The Air Force's two new wind turbines at the Massachusetts
Military Reservation in Cape Cod, Mass., seen from a distance, pose an
interesting contrast to an ornamental traditional windmill atop a local Cape
Cod shop. The 1.5 megawatt wind turbines, in addition to an existing
turbine, were built to offset electrical costs for powering numerous
groundwater cleanup systems at the reservation. The turbines will pay for
all the Air Force's electric needs for groundwater remediation at MMR,
saving more than $1.5 million per year. (U.S. Air Force photo/Scott Dehainaut)
A close-up view of one of the Air Force's two new wind turbines
at the Massachusetts Military Reservation in Cape Cod, Mass. The 1.5
megawatt wind turbines, in addition to an existing turbine, were built to
offset electrical costs for powering numerous groundwater cleanup systems at
the reservation. The turbines will pay for all the Air Force's electric
needs for groundwater remediation at MMR, saving more than $1.5 million per
year. They will also offset emissions generated by fossil-fueled power
plants, reducing the Air Force's carbon footprint. (U.S. Air Force
photo/Scott Dehainaut)
Under secretary of the Air Force Erin Conaton speaks at a ribbon cutting ceremony for two new Air Force wind turbines Oct. 28, 2011, at the Massachusetts Military Reservation in Cape Cod, Mass. The 1.5 megawatt wind turbines, in addition to an existing turbine, were built to offset electrical costs for powering numerous groundwater cleanup systems
at the reservation. The turbines will pay for all the Air Force's electric needs for groundwater remediation at MMR, saving more than $1.5 million per year. They will also offset emissions generated by fossil-fueled power plants, reducing the Air Force's carbon footprint. (U.S. Air Force photo/Scott Dehainaut)
by Senior Master Sgt. David Byron
Air Force Public Affairs Agency
10/28/2011 - WASHINGTON (AFNS) -- Under Secretary of the Air Force Erin C. Conaton visited the Massachusetts Military Reservation in Cape Cod, Mass., Oct. 28 for a ribbon cutting ceremony for two new wind turbines.
The 1.5 megawatt wind turbines, in addition to an existing turbine, were built to offset electrical costs for powering numerous groundwater cleanup systems at the reservation.
The turbines will pay for all the Air Force's electric needs for groundwater remediation at the military reservation, saving more than $1.5 million per year, officials said. The turbines will also offset emissions generated by fossil-fueled power plants, reducing the Air Force's carbon footprint.
"The future is bright for environmental clean-up, renewable energy and energy conservation at the Massachusetts Military Reservation," Conaton said. "As Air Force missions expand and change over time, we will be integrating the full spectrum of energy considerations into our facility design and construction projects and into our mission operations."
As the Air Force under secretary, Conaton is responsible for ensuring the Air Force has what it needs to perform its missions in support of national security. Dependence on fossil fuels can be a liability in both supply and cost, generating the need to decrease demand and diversify supply sources. The wind turbine project is an example of an Air Force initiative to meet this need.
"The Air Force currently operates 85 on-base renewable energy projects at 43 installations, playing a significant role in the national strategy to establish greater energy security via conservation and alternative energy use," Conaton said.
According to U.S. Environmental Protection Agency reports, the Air Force is the third largest purchaser of green power in the federal government.
"The Air Force values and respects the natural resources placed in our trust; this is the environment where we live, train and operate," Conaton said. "Every Airman must protect and conserve these resources for the benefit of present and future mission requirements and for the benefit of present and future generations."
Comments
11/3/2011 9:36:43 AM ET Jerry and Dave. I completely get what your saying and I agree to an extent. But I'd rather see them invest in projects like over an F35 they've been funding for how many years and still isn't in the air. The maintainence for these turbines will be far less than the maintainence on those jets. Also long term, yes it will offset the cost of carbon emissions that it took to construct them, that's the point of them. Short term costs are incredible but in a big picture perspective they will benefit much more than harm.
Mike, WPAFB OH
11/1/2011 5:33:58 PM ET I saw some of these at F.E. Warren when I was out there earlier this year. I was there for two weeks and none of them were operating at all. Off base there are fields of them constantly turning. I don't know why they were shut down, a costly maintenance issue lol. I do like the AF written on the side of them, it's pretty and makes me feel like the AF is going green.
DMR, Louisiana
11/1/2011 11:13:46 AM ET The federal government owes it to the taxpayer to spend money wisely. There needs to be a limit on the number of years to the break-even point on these types of projects. Also guess what it still costs money to run these things. There is constant maintanence required as well as inspections. So the savings per year presented in the article aren't accurate.
Jerry, Oklahoma
10/31/2011 4:46:18 PM ET I would like to make an educated commenting about different wind generator designs but ACC has blocked access every website about wind generators I chose to view and research. How convenient...again.
Mr Gregory Gaunt, Davis-Monthan AFB
10/31/2011 12:23:26 PM ET I am a great fan of alternative energy and applaud this effort. In order to better understand the progress in this area it would be helpful to get the total picture the cost of this equipment land and installation estimated lifespan operations and maintenance costs etc. It is not accurate to simply say it is saving 1.5M a year. The savings didn't come for free.
Dan Pompea, Schriever AFB CO
10/31/2011 8:31:49 AM ET Yes but do they also offset all the carbon emissions that it took to construct them? I love the idea of wind power but I have found that you almost never save money by the time you look at all the associated costs of ownership. They look nice, though.
