museum

    3. I don't have a problem with higher taxes, since it is obvious that our city is not adequately funded. And Ballard doesn't want to admit it, but he has increased taxes indirectly by 1) selling assets and spending the money, 2) letting now private entities increase user fees which were previously capped, 3) by spending reserves, and 4) by heavy dependence on TIFs. At the end, these are all indirect tax increases since someone will eventually have to pay for them. It's mathematics. You put property tax caps ("tax cut"), but you don't cut expenditures (justifiably so), so you increase taxes indirectly.

    4. Marijuana is the safest natural drug grown. Addiction is never physical. Marijuana health benefits are far more reaching then synthesized drugs. Abbott, Lilly, and the thousands of others create poisons and label them as medication. There is no current manufactured drug on the market that does not pose immediate and long term threat to the human anatomy. Certainly the potency of marijuana has increased by hybrids and growing techniques. However, Alcohol has been proven to destroy more families, relationships, cause more deaths and injuries in addition to the damage done to the body. Many confrontations such as domestic violence and other crimes can be attributed to alcohol. The criminal activities and injustices that surround marijuana exists because it is illegal in much of the world. If legalized throughout the world you would see a dramatic decrease in such activities and a savings to many countries for legal prosecutions, incarceration etc in regards to marijuana. It indeed can create wealth for the government by collecting taxes, creating jobs, etc.... I personally do not partake. I do hope it is legalized throughout the world.

    5. Build the resevoir. If built this will provide jobs and a reason to visit Anderson. The city needs to do something to differentiate itself from other cities in the area. Kudos to people with vision that are backing this project.

    ADVERTISEMENT