When utilities were either municipally or locally owned the interconnects were solely for regional load balancing and backup capability. Now firms think nothing of building a plant where environmental restrictions are lax and shipping the electricity a thousand miles away.
Enron was only unique in that it got greedy and got caught. Selling electricity on the spot market has never made sense to me, so requiring a firm to buy at a fixed price for an extended period of time seems to go against current (US) trends. If there is a movement in the other direction I would like to hear about it. Policies not Politics ---- Daily Landscape
From a rancher's POV, which are the ones that matter here, having a turbine blade whirling around 10 meters above their cows or sheep heads is No Big Deal. Neither the cows nor the sheep give a darn and the lease-payments for the use and access are, or can be, a significant source of income. The use of windmills (AeroMotors) to provide water for stock is so common as to be unnoticed; thus, the psychological 'buy in' is present.
From the communities POV the jobs provided by a wind farm are quality jobs: high paying, stable, future orientated. Maintenance and repair need to be done on site so those jobs cannot be out-sourced. Maintenance and repair are technical jobs requiring a level of skill (Intellectual Capital) meaning once here there is a strong incentive to put more turbines in suitable location to avoid the time and expense of training. Even the addition of 5 full-time jobs, minor in the major population areas, would be a major boost to the local employment and to the local economy.
Inclusive, the reaction in these parts is support that can have the adjective "enthusiastic" attached.
