I was surprised by a recent letter to the editor opposing baseload power plants that are fueled by coal. The writer suggested that wind energy should replace Minnesota’s coal-burning power plants. As reasons for his stance, the writer cited environmental problems with coal, the damaging effects of global warming, and wind power’s potential for “green” job creation.

I do agree with the writer’s suggestion that a high priority be placed on developing ways to generate power that do not use coal. The way I see it, a mix of various power sources will be needed to generate the electricity our region will require in the future.

I think it’s fair to say that our way of life, our economy and security run on electric power — a constant and reliable supply of electric power. That’s the very reason why wind turbines cannot be viewed as a replacement for baseload generating plants. Why? It’s because the technology to store utility-grade electric energy does not exist today. Electricity from the power grid is generated and used simultaneously. We depend on baseload power plants to supply a constant level of electricity that is sufficient to cover the constant demand for power. Coal plants currently supply 50 percent of all electricity generated in the United States.

Unlike baseload power plants, the electricity produced by wind turbines is not available to the electrical grid at a constant level each hour of every day. This is not to dismiss the contribution that wind power currently makes to our region. But let’s recognize the role it actually plays, that of a supplemental power source.

As our state and country develop the energy strategies that will take us into the future, it is important that we recognize that all sources of power need to be available as resources. This includes wind power, coal, biomass and even nuclear power. We cannot afford to eliminate coal plants from our options.

Jim Krueger

president & CEO

Freeborn-Mower

Cooperative Services

Albert Lea