Link to Wind farms in the U.S.
Monday, August 31st, 2009This is a resource link to the large Wind Farms in the U.S. Amazing how many there are now!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wind_farms_in_the_United_States
Archive for August, 2009
Evaluating Community Wind Farms in Rural Alaska
Thursday, August 27th, 2009Michelle LaBrosse, PMP
Wind Power in Rural Alaska
I have been doing a wind feasibility study on a property in Alaska since April for a small 5kw wind mill I want to install for basic home use. I have another piece of property that could be a potential location for small community wind farm. After studying what else is going on in Alaska and talking with folks in the power industry up here, it appears the largest impediment to these small rural Alaskan wind farms is not the funding as the state has already approved $50 million in funding per year, but it is the land that needs to be set aside to create the wind farm. Well that problem is solved in my location, because I own it. So, now it’s onto evaluating the feasibility of that location for wind power.
Here are some links I’ve been studying to get smarter on a community wind farm in rural alaska:
1. The American Wind Energy Association (AWEA) Economics of Wind Power Report - Feb. 2005
2. The Annual Report on US Wind Power Installation, Cost, and Performance Trends, 2006.
It doesn’t appear there has been another “annual” report issued by the Department of Energy.
3. State of Alaska calls for more rural wind farms - Jan. 28, 2009 - Anchorage Daily News
Some key points:
- AK plans to spend $100 million on wind farms to bring down rural electric rates that are being driven up by the price of diesel for diesel generators.
- Reduction in the price of electricity is 15% from the wind energy projects.
- Alaska Energy Authority is slated to spend $50 million per year in renewable energy projects around the state.
- Getting permission to use the land and the building permits appears to hold up the process for many of these rural wind farms.
- The existing wind farms have reduced the use of diesel generated electricity by up to 50,000 gallons per year.
4. This article appeared in the New York Times, Feb. 17, 2009 - Alaska is the Frontier for Green Energy.
Some Key Points:
- In 2008 Alaska Legislature slated $300 million over five years in renewable energy grants to utilities, independent power producers or local governments.
- The state already generates 24 percent of its electricity from renewable sources — almost exclusively hydroelectric — and Ms. Palin last month announced a goal of 50 percent by 2025.
- Martina Dabo overseas wind power programs for the Alaska Energy Authority and in a 2008 report, for 100 alaska villages where this would be economically feasible.
- Northern Power Systems, a small turbine manufacturer in Barre, Vt., designed its 100-kilowatt turbine for operation at the South Pole, now supplies wind mills for 8 remote, arctic communities and has projects in 45 other villages.
- A wind farm is under development for an island near Anchorage.
- The payback estimate the turbines in Toksook Bay is about 17 years, and will last 20 to 25 years.
- The variability of the wind is being handled by electronically controlled diesel generators that can rapidly adjust their output, electric heaters that can absorb excess power and other.
- The hybrid diesel/wind power systems generate 25 percent or more of their power from wind on an annual basis.
- Fishermen in these remote locations find their way home by the wind mills
5. Wind Energy Alaska is proposing to wind power installations along the “railbelt” (that is from Seward to Fairbanks) as long as the electric companies provide the transmission lines and they resolve other “technical” issues (they don’t elaborate on their site)
All very fascinating The property I am evaluating is not in an arctic region and the temperature seldom gets below 0 for any length of time. But we do get a lot of snow at times and recalling my days as a consultant evaluating the environment’s impacts on aviation equipment, icing from snow fall might present a problem on the rotors. This will need to became part of my requirements document if the wind feasibility study proves this to be a worthwhile venture.
The power lines already go to this property, but we’d need a bit bigger transmission pipe. That level of pipe stops just five miles short of this property so the transmission problem will be fairly inexpensive to resolve (in comparison to some of these more remote operations).
The other benefit to my location, the main people who will see the wind turbines will be the cruise ships. Very few of the neighbors even look over at that hill and those that do - they already have their own windmills installed for generating electricity on their property. The neighborhood has been using wind power for electricity for over 20 years.
But before I even go much further, I need to fully assess if this site will produce sufficient power based on the wind assessment. I ordered another weather station and that will be going up by the weekend. To see the current weather station where my small home wind mill is going - visit my personal weather station on the weather underground. I was displaying the information through www.weatherlink.com but they do not provide an historical record. The Weather Underground, as you will see if you go to the personal weather station link, has a data logging function so you can record the weather over time - IMPORTANT for a wind feasibility study.
Bi-Directional Metering - What Does it Involve?
Wednesday, August 12th, 2009I’m working on the hook up of a solar energy system on a property in Connecticut and a wind power system in Alaska. In Connecticut, the utility company by law has to purchase back any excess power a consumer creates with an alternative energy system. The company GroSolar that is handling the installation, takes care of setting up the bi-directional metering as part of their installation. It truly is simple and a turn key system.
In Alaska, they are a bit behind with complying with federal laws. And it’s not nearly as simple (isn’t this why people choose to live in Alaska anyhow - because of the challenges of day to day life in the last frontier - I guess this includes bureaucratic challenges too). With my local utility company in Southeast Alaska to purchase back power, I was told I would have to set up my own utility company. The larger utility company in Alaska - Golden Valley Electric has an incentive program for renewable energy development. But it really doesn’t look like something anyone would want to do - for as they say on their website - “The producers of renewable power do not keep any of the power they produce.” Wow - where is the power to the people with that policy?
So just how does a utility company buy back power? According to the Department of Energy’s Website - http://www.energysavers.gov/your_home/electricity/index.cfm/mytopic=10600?print - they can either set up two meters with one that measures the energy you consume and the other one that measures the energy you produce. I think this is a very old post as most utility companies now use Bi-directional meters. Additionally this article references a 1978 law - The Public Utility Regulatory Policy Act of 1978 (PURPA) requires power providers to purchase excess power from grid-connected small renewable energy systems at a rate equal to what it costs the power provider to produce the power itself.
There was further national legislation passed in 2005 with the Energy Policy Act of 2005 that Requires all public electric utilities to offer net metering on request to their customers. According to this law, ‘‘(11) NET METERING.—Each electric utility shall make available upon request net metering service to any electric consumer that the electric utility serves. For purposes of this paragraph, the term ‘net metering service’ means service to an electric consumer under which electric energy generated by that electric consumer from an eligible on-site generating facility and delivered to the local distribution facilities may be used to offset electric energy provided by the electric utility to the electric consumer during the applicable billing period.
I guess there are all types of ways to enact this legislation that is very unfavorable to the renewable energy producer as demonstrated by the State of Alaska. Furthermore, most of the net-metering laws are manipulated by the local utility companies to be in their favor ranging from the extreme policies of Golden Valley Electric where you cannot even use any of the power you create to the policy where the utility can company purchase the power from the renewable energy system at the lowest wholesale rate, but when you are using the power from their system, you are paying the prevailing retail rate all the way to Colorado’s policy that you get credited at the “avoided” cost rate - which is the prevailing retail rate for which you are avoiding. What is interesting is how these utility companies attempt to manipulate the end user. I was told by my local utility company at first that the reason that their utility could not do a bi-directional meter was because it would damage their grid. Upon further inquires, I was told that yes it was possible, and they were in fact now doing it with other people - but that if I wanted to get a rebate, I’d have to set up my own utility company.
Here is a website that explains the net metering policy by state - http://apps3.eere.energy.gov/greenpower/markets/netmetering.shtml. We summarized the policies in a previous post - http://www.cheetahpower.net/incentives/
Most states with more legislative power over the utility companies credit rates with renewable energy system at the retail rate or the “avoided cost” rate. But they do not rebate the cost savings. If at the end of the year, you have credits, the utility company absorbs those credits. Colorado is the exception and the cost savings are rebated to the consumer for the “avoided” cost rate. Kentucky does not have a end of the year credit grabbing policy like most other states. In Connecticut, the rates are credited at the retail rates, but if you have a credit at the end of the year, that credit is absorbed by the utility company.
Rather amazing.
So the moral of the story here - make sure that you have strong consumer advocates at the legislative level who understand the nuances of electric metering.
$2.4 Billion in Recovery Funding for Vehicle Battery Technology
Wednesday, August 5th, 2009Wow - they have really spread out this AWARD for developing electric vehicle battery technology.
Check out their press release on this - rather impressive
CONTACT:
Betsaida Alcantara
alcantara.betsaida@epa.gov
202-564-1692
202-564-4355
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
August 5, 2009
EPA Administrator Announces $95 Million in Recovery Act Funds to Unleash American Innovation and Create Jobs in Florida
$95 Million will go to Saft America Inc. in Jacksonville, Fla. to manufacture battery technology for electric vehicles
Nationwide, President Obama announced $2.4 billion in recovery act funding for advanced battery and electric drive components manufacturing and electric drive vehicle deployment
ST. PETERSBURG, Fla. – To accelerate the manufacturing and deployment of electric vehicles, batteries, and components here in America, and create tens of thousands of new jobs, President Obama today announced 48 new advanced battery and electric drive projects, in more than 20 states, receiving a total of $2.4 billion in funding under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. Vice President Joe Biden and four members of the Cabinet, fanned out to communities across the country to share the historic announcement.
EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson traveled to Florida to announce a $95 million grant for Saft America, Inc. to construct a new plant in Jacksonville, Fla. on the site of the former Cecil Field military base. The new plant will manufacture lithium-ion cells, modules and battery packs for military, industrial, and agricultural vehicles. These projects, selected through a highly competitive process by the Department of Energy, will significantly boost U.S. manufacturing capacity for batteries and electric drive components as well as the deployment of electric drive vehicles, helping to establish American leadership in creating the next generation of advanced vehicles.
“President Obama has called for us to unleash American innovators, engineers, workers and entrepreneurs. We need to get into the global clean energy race – and today we’re firing the starting gun,” said EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson. “This recovery funding will propel America into global leadership in innovative battery manufacturing, position our auto industry to reclaim the lead in producing the cars of the 21st century, and lay a new foundation for prosperity with new jobs in clean energy.”
Administrator Jackson appeared with representatives of Saft America, Progress Energy, and Ford Motor Company at the event today held in St. Petersburg, Fla. Progress Energy plans to deploy Ford electric vehicles to help provide service to its electric utility customers in St. Petersburg and Lake Mary.
Thomas Alcide, President of Saft America, Inc. said, “This investment in America will allow Saft to build a state of the art factory for lithium ion batteries which will bring high technology jobs to Jacksonville rapidly and make us competitive on the world markets.”
Additional funds nationwide will speed deployment of American-made Ford plug in electric vehicles.
“Ford is committed to the commercialization of plug-in hybrids and battery electric vehicles within five years and we are pleased the Obama administration is supporting these efforts,” said Sue Cischke, group vice president, Sustainability, Environment and Safety Engineering, Ford Motor Company. “This grant represents the recognition that the move toward electrification requires a partnership of vehicle providers, utilities and the government. Ford is uniquely positioned to work with its existing and new utility partners to develop the smart vehicle to grid integration that will be required for mass market acceptance of electric transportation.”
“Progress Energy is proud to partner with the EPA and with Ford on this innovative technology,” said Bill Johnson, chairman, president and chief executive officer of Progress Energy and co-chair of the Edison Electric Institute’s CEO Taskforce on Electric Transportation. “We already have one of the nation’s largest utility plug-in hybrid electric vehicle programs because we believe that plug-in hybrids and other alternative energy technologies are critical parts of our balanced solution strategy for addressing the challenges of growing customer demand, high fuel costs and global climate change. We are also investing in aggressive energy efficiency and state-of-the-art power plants as part of our balanced solution strategy to meeting these new energy realities.”
For a full list of award winners: http://www1.eere.energy.gov/recovery/pdfs/battery_awardee_list.pdf
For a map of their locations: http://www1.eere.energy.gov/recovery/pdfs/battery_awardee_map.pdf