Posts tagged wind energy
Windpower’s PTC: Secondary to State Mandates
Dec 27th
In recent weeks, wind developer Terra-Gen terminated plans to build its Horseshoe Wind Farm in Illinois, NextERA suspended the permitting process for a 150-megawatt project in South Dakota and Iberdrola announced its Desert Wind Energy Project in North Carolina was delayed and might be scrapped altogether. In each case, company officials blamed current market conditions and the inability to secure a long-term power contract with area utilities.
PTC in review
The American Wind Energy Association (AWEA) insists the industry is at risk of a slow-down if Congress does not act quickly to extend the production tax credit (PTC), the federal incentive most often credited for market growth in the wind sector. The PTC expires at the end of 2012.
But if the PTC were to expire, the damage would be less than what AWEA claims.
The industry has clearly grown addicted to the production tax credit but our findings suggest that attributing market activity to the PTC is overly simplistic and fails to consider other crucial factors driving development in the U.S.
The PTC was established by the Energy Policy Act of 1992 to stimulate the use of renewable power generation. The credit is adjusted annually for inflation and today stands at 2.2¢/kWh. When it was adopted, the House Ways and Means Committee insisted on an expiration date (June 30, 1999) in order to assess the effectiveness of the credit in meeting its goal.
State mandates key
In each of the five years following the PTC’s enactment, wind capacity declined. It wasn’t until 1998 and 1999 before the trend drifted upward.
The U.S. was awash in generation and oil prices were low and stable. The demand for renewable energy largely didn’t exist except in states with programs that encouraged the use of renewables. It’s no accident that the bulk of new wind projects built in 1998-99 occurred in four states with renewable programs — California, Iowa, Minnesota and Texas.
When the Asian Financial crisis hit in 1997, oil prices collapsed taking with them any incentive to build new renewable energy generators. The PTC expired in 1999, the same year oil prices bottomed out, and new wind installations went bust the following year.
AWEA has complained for ten years that expiration of the PTC in 1999 caused development to slow, yet given available data, it’s impossible to isolate what factors contributed to the decline. Clearly other macroeconomic issues played a crucial role.
After 2004, the PTC may have contributed to wind energy’s growth, but so did state policies mandating renewables. Wind energy benefited from rising natural gas prices as well (over $5 per million BTU) making wind power contracts an attractive way to displace higher-cost gas generation.
By the middle of 2008 the U.S. economy stumbled and energy prices dropped off quickly. With incomes falling, tax-based policy incentives lost much of their effectiveness. Section 1603 cash grants created under the stimulus were designed to fill the void by granting project owners payouts equal to 30 percent of a project’s qualifying cost. Consequently, wind capacity ballooned to nearly 45,000 megawatts with over 30,000 megawatts brought online in the last four years.
The PTC and wind’s future
Section 1603 is expected to expire this year and the wind industry has again turned its attention to extending the PTC. Ditlev Engel, chief executive officer of Vestas Wind Systems A/S complained that U.S. turbine sales may “fall off a cliff” unless lawmakers extend tax credits beyond 2012.
Sales may decline, Mr. Engel, but not because of the PTC.
The 2008 recession slowed economic growth causing demand for electricity to drop. Many states, including California, are now signaling their renewable mandates are being met which will weaken demand for wind energy. Recent discoveries of abundant shale gas reserves are expected to keep gas prices low and stable upto 2020. Since natural gas is among the important elements in determining the competitiveness of wind energy, low gas prices will generally reduce wind’s attractiveness as a ‘fuel saver’. These are the market conditions Terra-Gen, NextERA, Iberdrola and others are facing. In fact, the Energy Information Administration is now forecasting flat growth in the wind sector for the next ten years regardless of what happens with the PTC.
The PTC: overpriced and unneeded
The production tax credit largely benefits corporate investors and wind project owners. For investors like General Electric, the credit is an open-ended subsidy offered for each kilowatt-hour of electricity produced. Because the PTC directly reduces the amount of federal income taxes paid, it should be thought of as providing 2.2¢/kWh of after-tax income (in 2011 dollars).
This represents a pre-tax value of approximately 3.7¢/kWh (assumes a 40% marginal tax rate). When measured relative to the price of wholesale power, the PTC is exceptionally generous.
In New England, for example, where wholesale electricity prices are currently around 5.5¢/kWh, the subsidy equals nearly 75% percent of the power price. In areas where coal-fired power predominates, the subsidy on a pre-tax basis is approximately equal to the wholesale price of electricity. Bear this in mind the next time AWEA claims cost parity with non-renewable resources.
For consumers, the production tax credit disproportionately benefits ratepayers in states with renewable energy mandates by distributing the high cost of wind to taxpayers at large. And since the subsidy is uniform across the country it’s highly inefficient, supporting poorly sited projects as well as projects that would have been built regardless of the credit.
The production tax credit turns twenty years old next year. We recommend Congress act on the wishes of the House Ways and Means Committee and assess the effectiveness of the subsidy. AWEA’s myopic, superficial justification for extending the PTC is not supported by the facts.
Written by Lisa Linowes and Bill Short. Mr. Short is an independent consultant with a practice that specializes in renewable energy in the New England states. Ms. Linowes is the Executive Director of the Industrial Wind Action Group, focused on the impacts and costs of deploying large-scale wind generation.
______________________________
1. House Bill (H.R. 3307) has been filed that extends the PTC for another four years.
2. The PTC expired three times in the period between 1999 and 2003 and each time it was extended retroactively. At the same time, oil and gas prices were less stable before rising steadily after 2004.
3. The Department of Energy reported in 2003 that of the fifteen States with renewable programs on the books, 86 percent of new renewable energy capacity was a result of mandates, and the majority (93 percent) of the new capacity consisted of wind power installations.
4. Includes the period from 2008 to 2011. Despite meteoric growth, wind still represents under 3% of U.S. generation.
Can Renewables Survive in the U.S.?
Nov 23rd
For renewable energy in the U.S., the question of survival and growth is still unanswered. After all, the Department of Energy has been funding renewable energy research and development since its inception some 34 years ago from the consolidation of the Federal Energy Administration, the Federal Power Commission and the Energy Research and Development Administration, which was tasked to manage the nuclear weapon, naval reactor, and energy development programs. Concurrently, support for biofuels, photovoltaic and solar thermal energy systems, wind and geothermal systems and hydrogen have pervaded all government leaders’ speeches as the way to achieve energy independence and environmental stewardship.
Furthermore, the New York Times (NYT) reported that by 2009 the renewable energy industry supplied 8% of the energy consumed in the U.S. (see following chart). Though not counting conventional geothermal, which today is not considered a renewable source of energy, renewable energy still supplied about 5% of all our energy needs. One could say, 5% is better than no percent. Additionally, the same NYT report claims the U.S. solar market has grown to a $6 billion industry.
In comparison, American Petroleum Institute’s (API) report “Putting Earnings into Perspective” suggests that the U.S. Oil and Natural Gas (O&G) industry brought in about $1.2 trillion in revenues in 2010. Another API report states that, “since 2000, (O&G) has invested over $2 trillion in U.S. capital projects to advance all forms of energy, including alternatives.” With this enormous market potential and federal and industry spending on alternate energy, surely the renewable energy industry has to succeed, or so it would seem.
Additionally, a Times article in April 2001 reports “in one sense green energy is already achieving scale—in new power generation. Solar is growing faster than any other form of energy, and new statistics from the American Wind Energy Association (AWEA) showed that wind added 5,116 MW of new capacity last year. That’s 26% of all new energy generation added in the U.S. in 2010, second only to natural gas, which supplied 40% of new power. (Shale gas—it is for real.) Since 2007 wind has added an average of 35% of all new capacity—twice the amount of new coal and nuclear combined”
Renewable Energy Consumption in the Nation’s Energy Supply, 2009
Source: Energy Information Administration, Office of Coal, Nuclear, Electric and Alternate Fuels
So why the skepticism? It appears that the growth of the U.S. solar and wind segments of the industry is slowing down. The Times article noted above goes on to say that, “2010 wasn’t the best year for the wind industry. Thanks in part to regulatory uncertainty last year and the post-recession collapse of the tax equity market that helps fund many renewable energy projects, just half as much wind was installed in 2010 as in 2009. And the U.S. has fallen behind China as the world’s wind leader—China now has some 45,000 MW of wind installed, compared to 40,000 MW in the U.S. China added 18,900 MW of wind in 2010, nearly four times more than the U.S.” The slack and uncertainty in the U.S. solar industry was readily apparent at the Solar Power 2011 International tradeshow recently held in Dallas, TX. The myriad of solar module manufactures (vast majority Chinese) all indicated the same theme – the current situation in the U.S.is less than desirable. Hence the reason why there is an oversupply and large inventory of solar panels being dumped on the U.S. market, possibly below cost.
This uncertainty, whether temporary or the start of a downward spiral, may be due to a combination of factors such as:
• High capital cost for installed capacity.
• Lack of reliability to satisfy demand 24/7.
• Low PPA rates.
• SREC / REC fluctuations and inability to lock-in long-term purchase agreements.
• Geographic constraints.
• Regulatory hurdles.
• Large real estate requirement for solar.
• Costly maintenance for wind turbines.
• Erosion of support for subsidies by congress.
• Lack of a federal energy policy.
• Demise of some key federal incentives.
• Erratic retail gasoline prices.
Another look at the Energy Consumption chart shows biomass to comprise 50% of the renewable energy capacity. Without biomass and hydrothermal, the renewable energy industry is almost negligible, i.e., about 1.2% of the energy consumed in the U.S.; though, this deficiency presents a tremendous opportunity for growth of renewables.
Biomass which will continue to grow is more of a sustainable than renewable energy technology. In any event and no matter what it is called, biomass will continue to grow. Why, because the factors stated above, for the most part do not come into play. Take the case of Municipal Solid Waste (MSW). The technology exists to convert MSW into biofuels or electrons. Problematic MSW that is brought to landfills can be converted onsite to useable energy. Economic benefits exist on both ends, i.e., disposal cost saving on the front-end and revenue generation on the back-end.
The cost of solar modules which were +$3.00 per watt a few years ago can be purchased today around $1.00 per watt. This trend is in the right direction. While manufacturing efficiencies and competition have contributed to the rapid drop in prices, the glut of solar panels in the market and dumping by Chinese manufactures may have more to do with lowering prices. At the end of the day, a solar farm will cost about $3.25 watt, at best; a gas-fired electricity power generation plant will cost south of $1.25 per watt. Therefore, a utility that is not faced with gross penalties for using conventional fuels will install new capacity with gas.
Theoretically, sooner or later a business has to stand on its own two feet. Long-term subsidies are the wrong tool. However, until the subsidies are removed from the oil industry, renewables need subsidies to compete on a level playing field. Either remove subsides for both renewable and O&G or provide equal incentives for both. For starters, O&G subsidies include:
• Enhanced Oil Recovery Credit.
• Expensing of Intangible Drilling Costs.
• Tertiary Injectants Deduction.
• Passive Loss Exception for Working Interests in Oil Properties.
• Percentage Depletion Allowance.
• Manufacturing Tax Deduction.
• Reduced Geological and Geophysical Amortization Period.
In closing, growth of renewable energy market (solar, unconventional hydropower, geothermal and wind) will only be achieved if the factors stated above are addressed in a strategic U.S. energy policy that reflects the long-term interests of our country. If not, solar and/or or wind won’t cut the mustard in the foreseeable future.
Let’s not criticize the power company for using inexpensive fossil-fuels. Customers scream bloody hell every time the retailer raises their electrical rate. Few if any are overjoyed at a rate increase. Everyone likes a low cost of energy. Today, the most effective way to hedge the trend against renewables is to be energy efficient, adopt sustainable energy technologies, and be smart about how you use a precious commodity like the little electron.
The opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author Dr. Barry Stevens, an accomplished business developer and entrepreneur in technology-driven enterprises. He is the founder of TBD America Inc., a technology business development group. In this role, he is responsible for leading technology driven enterprises through ideation, development and commercialization. To read his other discussions, please visit: http://barryonenergy.wordpress.com
Operation Technology Develop Power System Engineering Software for Renewable Energy Sector
Nov 21st
Operation Technology develops power system engineering software for renewable energy sector
Operation Technology Inc. has released newest version of ETAP enterprise software solution that includes a comprehensive renewable energy model for wind turbine generators, full scale power converters and photovoltaic array with manufacturer specific libraries of P-V and I-V curves.
ETAP 11 enables designers and engineers to conceptualize wind and solar collection, determine renewable energy penetration levels and perform grid interconnection studies. In addition, ETAP 11 offers a graphical user-defined dynamic modeling module that is completely script free for fast and reliable simulations taking the guess work out of control systems.
HyperSolar working to making renewable natural gas
HyperSolar Inc. has disclosed more information from its patent application for a process to produce renewable natural gas using sunlight, water and carbon dioxide. Inspired by the photosynthetic processes that plants use to effortlessly harness the power of the Sun to create energy molecules, the company is developing a novel solar-powered nanoparticle system that mimics photosynthesis to separate hydrogen from water. The free hydrogen can then be reacted with carbon dioxide to produce methane, the primary component in natural gas.
The company’s patent application is entitled, “Photoelectrochemically active heterostructures, methods for their manufacture, and methods and systems for producing desired products.” It discloses the company’s novel low cost manufacturing techniques, nanostructure innovations for high efficiency, and the use of freely available sunlight, waste water and carbon dioxide to produce hydrogen, methane, and other valuable chemical products.
Mass Megawatts completes low-cost, “off-the-grid” wind power system
Mass Megawatts Wind Power Inc. has completed the construction on its first wind power system delivered for use at an agricultural or home-based location that is not connected to the utility power grid. The wind power system is located nearAspen,Colorado.
The wind power system, in conjunction with a small solar photovoltaic system, is producing enough electricity to power a home. The surplus electricity is stored in batteries, providing power during times of low-wind and sun exposure.
As many remote locations do not have access to traditional utility-power, the wind power system offered by Mass Megawatts provides a cost-effective solution for onsite power generation. Mass Megawatts Wind Power is currently in negotiations with agricultural, mining and resort locations that are seeking an efficient, low-cost, power source.
Wind energy and radar: A safety risk
Nov 17th
While of course the wind farm may be one of those projects with such overwhelming policy benefits (and political support) as to trump all other considerations, even as they relate to safety, the record expresses no such proposition. — U.S. Court of Appeals
Federal agencies and military leaders are under pressure to not disrupt White House green energy policies even while green energy technology is disrupting our navigation aids and impairing U.S. national security.
The fact is that our air space has been made less safe by turbines and our national security has been compromised because of a reckless policy of siting wind towers within 50-miles of radar installations. FAA and military radar experts in the field know the damage that’s been done. But with the debate surrounding energy policy dominated by politics and money, they’ve bowed to the pressure.
Radar interference and mitigation
U.S. military services and federal agencies have conducted numerous studies on the radar question, as have multiple international military and private interests. Not all studies agree on levels of severity and potential mitigations, but all agree that large-scale industrial wind turbines have the potential to negatively affect military installations, radar, and navigation aids.
The problem is easy to explain, but difficult to resolve.
Since radar technology is designed to detect moving objects, spinning turbine blades create interference, which degrades the signal. Wind towers carry signal strength greater than a Boeing 747, so when the radar repeatedly sees the large return it cannot detect an actual aircraft in the same area.
Large expenditures of time and funds have been allocated in pursuit of technical mitigations but so far the results are controversial. By 2008, nearly 40% of our long-range radar systems were compromised by wind turbines. Today, more than twice the wind capacity is installed and the problem of radar interference persists.
Proper siting of turbines, while politically cumbersome, is the only tried and true form of mitigation. But this means denying wind developers access to land areas covered by radar.
Radar interference and Travis Air Force Base
The problem of radar interference first cropped up in the United States in early 2007 near Travis Air Force base in California. Two wind proposals were before the Solano County Planning Commission that would erect over one hundred new turbines in the area. The spinning blades resulted in aircraft appearing to drop off the radar while others appeared when they weren’t actually there.
Both Travis and the Solano County Airport Land Use Commission urged a delay in approving the projects, citing air safety and the need for more time to study the effects the towers had on navigation.
In his letter to the County, Colonel Steven Arquiette, commander of the 60th Air Mobility Wing at Travis warned the turbines would create significant interference with the base’s radar and could lead to potentially serious flight safety hazards.
The county heeded the concerns and agreed to a delay.
Travis held firm on its objections until a year later when enXco, one of the project proponents gifted $1 million to the base for technical mitigations. Col. Arquiette was told by his superiors to accept the money and withdraw his complaints; enXco’s project was built but the radar problem was never resolved.
Today, the Travis AFB Midair Collision Avoidance (MACA) pamphlet warns that wind farms southeast of the base interfere with radar. Unless an aircraft is flying with its transponder on (‘squawking’) it can’t be seen. (See image on right or click here to access the MACA . )
The strategy of requiring areas to be transponder-only airspace could work but relies on pilots complying with the warning. Recreational pilots may not remember to comply or their aircraft might not be adequately equipped. And worse, drug runners or — in this post-9/11 world — terrorists, might prefer they not be seen. The first thing the 9/11 hijackers did after seizing control of our passenger planes was to turn off the transponders.
Despite the apparent flaws, the “Travis solution” is touted as the gold standard for mitigating turbine interference.
FAA’s inadequate reviews
Last month, a U.S. federal appeals court found that the FAA failed to adequately analyze whether Cape Wind, the controversial proposal to erect 130 utility-scale turbines offshore in Nantucket Sound, would pose a hazard to air navigation.
The project’s proponent vigorously defended the agency’s review claiming that for over eight years the FAA repeatedly found the project would pose no hazard. But the record clearly shows otherwise.
In May 2010, the FAA issued identical Determinations of No Hazard for each of the Cape Wind turbines. These determinations were conditioned on implementing a tiered mitigation plan that incrementally upgraded nearby radar systems to correct for any interference the turbines would produce. While the upgrades would limit the impact of the spinning blades, the FAA acknowledged that the ‘fixes’ would reduce the resolution of the radar. Like Travis, aircraft flying in the area might go undetected or false objects could appear. If, after the turbines go online, the interference was found to be a safety risk, the FAA recommended revising airspace procedures to restrict air traffic to transponder only – also like Travis.
Remarkably, this is not the first time the FAA’s No Hazard determinations on wind turbines were overturned by the Courts. In 2008, a near identical finding to the Cape Wind case was reached by the Federal Appeals Court. In that case, Clark County, NV challenged the FAA over turbines proposed to be built several miles from the County’s planned airport.
Why compromise?
Windaction.org has interviewed radar specialists familiar with the mitigations implemented at Travis and those proposed near Nantucket Sound and elsewhere. These experts are very clear that the reduction in radar resolution poses a serious risk to air safety and should not be permitted.
Our national security and air safety have been compromised by wind turbines and U.S. taxpayers are unknowingly funding the degradation of our radar through federal renewable programs. The larger question is why? Why are our agencies and military services allowing these compromises and why are the courts — and not the agencies themselves — being called upon to correct their actions? Indeed, politics are playing a role in these compromises along with a general disinterest by many in Washington to consider both the good and bad of renewable energy.
The Court had it right when it stated: “While of course the wind farm [Cape Wind] may be one of those projects with such overwhelming policy benefits (and political support) as to trump all other considerations, even as they relate to safety, the record expresses no such proposition.
Written by Lisa Linowes, Executive Director of the Industrial Wind Action Group. The opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author, Lisa Linowes.
US Lawmakers Introduce Clean Energy Supports Legislation
Nov 15th
US lawmakers introduce clean energy supports legislation
Senators Harry Reid (D-NV), Richard Burr (R-NC), Robert Menendez (D-NJ) and Saxby Chambliss (R-GA) have introduced a bill that would provide increased support for the movement to deploy large numbers of natural gas vehicles in the United States, Clean Energy Fuels Corp. said.
The bill, NAT GAS Act of 2011, would provide a five-year extension of tax credit incentives for the purchase of NGVs. The bill would also encourage manufacturers to produce dedicated NGVs. The proposed legislation is driven by the need forAmericato quickly reduce its dependence on foreign oil while simultaneously reducing greenhouse gas emissions and urban pollution. To achieve these goals, the bill’s objective is to accelerate the production and use of natural gas-fueled vehicles. The legislation would expand the NGV tax incentive to help offset an NGV vehicle’s incremental cost, subject to caps depending upon vehicle size.
Pepco Energy wins $27.6 million energy performance contract from
Pepco Holdings Inc. subsidiary Pepco Energy Services Inc. has received a $27.6 million comprehensive energy performance and maintenance contract from the Maryland Port Administration.
The contract calls on Pepco Energy to install 22 energy conservation measures. The company will install an aggregate 750-kW high-efficiency photovoltaic system on two building rooftops. The electricity generated will be used to directly power these facilities during peak operational hours, producing an estimated $93,400 per year in electricity savings.
First Wind to buy 77 wind turbines from Vestas
First Wind has signed an agreement with Vestas to purchase 77 V100-1.8 MW turbines to be deployed at projects under development inMaineand in construction inWashington.
First Wind will deploy 19 V100-1.8 MW turbines to its proposed 34-MW Bull Hill Wind project on Bull Hill and Heifer Hill inHancock County,Maine. In addition, the company will deploy 58 V100-1.8 MW turbines to its 105 MW Palouse Wind project inWashington.
Carmanah Technologies launches new solar battery chargers
Carmanah Technologies Corp. has launched SUNfilm Solar Battery Chargers. The new SUNfilm series feature lightweight, thin-film technology geared to maintain a vehicle’s battery charge during periods of inactivity or storage. The addition of the SUNfilm solar chargers expands Carmanah’s current solar power solutions portfolio to address the needs of new, emerging markets.
Delmarva Power Buys 40-MW From Roth Rock Wind Farm in Maryland
Nov 14th
Delmarva Power buys 40-MW from Roth Rock wind farm in Maryland
Pepco Holdings Inc. subsidiary Delmarva Power will receive 40 MW of wind energy and associated renewable energy credits from the recently completed 50-MW Roth Rock wind facility inWestern Maryland.
The Roth Rock wind farm, which is owned by Gestamp Wind North America, comprises 20 2.5 MW turbines manufactured by Nordex. Delmarva Power will purchase 80% of Roth Rock’s output, while the remaining 20% will be sold separately to the University System of Maryland, Maryland Department of General Services.
Serious Energy acquires building energy management technology company
Serious Energy Inc. has acquired a building energy management technology company, Agilewaves Inc. Upon closing of the transaction, the engineering and advanced capabilities of the Building Optimization System created by Agilewaves will be integrated with those of Serious Energy’s SaaS energy efficiency platform.
Saginaw Future breaks ground on Great Lakes Solar Technology Park
Saginaw Future, the Great Lakes Bay Region and the Michigan Economic Development Corp. have broke ground on the 231-acreGreat LakesSolarTechnologyPark in Michigan. The Solar Technology Park has the potential to locate up to six solar manufacturing facilities that would create hundreds of direct and indirect jobs, along with millions of dollars in new investment and new tax base.
SURGE Accelerator Program Opens In Houston
Nov 14th
Kirk Coburn, Co-founder and Managing Director of the SURGE Accelerator in Houston, discusses the kind of start-up entrepreneurs that he’s looking for as he builds his team’s inaugural accelerator class. More >
The Impact of Germany’s Decision to Phase out Nuclear Energy
Nov 14th
On 30 May, in the aftermath of Japan’s Fukushima nuclear disaster, German Chancellor Angela Merkel announced that Germany would close all of its 18 nuclear power plants between 2015 and 2022, which produce about 28 percent of the country’s electricity.
Eight have now been taken offline, and with the winter coming on, Berlin is scrambling to make up the energy shortfall lest the country suffer blackouts combined with the need to import massive amounts of electricity.
Despite Germany’s Kreditanstalt fur Wiederaufbau (German Development Bank) being set to underwrite renewable energy and energy efficiency investments in Germany worth $137.3 billion over the next five years, Merkel’s government has now announced that in addition to going green, it will also build a dozen coal-fired power plants as part of the country’s future energy mix. In order to assure the energy transition, the government also plans to subsidize new natural gas power plants as well.
Now the consequences of the 30 June Bundestag law phasing out nuclear power are impacting. On 19 October Germany’s Minister of Economics and Technology Philipp Roesler somberly told Parliament, “The real work starts now,” adding that the ministry now had the goals “To ensure the security of the energy supply and to protect the environment, within acceptable financial conditions.” Afterwards, Environment Minister Norbert Roettgen told legislators at the same session, “Renewable energy and energy efficiency are the two pillars of the new energy policy.” The next day Roesler in the company of Finance Minister Wolfgang Schaeuble in a joint press conference informed reporters that Germany had sharply lowered its 2012 growth forecast to 1 percent. In April, the month following Fukushima but before the German government decided to phase out nuclear power, the Economy Ministry had predicted a 2012 growth rate of 1.8 percent.
The government’s newly pragmatic approach contrasts with the hopes of many environmentalists, who believe that Germany now has an historic opportunity to embrace renewable power rather than pursuing the retrograde step of commissioning new coal burning power plants.
But government ministers are increasingly concerned primarily with ensuring the security of the nation’s energy supply, even though the 30 June legislation mandated that Germany’s share of energy from renewable sources must increase from 17 percent to 35 percent in 2020 and reach 80 percent by 2050. A modest start has already been made, as since the eight reactors were closed Germany increased its share of electricity produced from renewable energy sources from 17 percent to 20.8 percent.
But the renewable power sources will be costly. On 19 October the German Association of Industrial Energy and Power Users complained that electricity price had increased even though its quality has decreased and noted that next year its members will see their electrical power invoices increase by 9 percent.
As for the economics of the shift, electricity from conventional coal fired plants costs roughly $83 per megawatt-hour, the price increases roughly 50 percent to $124 per megawatt-hour for wind energy, $207 per megawatt-hour for offshore wind power, and $268 per megawatt-hour for solar, the last more than three times the cost of coal-fired electricity.
Despite the fact that renewable energy has such high differential costs, most Germans accept it. According to a recent TNS Infratest survey, 79 percent of Germans polled felt that the “new energy” fees were “reasonable,” with only 15 percent considering them “too high.” Germany Trade & Invest economic development agency photovoltaic-industry expert Tobias Homann said, “With the decision to abandon nuclear power earlier this year, it was clear that the road ahead would be challenging. But Germany is in a very promising position to be the first industrialized country to rely entirely on renewable energy.”
Despite the cost associated with renewable energy Germany is one of the world’s largest producers of wind power, with 27 gigawatts of generating power installed, roughly 16 percent of the world’s current wind power generating capacity in the world, making it Europe’s biggest consumer of electricity from wind power.
In the new austere Germany, the shift to renewable energy sources comes at a bad time for the exports-driven German economy, as increased energy costs can only add to the expensiveness of exports. Needless to say, despite Germany’s commitment to preserving the euro, further uncertainties are introduced into German economic long-range planning.
Economic teething problems aside, Germany’s abandonment of nuclear power and embrace of renewable energy will be closely watched around the world not only by nations but the globe’s nuclear and renewable power industries. While startup costs and transition problems have yet to be resolved, Germany is betting on its future, and future generations using solar and wind power will not have to bury energy wastes with a half-life of tens of thousands of years.
Written by. Dr. John C.K. Daly for OilPrice.com. The opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author, Dr. John C.K. Daly. For more information on oil prices and other commodity related topics please visit http://oilprice.com
Vu1 to Supply 20,000 ESL Bulbs to Avspar
Nov 11th
IKEA opens 4 electric vehicle charging stations in Carson, Calif.
IKEA has officially plugged-in four Blink Pedestal electric vehicle charging stations at its store inCarson,California, as part of its partnership with ECOtality Inc. Installation also is planned at seven other IKEA stores in theWestern United States. To charge an EV at IKEA Carson, drivers pull into a designated parking spot, swipe their Blink InCard, plug the charger into the EV and then shop and eat at their leisure in the IKEA store while the vehicle is charging.
Vu1 to supply 20,000 ESL bulbs to Avspar
Vu1 Corp. has received an initial order for 20,000 of Electron Stimulated Luminescence R30 light bulbs from Avspar Corp. The company expects to fulfill the order during the 2012 first quarter.
The R30 bulb, which is based on Vu1′s unique ESL lighting technology platform, uses accelerated electrons to stimulate phosphor. ESL bulbs are fully dimmable, energy-efficient, non-toxic and provide a light quality virtually indistinguishable from traditional incandescent light bulbs for up to 11,000 hours.
GE, Illinois Institute of Technology team up on efficient wind energy production project
General Electric has joined hands with Illinois Institute of Technology to investigate ways to improve wind farm productivity and efficiency. The project is part of a larger U.S. Department of Energy investment of $9 million to an IIT-led consortium to enhance the leadership role of theU.S.in testing and producing the most advanced and efficient wind turbines in the world.
The two-year project will focus on helping wind farms to reduce maintenance costs and improve availability through predictions of impending problems. The project’s research will be conducted near Marseilles, Illinois, on a GE 1.5 MW series wind turbine operated and maintained by Invenergy. IIT students will be conducting research using GE’s Proficy SmartSignal software on the GE wind turbine to learn how to detect faults even earlier and more accurately than currently possible.
SunPower to install 13.78-MW solar system at Naval Air Weapons Station China Lake
SunPower Corp. has begun designs for a 13.78-MW solar photovoltaic power system atNavalAirWeaponsStationChinaLakeinCalifornia. The company is expected to break ground on the solar system next month.
Under the agreement, SunPower will design, build, operate and maintain the solar power system, which will utilize the company’s high-efficiency solar panels that are supported by a 25-year warranty. TheNavalAirWeaponsStationChinaLakewill buy the electricity at a rate that is currently below the retail utility rate. The 20-year power purchase agreement will also allow the Navy to secure electricity at up to 30% below the rate available through the more traditional 10-year PPA.
Wind turbines and public safety: Setbacks Matter
Oct 10th
Last month, the LA Times examined how the push to build more wind and solar installations was raising safety concerns for workers and the general public. As if on cue, local newspapers around the U.S. also ran stories on five separate catastrophic events involving turbines: a shattered blade in Ohio, fires in Texas and Michigan, the death of a technician in Iowa and another hospitalized in Kansas. None of these stories made national news so most people are unaware about the frequency of such events. 
Large-scale wind turbines operating in the U.S. are typically located in remote areas away from where people gather; so that when a turbine fails the risk of bodily harm is low. But as more communities respond to government incentives and work to erect their own towers on town-owned land we’re finding a dangerous pattern of authorities approving proposals with little consideration or apparent understanding, of the safety risks.
Setbacks matter
The story of mounting safety concerns is not new; a report from 2007 found that as wind turbines multiplied around the globe, the number of dangerous accidents was also climbing. The authors cited problems ranging from defects in design and manufacturing processes to construction errors and harsh operating environments. Thousands of insurance claims filed in 2006 alone led some to question whether wind turbines were as reliable or as safe as developers purported.
Additionally, according to Warren Diogo of Ascot Underwriting, the onshore wind sector is undergoing “rapid evolution”. Turbine components are being modified and scaled-up quickly to meet changing market demands and challenging site conditions. The period between research and market launch is greatly reduced leaving little time for testing prototypes before they’re placed in the field.
The industry insists that even if a failure does occur, safety setbacks lessen the likelihood of anyone being harmed. And although that’s true, there’s no consensus regarding setback standards. Each time a project is proposed, the same arguments are raised over how close is too close.
Safety vs. statistical probabilities
Advancing the notion that these massive spinning structures can be safely erected a few hundred feet from property lines, public areas and rights-of-way sends a dangerous message to the public. Blade failures, fire, and turbine collapse are more common than many have been led to believe so communities should not be lulled into a false sense of safety. When turbine failures are reported, authorities should take notice and not assume any failure is a singular event that won’t repeat in another town.
Safety cannot take a back seat to statistical probabilities but that’s what’s happening especially in densely populated communities where land is scarce. The latest example, and perhaps one of the most egregious we’ve looked at, involves a proposal to erect a General Electric, 1.5 megawatt turbine in Salem, Massachusetts; the city’s mayor is recommending a 382-foot tower be sited at a public park on Winter Island, adjacent to several historic buildings, the harbor master’s office, and 300-feet from abutting property lines.
A turbine on Winter Island?
The Salem proposal exposes how ambiguous the question of turbine safety has become.
When asked what land would be removed from public access to accommodate the tower, the city’s answer implies no safety buffer at all:
The diameter of the monopole (tower) for the proposed Winter Island turbine will be about 15 feet (180 sq ft).
On the question of catastrophic failure, the response is equally unsettling:
Modern wind turbines are fitted with ice monitoring technologies that sense ice buildup and “turn off” …In a study that looked at a 31 year period ending in 2006, among thousands of installations worldwide, there were no injuries or deaths attributable to wind turbine blade throw, either among the general public or wind industry workers. Typically it would take something in excess of a Category 5 hurricane to blow one of the units over.
Salem’s mayor appears to be accepting everything the industry claims in order to sell the wind turbine project. Unfortunately, safeguards don’t work as well as advertised. Footage on the web clearly shows turbines spinning with ice caked on the blades. Also, hidden damage to turbine components can lead to failures long after the events that caused them; turbines may appear to be in good operating order and then fail unexpectedly. Three separate collapses occurred in the northeast since 2008 and none involved category 5 hurricanes.
As of now, it’s not clear whether G.E. will even agree to erect one of its turbines on Winter Island.
Recall last year when Falmouth and Charlestown in Massachusetts approached the company about supplying turbines. G.E. refused citing inadequate setbacks for mitigating the risk of ice shed. To meet the same standard, the Salem project would need to be setback 775+ feet from occupied structures, roads, property lines and public access areas. The city would be wise not to ignore this setback.
Salem has been poorly served by the experts it consulted. We recommend the project, as defined, be cancelled immediately and call on the industry to bring more clarity to the setback debate. Erecting this enormous wind turbine in a public park so close to a neighborhood is nothing more than a recipe for disaster.
Note: The distances referenced in this editorial pertain to the risks of flying debris from operating turbines. Setbacks to mitigate for turbine noise, shadow flicker and visual impacts — which would be much larger — are not considered.
Written by Lisa Linowes, Executive Director of the Industrial Wind Action Group. The opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author, Lisa Linowes.
Loading ...
Recent Comments