National Offshore Wind Energy Grid Interconnection Study Executive Summary

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

National Offshore Wind Energy Grid Interconnection Study Executive Summary National Offshore Wind Energy Grid Interconnection Study Executive Summary DOE Award No. EE-0005365 ABB, Inc. 12040 Regency Pkwy. Suite 200 Cary, NC 27518-7708 Project Period: 10/11 – 04/14 Authors: John P. Daniel Dr. Shu Liu Dr. Eduardo Ibanez (Principal Investigator) ABB, Inc. National Renewable Energy Laboratory ABB, Inc. 919-856-2473 303-384-6926 940 Main Campus Dr. [email protected] [email protected] Raleigh, NC 27606 919-856-3306 [email protected] Ken Pennock Dr. Gregory Reed Spencer Hanes AWS Truepower University of Pittsburgh Duke Energy 518-213-0044 412-383-9862 704-382-4560 [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] July 30, 2014 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This report is based on work supported by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) under Award No. EE-00005365. The authors wish to express appreciation for the kind support from DOE and the many industry leaders that have contributed through direct input and comment on the work as it has progressed. In particular, we would like to thank the study’s technical review committee (TRC) for their tremendous input and support for this work. Representatives from utilities, regional system operators, government, and the wind industry comprised the TRC. Technical Review Committee American Wind Energy Association Offshore Wind Development Coalition Chris Long Doug Pfeister Bureau of Ocean Energy Management PJM Casey Reeves Scott Baker Ken Schuyler Electric Reliability Council of Texas U.S. Department of Defense Cathey Carter Louis Husser ISO-New England U.S. Department of Energy Jon Black Charlton Clark Rich Kowalski Brad Ring Melissa Callaway National Renewable Energy Laboratory Xero Energy Limited Aaron Bloom Jeff Fodiak Dennis Elliott Helen Snodin Study Team ABB, Inc. National Renewable Energy Laboratory John Daniel Dr. Eduardo Ibanez Dr. Shu Liu Dr. Trieu Mai Dr. Lang Chen Michael Heaney Dr. Jiuping Pan Lynn Coles AWS Truepower University of Pittsburgh Ken Pennock Dr. Gregory Reed Jaclyn Frank Brandon Grainger Charles Alonge Matthew Korytowski Duke Energy Spencer Hanes 2 DISCLAIMER Any findings, opinions, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this report are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the view of the U.S. Department of Energy. 3 TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF ACRONYMS ................................................................................................................................................... 5 LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................................................................................ 6 LIST OF TABLES .......................................................................................................................................................... 7 SYNOPSIS ..................................................................................................................................................................... 8 KEY RESULTS AND OBSERVATIONS ................................................................................................................................. 8 SUMMARY .................................................................................................................................................................. 10 BACKGROUND............................................................................................................................................................. 10 OFFSHORE WIND DEVELOPMENT—STAGING PROJECTIONS ............................................................................................ 12 WIND PRODUCTION PROFILE DEVELOPMENT ................................................................................................................. 14 INITIAL INTEGRATION ANALYSIS .................................................................................................................................... 16 TECHNOLOGY OVERVIEW ............................................................................................................................................. 18 TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENTS ....................................................................................................................................... 20 Costs .................................................................................................................................................................... 20 Reliability .............................................................................................................................................................. 22 Technology Comparison ...................................................................................................................................... 24 Production Costs .................................................................................................................................................. 26 REGULATORY REVIEW ................................................................................................................................................. 27 State of Offshore Wind in the United States in 2014 ............................................................................................ 27 Offshore Wind Development Framework ............................................................................................................. 30 Recommendations ............................................................................................................................................... 36 REFERENCES............................................................................................................................................................. 38 4 LIST OF ACRONYMS AAM - alternative arm modular MISO - Midcontinent Independent System Operator AC - alternating current MMC - modular multi-level AWC - Atlantic Wind Connection MMS - Minerals Management Service BA - balancing areas MOU - memorandum of understanding BOEM - Bureau of Ocean Energy Management MTDC - multi-terminal direct current CF - capacity factor MVDC - medium-voltage direct current COE - cost of energy MW - megawatts COWICS - Carolina Offshore Wind Integration Case MWh - megawatt-hours Study NAMTGM - North American transmission grid model CREZ - competitive renewable energy zone NCF - net capacity factor CSP - concentrating solar power NEPA - National Environmental Policy Act CTL - cascaded two-level NREL - National Renewable Energy Laboratory DC - direct current NERC - North American Reliability Corporation DFIG - doubly-fed induction generator NOWEGIS - National Offshore Wind Energy Grid DOE - U.S. Department of Energy Interconnection Study DOI - U.S. Department of the Interior NOAA - National Oceanic and Atmospheric DOWNVInD - Distant Offshore Wind farms with No Administration Visual Impact in Deepwaters nmi - nautical mile EA - environmental assessment NPC - neutral-point-clamped EENS - expected energy not supplied NWPP - Northwest Power Pool EIA - U.S. Energy Information Administration OCS - Outer Continental Shelf EIS - environmental impact statement ODIS - National Grid’s Offshore Development EMM - U.S. Energy Information Agency Electricity Information Statement Market Modules OREC - offshore wind renewable energy certificate ENTSO-E - European Network of Transmission PCC - point of common coupling System Operators for Electricity PJM - the regional transmission organization covering EPR - ethylene propylene rubber all or parts of 13 states and the District of ERCOT - Electric Reliability Council of Texas Columbia ERGIS - Eastern Renewable Generation Integration PPA - power purchase agreement Study PUC - public utilities commission EWITS - Eastern Wind Integration and Transmission REC - renewable energy certificate Study ReEDS - Regional Energy Deployment System FERC - Federal Energy Regulatory Commission RPS - renewable portfolio standards GIP - generator interconnection process RTO - regional transmission organization GW - gigawatts TRC - technical review committee HV - high voltage TWh - terawatt-hours HVAC/HVDC - high-voltage alternating/direct current USGS - U.S. Geological Survey IEC - International Electrotechnical Commission var - volt-ampere reactive IEEE - Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers VOWTAP - Virginia Offshore Wind Technology IGBT - insulated-gate bipolar transistor Advancement Program ISO - independent system operator VSC - voltage source converter ISO-NE - Independent System Operator New England WEA - wind energy area kV - kilovolts WTG - wind turbine generator kW - kilowatts XLPE - cross-linked polyethylene LCC - line-commutated converter LCOE - levelized cost of energy LMP - locational marginal prices MASS - Mesoscale Atmospheric Simulation System 5 LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE ES-1. NOWEGIS TASKS AND STUDY FLOW ........................................................................................................... 11 FIGURE ES-2. INSTALLED ONSHORE AND OFFSHORE WIND AS OUTLINED IN 20% WIND ENERGY BY 2030 ................................ 12 FIGURE ES-3. ONSHORE AND OFFSHORE WIND DEPLOYED IN 2030 ...................................................................................... 13 FIGURE ES-4. OFFSHORE WIND BUILD-OUT FOR THE EAST COAST ....................................................................................... 14 FIGURE ES-5. MAP OF NATIONAL WIND NET CAPACITY FACTOR ............................................................................................ 16 FIGURE ES-6. BOX PLOTS SHOWING HOURLY AND 10-MINUTE
Recommended publications
  • Applications of Systems Engineering to the Research, Design, And
    Applications of Systems Engineering to the Research, Design, and Development of Wind Energy Systems K. Dykes and R. Meadows With contributions from: F. Felker, P. Graf, M. Hand, M. Lunacek, J. Michalakes, P. Moriarty, W. Musial, and P. Veers NREL is a national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy, operated by the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC. Technical Report NREL/TP-5000-52616 December 2011 Contract No. DE -AC36-08GO28308 Applications of Systems Engineering to the Research, Design, and Development of Wind Energy Systems Authors: K. Dykes and R. Meadows With contributions from: F. Felker, P. Graf, M. Hand, M. Lunacek, J. Michalakes, P. Moriarty, W. Musial, and P. Veers Prepared under Task No. WE11.0341 NREL is a national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy, operated by the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC. National Renewable Energy Laboratory Technical Report NREL/TP-5000-52616 1617 Cole Boulevard Golden, Colorado 80401 December 2011 303-275-3000 • www.nrel.gov Contract No. DE-AC36-08GO28308 NOTICE This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States government. Neither the United States government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States government or any agency thereof.
    [Show full text]
  • Planning for Wind Energy
    Planning for Wind Energy Suzanne Rynne, AICP , Larry Flowers, Eric Lantz, and Erica Heller, AICP , Editors American Planning Association Planning Advisory Service Report Number 566 Planning for Wind Energy is the result of a collaborative part- search intern at APA; Kirstin Kuenzi is a research intern at nership among the American Planning Association (APA), APA; Joe MacDonald, aicp, was program development se- the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), the nior associate at APA; Ann F. Dillemuth, aicp, is a research American Wind Energy Association (AWEA), and Clarion associate and co-editor of PAS Memo at APA. Associates. Funding was provided by the U.S. Department The authors thank the many other individuals who con- of Energy under award number DE-EE0000717, as part of tributed to or supported this project, particularly the plan- the 20% Wind by 2030: Overcoming the Challenges funding ners, elected officials, and other stakeholders from case- opportunity. study communities who participated in interviews, shared The report was developed under the auspices of the Green documents and images, and reviewed drafts of the case Communities Research Center, one of APA’s National studies. Special thanks also goes to the project partners Centers for Planning. The Center engages in research, policy, who reviewed the entire report and provided thoughtful outreach, and education that advance green communities edits and comments, as well as the scoping symposium through planning. For more information, visit www.plan- participants who worked with APA and project partners to ning.org/nationalcenters/green/index.htm. APA’s National develop the outline for the report: James Andrews, utilities Centers for Planning conduct policy-relevant research and specialist at the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission; education involving community health, natural and man- Jennifer Banks, offshore wind and siting specialist at AWEA; made hazards, and green communities.
    [Show full text]
  • U.S. Offshore Wind Power Economic Impact Assessment
    U.S. Offshore Wind Power Economic Impact Assessment Issue Date | March 2020 Prepared By American Wind Energy Association Table of Contents Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................................................................. 1 Introduction .......................................................................................................................................................................................... 2 Current Status of U.S. Offshore Wind .......................................................................................................................................................... 2 Lessons from Land-based Wind ...................................................................................................................................................................... 3 Announced Investments in Domestic Infrastructure ............................................................................................................................ 5 Methodology ......................................................................................................................................................................................... 7 Input Assumptions ............................................................................................................................................................................................... 7 Modeling Tool ........................................................................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Advanced Transmission Technologies
    Advanced Transmission Technologies December 2020 United States Department of Energy Washington, DC 20585 Executive Summary The high-voltage transmission electric grid is a complex, interconnected, and interdependent system that is responsible for providing safe, reliable, and cost-effective electricity to customers. In the United States, the transmission system is comprised of three distinct power grids, or “interconnections”: the Eastern Interconnection, the Western Interconnection, and a smaller grid containing most of Texas. The three systems have weak ties between them to act as power transfers, but they largely rely on independent systems to remain stable and reliable. Along with aged assets, primarily from the 1960s and 1970s, the electric power system is evolving, from consisting of predominantly reliable, dependable, and variable-output generation sources (e.g., coal, natural gas, and hydroelectric) to increasing percentages of climate- and weather- dependent intermittent power generation sources (e.g., wind and solar). All of these generation sources rely heavily on high-voltage transmission lines, substations, and the distribution grid to bring electric power to the customers. The original vertically-integrated system design was simple, following the path of generation to transmission to distribution to customer. The centralized control paradigm in which generation is dispatched to serve variable customer demands is being challenged with greater deployment of distributed energy resources (at both the transmission and distribution level), which may not follow the traditional path mentioned above. This means an electricity customer today could be a generation source tomorrow if wind or solar assets were on their privately-owned property. The fact that customers can now be power sources means that they do not have to wholly rely on their utility to serve their needs and they could sell power back to the utility.
    [Show full text]
  • 2020 State of Reliability an Assessment of 2019 Bulk Power System Performance
    2020 State of Reliability An Assessment of 2019 Bulk Power System Performance July 2020 Table of Contents Preface ........................................................................................................................................................................... iv About This Report ........................................................................................................................................................... v Development Process .................................................................................................................................................. v Primary Data Sources .................................................................................................................................................. v Impacts of COVID-19 Pandemic .................................................................................................................................. v Reading this Report .................................................................................................................................................... vi Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................................................... viii Key Findings ................................................................................................................................................................ ix Recommendations......................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Small Vulnerable Sets Determine Large Network Cascades in Power Grids
    Article Summary — followed by the full article on p. 4 Small vulnerable sets determine large network cascades in power grids Yang Yang,1 Takashi Nishikawa,1;2;∗ Adilson E. Motter1;2 Science 358, eaan3184 (2017), DOI: 10.1126/science.aan3184 Animated summary: http://youtu.be/c9n0vQuS2O4 1Department of Physics and Astronomy, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL 60208, USA 2Northwestern Institute on Complex Systems, Northwestern University, Evanston, IL 60208, USA ∗Corresponding author. E-mail: [email protected] Cascading failures in power grids are inherently network processes, inwhich an initially small perturbation leads to a sequence of failures that spread through the connections between sys- tem components. An unresolved problem in preventing major blackouts has been to distinguish disturbances that cause large cascades from seemingly identical ones that have only mild ef- fects. Modeling and analyzing such processes are challenging when the system is large and its operating condition varies widely across different years, seasons, and power demand levels. Multicondition analysis of cascade vulnerability is needed to answer several key questions: Un- der what conditions would an initial disturbance remain localized rather than cascade through the network? Which network components are most vulnerable to failures across various con- ditions? What is the role of the network structure in determining component vulnerability and cascade sizes? To address these questions and differentiate cascading-causing disturbances, we formulated an electrical-circuit network representation of the U.S.-South Canada power grid—a large-scale network with more than 100,000 transmission lines—for a wide range of operating conditions. We simulated cascades in this system by means of a dynamical model that accounts arXiv:1804.06432v1 [physics.soc-ph] 17 Apr 2018 for transmission line failures due to overloads and the resulting power flow reconfigurations.
    [Show full text]
  • Eastern Interconnection
    1/31/2020 Eastern Interconnection - Wikipedia Eastern Interconnection The Eastern Interconnection is one of the two major alternating-current (AC) electrical grids in the continental U.S. power transmission grid. The other major interconnection is the Western Interconnection. The three minor interconnections are the Quebec, Alaska, and Texas interconnections. All of the electric utilities in the Eastern Interconnection are electrically tied together during normal system conditions and operate at a synchronized frequency at an average of 60 Hz. The Eastern Interconnection reaches from Central Canada The two major and three minor NERC eastward to the Atlantic coast (excluding Quebec), interconnections, and the nine NERC Regional south to Florida, and back west to the foot of the Reliability Councils. Rockies (excluding most of Texas). Interconnections can be tied to each other via high-voltage direct current power transmission lines (DC ties), or with variable-frequency transformers (VFTs), which permit a controlled flow of energy while also functionally isolating the independent AC frequencies of each side. The Eastern Interconnection is tied to the Western Interconnection with six DC ties, to the Texas Interconnection with two DC ties, and to the Quebec Interconnection with four DC ties and a VFT. The electric power transmission grid of the contiguous United States consists of In 2016, National Renewable Energy Laboratory simulated a 120,000 miles (190,000 km) of lines year with 30% renewable energy (wind and solar power) in 5- operated
    [Show full text]
  • Clean Energy from America's Oceans
    Clean Energy from America’s Oceans Permitting and Financing Challenges to the U.S. Offshore Wind Industry Michael Conathan and Richard Caperton June 2011 Introduction and summary For 87 days in the spring and summer of 2010, an undersea gusher of oil continuously reminded Americans of the toll energy development can take on our oceans. Approximately 3,500 oil rigs and platforms were operating in U.S. waters at the time of the BP disaster. There were also over 1,000 wind turbines generating clean, renewable electricity off the coastlines of northwestern Europe. But not a single windmill yet turns in the strong, abundant winds that abound off our shores. Clearly wind power cannot immediately replace the energy we still must generate from the oil and gas produced on the outer continental shelf. But America’s unwillingness to clear the way for permitting a proven, commercially scalable, clean source of energy is a major black eye for a nation that purports to be a leader in technological development. Denmark constructed the first offshore wind facility in in 1991. In the intervening two decades 10 other countries installed offshore wind farms—eight nations in northern Europe, plus Japan and China (see chart). Nations embracing wind energy Current offshore wind capacity in megawatts, Europe, China, and the United States Europe Offshore wind capacity (United Kingdom, Denmark, The China United States in megawatts (MW) Netherlands, Belgium, Germany, Sweden, Ireland, Finland, Norway)1 Installed 2,946 1022 0 Under construction 3,000 2,3003 0 Permitted 19,000 13,6004 4885 Total 24,946 MW 16,002 MW 488 MW Note: One megawatt roughly equates to the amount of electricity needed to power 300 American homes.
    [Show full text]
  • 2019 Market Report
    US OFFSHORE WIND MARKET UPDATE & INSIGHTS US OFFSHORE WIND CAPACITY GENERATION The US Department of the Interior’s Bureau of Ocean and Energy Management (BOEM), has auctioned 16 US offshore wind energy areas (WEAs) designated in federal waters for offshore wind development. Each area has been leased to a qualified offshore wind developer. The ar- eas are located along the East Coast from North Carolina to Massachusetts and represent a total potential capacity of 21,000 Megawatts (MWs) of offshore wind power generation. HISTORY OF BOEM AUCTIONS AND LEASES YEAR LEASE # LESSEE STATE ACREAGE BID MW* NEXT 2012 0482 GSOE I DE 70,098 NA NA SAP *Reading volumes, some earlier estimates 2013 0486 Deepwater Wind NE RI/MA 97,498 $3,838,288 3400 TTL COP of capacity likely used 2013 0487 Deepwater Wind NE RI/MA 67,252 $3,838,288 3400 TTL FDR different calculations. 2013 0483 VA Electric & Power Co. VA 112,799 $1,600,000 2000 COP In all cases, capacity 2014 0490 US Wind MD 79,707 $8,701,098 1450 COP calculations should be considered estimates. 2015 0501 Vineyard Wind MA 166,886 $166,886 See Below FDR 2015 0500 Bay State Wind MA 187,523 $281,285 2000 TTL COP 2016 0498 Ocean Wind NJ 160,480 $880,715 See Below COP 2016 0499 EDFR Development NJ 183,353 $1,006,240 3400 TTL SAP 2017 0512 Equinor Wind US NY 79,350 $42,469,725 1000 COP 2017 0508 Avangrid Renewables NC 122,405 $9,066,650 1486 SAP 2018 0519 Skipjack Offshore Energy DE 26,332 Assigned NA SAP 2018 0520 Equinor Wind US MA 128,811 $135,000,000 1300 EXEC 2018 0521 Mayflower Wind Energy MA 127,388 $135,000,000 1300 EXEC 2018 0522 Vineyard Wind MA 132,370 $135,000,000 1500 EXEC EXEC—Lease Execution SAP—Site Assessment Plan COP—Construction & Operations Plan FDR—Facility Design Report @offshorewindus / BUSINESS NETWORK FOR OFFSHORE WIND / offshorewindus.org 1 STATE 2018 2019 MARKET GROWTH The US Offshore Wind market currently stands VIRGINIA 12 12 at 16,970 MWs and is a subset of the total US MARYLAND 366 366 potential generation capacity.
    [Show full text]
  • FERC Approval Release 5-19
    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact: Frank Maisano, (202) 828-5864, c: (202) 997-5932 [email protected] FERC Action Will Enable Offshore Transmission, Reduce Congestion First–of-Kind Offshore Backbone Project will Deliver Clean Energy, Jobs, Reliability WASHINGTON, DC – The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) approved a filing that greatly enhances transmission development to support America's renewable energy needs, which will also reduce expensive transmission congestion in the Mid-Atlantic states. FERC's order provides a boost to new transmission projects like the Atlantic Wind Connection that require large sums of capital that are totally at risk. The Atlantic Wind Connection investment will create thousands of offshore wind development jobs and expand reliability and national security through improvements in the electric grid. "This is an important and significant step forward to build the interstate electric super highway necessary for offshore wind to reach scale," said Robert Mitchell, CEO of Atlantic Grid Development, the project's developer. "The Atlantic Wind Connection project will allow thousands of megawatts of clean power to efficiently connect to the PJM transmission grid, while spurring the creation of thousands of clean energy jobs and improving the reliability and security of the power grid in the Mid-Atlantic. We are gratified and appreciate that the Commissioners recognize the important benefits this project will provide in furthering the efficient and timely development of offshore wind in New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland and Virginia.” AWC originally filed its petition with FERC regarding its backbone transmission project in December. Announced in October, the AWC project is the super highway for potential offshore wind energy along the Mid-Atlantic coast.
    [Show full text]
  • Meeting Minutes PJM Interconnection PJM Planning Committee PJM Conference and Training Center Valley Forge, PA January 9Th, 2014 9:30 AM Members Present
    Meeting Minutes PJM Interconnection PJM Planning Committee PJM Conference and Training Center Valley Forge, PA January 9th, 2014 9:30 AM Members Present: David Canter AEP John Syner (FE) Allegheny Power Takis Laios American Electric Power Chris Norton American Municipal Power, Inc. Dale Burmester American Transmission Company, LLC Gary Fuerst American Transmission Systems, Inc. David Tates American Transmission Systems, Inc. Patricia Esposito Atlantic Grid Operations A, LLC Mohamed El Gassier Atlantic Wind Connection Paul McCoy Atlatic Wind Connection James Jablonski Borough of Butler, Butler Electric Division Ron Pezon Borough of Chambersburg Wil Burns Burns Law Firm Barry Trayers Citigroup Energy, Inc. Deral Danis CLEAN LINE ENERGY PARTNERS LLC William Allen Commonwealth Edison Company Thomas Leeming Commonwealth Edison Company Rehan Gilani ConEdison Energy Griffin Reilly Consolidated Edison Company of NY, Inc. Dan Griffiths Consumer Advocates of PJM States Bill Dugan Customized Energy Solutions, Ltd.* Guy Filomena Customized Energy Solutions, Ltd.* Carl Johnson Customized Energy Solutions, Ltd.* John Horstmann Dayton Power & Light Company (The) Jaclyn Cantler Delmarva Power & Light Company David Hastings DhastCo,LLC David Scarpignato Direct Energy Janhavi Dharmadhikari (ES) Dominion Energy Marketing, Inc. George Owens Downes Associates, Inc. Greg Pakela DTE Energy Trading, Inc. Kenneth Jennings Duke Energy Business Services LLC Steve Steinkuhl Duke Energy Business Services LLC Jason Harchick Duquesne Light Company Jennifer Ayers-Brasher
    [Show full text]
  • Power Purchase Agreement Checklist for State and Local Governments
    Horizontal Format-A Reversed National Renewable Energy Laboratory Innovation for Our Energy Future Horizontal Format-B Reversed National Renewable Energy Laboratory Innovation for Our Energy Future Vertical Format Reversed-A National Renewable Energy Analysis Energy Laboratory Innovation for Our Energy Future Fact Sheet Series on Financing Renewable Energy Projects Vertical Format Reversed-B Power Purchase Agreement Checklist National Renewable Energy Laboratory forInnovation State for Our Energy Future and Local Governments This fact sheet provides information and guidance on the certificates (RECs), interconnection, and net metering are dis- Sponsorship Format Reversed solar photovoltaic (PV) power purchase agreement (PPA), cussed later. Basic terms for three example PPAs are included which is a financing mechanism that state and local govern- at the end of this fact sheet. ment entities can use to acquire clean, renewable energy. We The system owner is often a third-party investor (“tax inves- address the financial, logistical, and legal questions relevant National Renewable tor”) who provides investment capital to the project in return to implementingEnergy Laboratory a PPA, but we do not examine the technical for tax benefits. The tax investor is usually a limited liability details—those can be discussed later with the developer/con- corporation (LLC) backed by one or more financial institu- tractor. This fact sheet is written to support decision makers tions. In addition to receiving revenues from electricity sales, in U.S. state and local governments who are aware of solar Color: White they can also benefit from federal tax incentives. These tax PPAs and may have a cursory knowledge of their structure incentives can account for approximately 50% of the project’s but they still require further information before committing financial return (Bolinger 2009, Rahus 2008).
    [Show full text]