DOCSLIB.ORG

Via Hand Delivery

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Via Hand Delivery J ATTORNEYS AT LAW\ PLLC 1600 LAIDLEYTOWER EO.BOX 553 CHARLESTON,WESTVIRGINIA 25322 *TELEPHONE 304-340-1000 *TELECOPIER: 304-340-1 I30 wJacksonkelkcorn DIRECT TELEPHONE: (304) 340-1214 DIRECT TELECOPIER (304) 340-1080 E-Mail: snchambersldiacksonkellv.com State Bar No. 694 May 26,2009 Via Hand Delivery Ms. Sandra Squire Executive Secretary Public Service Commission of West Virginia 201 Brooks Street Charleston, West Virginia 25301 Re: CASE NO. 09-0360-E-CS Pinnacle Wind Force, LLC Application for a Siting Certificate to Authorize the Construction and Operation of an Electric Wholesale Generating Facility and Related Transmission Support Line of Less than 200 kV and Associated Interconnection Facilities in Mineral County, West Virginia. Dear Ms. Squire: Enclosed for filing on behalf of Pinnacle Wind Force, LLC in the above-styled case are an original and twelve copies of Direct Testimony of the following: 1. James D. Barnes 2. Randall A. Childs 3. Terrence J. DeWan 4. David Friend 5. Paul Kerlinger 6. Kathryn M. Kuranda 7. William E. Llewellyn 8. Jeffrey H. Maymon 9. Mike Sponsler 10. Karen Tyrell, Ph.D. {C1547103.1} Clarksburg, WV Martinsburg, WV Morgantown, WV Wheeling, WV Denver, CO Lexington, KY Pittsburgh, PA Washington, D.C. Ms. Sandra Squire May 26,2009 Page 2 Please advise if you have any questions. Sincerely, SNC/dmb Enclosures cc: John R. Auville, Esq. (w/enc.) Bradley W. Stephens, Esq. (wlenc.) Vincent Trivelli, Esq. (w/enc.) James M. Cookman (w/enc.) David K. Friend (w/enc.) Jennie Henthorn (w/enc.) {C 1453 103.1} PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION OF WEST VIRGINIA CHARLESTON Case No. 09-0360-E-CS Pinnacle Wind Force, LLC Application for a Siting Certificate to Authorize the Construction and Operation of an Electric Wholesale Generating Facility and Related Transmission Support Line of Less than 200 kV and Associated Interconnection Facilities in Mineral County, West Virginia DIRECT TESTIMONY OF JAMES D. BARNES May 26,2009 Pinnacle Wind Force, LLC Case No. 09-0360-E-CS Direct Testimony of James D. Barnes Page 1 of 16 1 Q. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND BUSINESS ADDRESS. 2 A. James D. Barnes. My business address is 33 Moulton Street, Cambridge, MA 02138. 3 4 DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES 5 Q. BY WHOM ARE YOU EMPLOYED AND IN WHAT CAPACITY? 6 A. I am a Supervisory Consultant of Acentech Incorporated ((‘Acentech”). In this role, I 7 typically serve as principal investigator and/or manager on projects that address 8 community sound associated with industrial, energy, institutional, and transportation 9 facilities. My firm has been retained by Pinnacle Wind Force, LLC (“Pinnacle Wind 10 Force”) to perform and prepare an acoustical study of the proposed Pinnacle Wind Farm 11 at New Page ((‘Project”). 12 Q. PLEASE DESCRIBE ACENTECH AND ITS WORK IN RELATION TO NOISE 13 ISSUES AND STUDIES. 14 A. Acentech is a multi-disciplinary consulting firm with offices located in Massachusetts, 15 Pennsylvania, and California. The staff of more than 50 professionals is comprised of 16 acoustical consultants, audiovisual consultants, noise and vibration consultants, and IT 17 consultants. For environmental sound studies, Acentech consultants apply experience, 18 technical expertise, current computer modeling techniques, and measurement procedures 19 to assess conditions and to develop design recommendations. 20 Pinnacle Wind Force, LLC Case No. 09-0360-E-CS Direct Testimony of James D. Barnes Page 2 of 16 1 EXPERIENCE AND EDUCATION 2 Q. PLEASE DESCRIBE YOUR PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE AND EDUCATIONAL 3 BACKGROUND. 4 A. My educational and professional qualifications that relate to providing this testimony are 5 set forth on Exhibit JDB-1. I have over 35 years of experience relating to the study of 6 sound, which has encompassed interior and community noise studies for existing sources, 7 prediction of construction and operation noise levels, and ambient sound studies for 8 proposed industrial sites and transportation corridors. During this time, I have worked 9 with design team engineers, architects and planners, attorneys, equipment suppliers, 10 owners, community representatives, private citizens, and state and local government 11 personnel. I hold a Bachelor of Science degree and a Masters of Engineering degree 12 from Cornel1 University, am a registered Professional Engineer in multiple states, and 13 currently co-teach the Fundamentals Exam Preparation Course for the Institute of Noise 14 Control Engineering. 15 Q. HAVE YOU PREVIOUSLY TESTIFIED BEFORE THE PUBLIC SERVICE 16 COMMISSION OF WEST VIRGINIA? 17 A. Yes. I have testified before the Commission in the hearings on the Beech Ridge Energy 18 project in 2006 and the Liberty Gap Wind Force project in 2007. In addition, I have 19 presented testimony in hearings before the Massachusetts Energy Facilities Siting Board, 20 the New Hampshire Energy Facility Site Evaluation Committee, and at local town and 21 planning board meetings. 22 Pinnacle Wind Force, LLC Case No. 09-0360-E-CS Direct Testimony of James D. Barnes Page 3 of 16 PURPOSE OF TESTIMONY Q. PLEASE DESCRIBE THE PURPOSE OF YOUR TESTIMONY. A. The purpose of my testimony is to sponsor the study prepared under my direction by Acentech entitled “Acoustical Study of Proposed Pinnacle Wind Farm, Mineral County, W’(“Acoustical Report”), a copy of which has been submitted to the Commission as Appendix U to the Siting Certificate Application. THE PINNACLE ACOUSTICAL REPORT 9 Q. PLEASE PROVIDE A GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF THE ACOUSTICAL REPORT. 10 A. In its Siting Rules, the Commission has adopted requirements for the study of sound to 11 aid its review of proposed electric generating facilities, including wind farm projects. 12 The Acoustical Report responded to the Siting Rules by developing information about the 13 existing land uses, noise-sensitive receptors, and ambient sound levels in the community; 14 and developing sound level estimates for the construction and operation phases of the 15 Project. Acentech reviewed the facility and site drawings, and equipment information; 16 toured the Project area; conducted sound measurements and observations of the existing 17 ambient conditions at representative community locations; and estimated construction 18 and operation sound levels for the facility. The Acoustical Report summarizes our 19 analysis and presents the pertinent results of the acoustical study. I performed or directly 20 supervised all work tasks in this study. Pinnacle Wind Force, LLC Case No. 09-0360-E-CS Direct Testimony of James D. Barnes Page 4 of 16 Q. PLEASE DESCRIBE HOW NOISE IS MEASURED BY DECIBELS AND PROVIDE SOME TYPICAL SOUND LEVEL COMPARISONS. A. The magnitude, or loudness, of sound waves (pressure oscillations) is described quantitatively by the terms sound pressure level, sound level, or simply noise level. The 5 magnitude of a sound is measured in decibels, abbreviated dB. Decibels are used to 6 quantify sound pressure levels just as degrees are used to quanti@ temperature and inches 7 are used to quantify distance. Since the decibel is a logarithmic rather than linear 8 quantity, adding two sound levels of 50 dB each results in a total sound level of 53 dB 9 rather than 100 dB. The faintest sound level that can be heard by a young healthy ear is 10 about 0 dB, a moderate sound level is about 50 dB, and a loud sound level is about 100 11 dB. 12 At any location, a complete physical description of the ambient acoustic .13 environment might include its sound pressure level at various frequencies, as a function 14 of time. As a first step toward simplifylng this multi-dimensional description, it has 15 become common practice to eliminate the frequency variable by measuring the A- 16 weighted sound level (dBA) as observed on a standard sound level meter. The A- 17 weighting filter emphasizes the mid-frequency components and de-emphasizes the low 18 and high frequency components of sounds to approximate the frequency response of the 19 human ear. A-weighted sound levels correlate well with our perception of most sounds. 20 Examples of common sound levels include: 21 0 truck passby at 100 feet - 80 dBA; 22 0 lawn mower at 100 feet - 65 dBA; Pinnacle Wind Force, LLC Case No. 09-0360-E-CS Direct Testimony of James D. Barnes Page 5 of 16 ~~ ~~ 1 0 average speech - 60 dBA; 2 0 private and open offices - 40 to 50 dBA; and 3 0 calm, quiet suburban nighttime and daytime periods - 35 to 45 dBA. 4 Q. THE ACOUSTICAL STUDY REFERENCES “LEQ” AND “LDN” SOUND LEVELS. 5 PLEASE DESCRIBE WHAT THE LEQ AND LDN SOUND LEVELS REPRESENT. 6 A. The equivalent sound level (Leq) is the level of steady-state sound that has the same 7 (equivalent) energy as the time-varying sound of interest, taken over a specified time 8 period. Thus, the equivalent sound level is a single-valued level that expresses the time- 9 averaged total energy of the entire ambient sound energy. It includes both the high-level 10 single event sounds (e.g., bird chirps, dog barks, or local car passbys) and the relatively 11 steady background sounds (distant traffic or steady wind in the trees). The day-night 12 sound level (Ldn or DNL) is simply the average equivalent sound for 24 hours after 10 13 dBA has been added to the nighttime sound levels from 10 p.m. to 7 a.m. Adding 10 14 dBA to the nighttime sound levels accounts for people’s expectations that the nighttime 15 should be a quiet period. Both the equivalent sound level (Leq) and the day-night sound 16 level (Ldn) have been selected by the US Environmental Protection Agency (“USEPA”) 17 as the best descriptors to use for the purpose of identifying and evaluating levels of 18 environmental noise. The Siting Rules require that Ldn sound levels be provided for 19 existing ambient conditions and projected Ldn sound levels be submitted for construction 20 and operation phases.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Annual Disclosure Report
    ANNUAL DISCLOSURE REPORT of the LONG ISLAND POWER AUTHORITY (FISCAL YEAR 2020) This Annual Disclosure Report does not constitute an offer to sell or solicitation of an offer to buy any securities. The information set forth herein has been furnished by the Authority and LIPA and includes information obtained from other sources, all of which are believed to be reliable. The information and expressions of opinion contained herein are subject to change without notice and nothing herein shall, under any circumstances, create any implication that there has been no change in the affairs of the Authority, LIPA, PSEG, PSEG Long Island, National Grid or Exelon since the date hereof. Such information and expressions of opinion are made for the purpose of providing information to prospective investors and are not to be used for any other purpose or relied on by any other party. This Annual Disclosure Report contains statements which, to the extent they are not recitations of historical fact, constitute “forward-looking statements.” In this respect, the words “estimate,” “project,” “anticipate,” “expect,” “intend,” “believe” and similar expressions are intended to identify forward-looking statements. A number of important factors affecting the Authority’s and LIPA’s business and financial results could cause actual results to differ materially from those stated in the forward-looking statements. References to website addresses presented herein are for informational purposes only and may be in the form of a hyperlink solely for the reader’s convenience. Unless specified otherwise, such websites and the information or links contained therein are not incorporated into, and are not part of, this Annual Disclosure Report.
    [Show full text]
  • Wind Energy Resource Guide: Common Questions and Concerns
    2009 WIND ENERGY RESOURCE GUIDE: COMMON QUESTIONS AND CONCERNS WIND ENERGY TASK FORCE OF LAKE COUNTY COMMUNITIES Devon Bank in Wheeling (LEED Gold and going Platinum) 12/21/2009 Page intentionally left blank 1 Table of Contents TYPES OF WIND ENERGY SYSTEMS ......................................................................................................... 5 Building Mounted Wind Energy System (BWES) .............................................................................. 5 Small Wind Energy System (SWES) ................................................................................................... 5 Large Wind Energy System (LWES) ................................................................................................... 6 The Horizontal Axis Wind Turbine .................................................................................................... 7 The Vertical Axis Wind Turbine ......................................................................................................... 7 Type of Wind Energy System Support Towers ................................................................................. 8 Monopole Towers ..................................................................................................................... 8 Tilt-Up Towers ........................................................................................................................... 8 Lattice Towers ..........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 2019-2028 Comprehensive Reliability Plan
    2019-2028 Comprehensive Reliability Plan A Report from the New York Independent System Operator Draft Report for April 12, 2019 ESPWG/TPAS Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................................................................ 4 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................................................... 7 RELIABILITY PLANNING PROCESS FINDINGS FOR 2019-2028 ................................................................................................ 8 Finding One – Resource Adequacy .............................................................................................. 8 Finding Two – Transmission Security ........................................................................................... 8 Finding Three – Plan Risk Factors and Highlights of Potential Developments ......................... 8 PEAKER RULE SCENARIO .................................................................................................................................................... 14 Con Edison Assessment ............................................................................................................. 15 Year 2023 ...................................................................................................................................................... 16 Year 2025 .....................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • E,XTENSIONS of REMARKS SENATOR JENNINGS RANDOLPH Our Citizens and the Quality of Our En­ Anticipated, However, and in Recent DISCUSSES INADEQUACY of the Vironment
    September 2, 1970 EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS 30753 E,XTENSIONS OF REMARKS SENATOR JENNINGS RANDOLPH our citizens and the quality of our en­ anticipated, however, and in recent DISCUSSES INADEQUACY OF THE vironment. years, there was a reluctance in many FEDERAL RESEARCH, DEVELOP­ Securing adequate supplies of fuels, cases to develop alternative sources of oil MENT, AND DEMONSTRATION EF­ particularly coal, for the next 5 years is or coal production. The required new FORTS ON METHOD TO CONTROL one of the most pressing problems facing mines were not capitalized and opened AND ABATE POLLUTION RESULT­ many electric utilities. to the extent originally envisioned. This ING FROM FUELS AND ENERGY During the past 18 months fuel stocks is part of the fuels crisis that has PRODUCTION-THE ENVIRON­ have reportedly slipped from sufficient developed. MENT IMPACT OF FUELS AND EN­ coal for at least 90 days' operation to Abundant supplies of coal and other ERGY PRODUCTION ARE UNAC­ quantities sufficient for only about 40 fossil fuels are in the ground; our short­ CEPTABLE days' operation. The causes contributing coming is our capacity to extract these to this serious problem were reported in resources from the earth and convert the April 18 issue of Business Week mag­ them into electricity and deliver the en­ HON. JENNINGS RANDOLP~ azine. They include a willingness of the ergy to the ultimate consumer. OF WEST VIRGINIA Japanese to pay high coal prices, a short­ Accustomed to doubling electric gen­ IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES age of railway hopper cars, wildcat erating capacity every decade, we have Tuesday, September 1, 1970 strikes, and the impact of the Coal Mine lost sight of the fact that today this Health and Safety Act.
    [Show full text]
  • Power Plants and Mercury Pollution Across the Country
    September 2005 Power Plants and Mercury Pollution Across the Country NCPIRG Education Fund Made in the U.S.A. Power Plants and Mercury Pollution Across the Country September 2005 NCPIRG Education Fund Acknowledgements Written by Supryia Ray, Clean Air Advocate with NCPIRG Education Fund. © 2005, NCPIRG Education Fund The author would like to thank Alison Cassady, Research Director at NCPIRG Education Fund, and Emily Figdor, Clean Air Advocate at NCPIRG Education Fund, for their assistance with this report. To obtain a copy of this report, visit our website or contact us at: NCPIRG Education Fund 112 S. Blount St, Ste 102 Raleigh, NC 27601 (919) 833-2070 www.ncpirg.org Made in the U.S.A. 2 Table of Contents Executive Summary...............................................................................................................4 Background: Toxic Mercury Emissions from Power Plants ..................................................... 6 The Bush Administration’s Mercury Regulations ................................................................... 8 Findings: Power Plant Mercury Emissions ........................................................................... 12 Power Plant Mercury Emissions by State........................................................................ 12 Power Plant Mercury Emissions by County and Zip Code ............................................... 12 Power Plant Mercury Emissions by Facility.................................................................... 15 Power Plant Mercury Emissions by Company
    [Show full text]
  • Piscivory and Prey Size Selection in Young- Of-The-Year Bluefish: Predator Preference Or Size-Dependent Capture Success?
    MARINE ECOLOGY PROGRESS SERIES Vol. 114: 59-69,1994 Published November 3 Mar. Ecol. Prog. Ser. 1 Piscivory and prey size selection in young- of-the-year bluefish: predator preference or size-dependent capture success? Francis Juanes*,David 0. Conover Marine Sciences Research Center, State University of New York. Stony Brook. New York 11794-5000, USA ABSTRACT: Young-of-the-year bluefish Pomatomus saltatrix become piscivorous at a very small size/age. When feeding on Atlantic silversides Menidia menidia in the laboratory, bluefish forage in groups and, unlike many other piscivores, tend to attack their prey tail-first. Attack distances, times and velocities as well as attack rates were not size-dependent Handling tlmes and attack success rates, howcver, were strongly determined by both predator and prey slze When given a choice of silverside sizes, all bluefish sizes consumed primarily small prey. These results suggest that bluefish attack all prey sizes upon encounter but capture primarily small prey. Size selectivity may be a passive process mediated by differential size-based capture success KEY WORDS: Piscivory . Prey size selection Foraging theory . Capture success . Bluefish INTRODUCTION prey are preferentially consumed (Brooks & Dodson 1965, Werner & Hall 1974), while others have shown As fish grow they tend to broaden the size range of the reverse (Bence & Murdoch 1986, Walton et al. prey items they ingest, thus increasing the average 1992). Confer & O'Bryan (1989) demonstrated that size size of prey consumed. This increase in prey size has selectivities of planktivorous fish depend on whether been attributed to ontogenetic (and often allometric) feeding is averaged over short or long time periods.
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix H Land Use Analysis of the Hayward Solar Project
    Appendix H Land Use Analysis of the Hayward Solar Project Hayward Solar LLC Docket No. IP-7053/GS-21-113 May 2021 Land Use Analysis of the Hayward Solar Project January 2021 David G. Loomis, Ph.D. Dr. David G. Loomis is About the Professor of Economics at Illinois State University and Author Co-Founder of the Center for Renewable Energy. He has over 10 years of experience in the renewable energy field and has performed economic analyses at the county, region, state and national levels for utility-scale wind and solar generation. He has served as a consultant for Apex Clean Energy, Clean Line Energy Partners, EDF Renewables, E.ON Climate and Renewables, Geronimo Energy, Invenergy, J-Power, the National Renewable Energy Laboratories, Ranger Power, State of Illinois, Tradewind, and others. He has testified on the economic impacts of energy projects before the Illinois Commerce Commission, Missouri Public Service Commission, Illinois Senate Energy and Environment Committee, the Wisconsin Public Service Commission, and numerous county boards. Dr. Loomis is a widely recognized expert and has been quoted in the Wall Street Journal, Forbes Magazine, Associated Press, and Chicago Tribune as well as appearing on CNN. Dr. Loomis has published over 25 peer-reviewed articles in leading energy policy and economics journals. He has raised and managed over $7 million in grants and contracts from government, corporate and foundation sources. He received the 2011 Department of Energy’s Midwestern Regional Wind Advocacy Award and the 2006 Best Wind Working Group Award. Dr. Loomis received his Ph.D. in economics from Temple University in 1995.
    [Show full text]
  • Norwalk Power Economic Impact Analysis City of Norwalk & Manresa Association
    NORWALK POWER ECONOMIC IMPACT ANALYSIS CITY OF NORWALK & MANRESA ASSOCIATION FINDINGS & RECOMMENDATIONS REPORT Photo Credit: Geoffrey Steadman 12/14/18 Table of Contents Introduction...........................................................................1 Summary of Findings................................................................3 Section 1: Context and Reuse Planning....................................7 Section 2: Site Characteristics & History.................................11 Section 3: Remediation Analysis.............................................19 Section 4: Natural Resources..................................................31 Section 5: Economic Development Profile...............................37 Section 6: Community Perspective........................................45 Section 7: Development Constraints......................................53 Section 8: Reuse Options........................................................59 Section 9: Remedial Strategies & Cost Estimate...................77 Section 10: Recommended Redevelopment Concepts.........81 Section 11: Implementation Plan...........................................91 Appendix................................................................................95 Introduction Manresa Island is comprised of two parcels that occupy approximately 144 acres of Norwalk’s shoreline. In 1960, a power plant was commissioned on the southern parcel by Connecticut Light & Power. The plant begun operations as a coal fired plant but was converted to oil in 1972. In 1999, the
    [Show full text]
  • Economic Impact and Land Use Analysis of the Koshkonong Solar Energy Center
    PSC REF#:409384 Public Service Commission of Wisconsin RECEIVED: 04/15/2021 12:35:17 PM Economic Impact and Land Use Analysis of the Koshkonong Solar Energy Center March 2021 Strategic by David G. Loomis Strategic Economic Research, LLC S E R Economic strategiceconomic.com Research, LLC 815-905-2750 About the Author Dr. David G. Loomis Professor of Economics, Illinois State University Co-Founder of the Center for Renewable Energy President of Strategic Economic Research, LLC Dr. David G. Loomis is Professor of Economics Dr. Loomis has published over 25 peer-reviewed at Illinois State University and Co-Founder of the articles in leading energy policy and economics Center for Renewable Energy. He has over 10 years journals. He has raised and managed over $7 of experience in the renewable energy field and has million in grants and contracts from government, performed economic analyses at the county, region, corporate and foundation sources. Dr. Loomis state and national levels for utility-scale wind and received his Ph.D. in economics from Temple solar generation. He has served as a consultant for University in 1995. Apex Clean Energy, Clean Line Energy Partners, EDF Renewables, E.ON Climate and Renewables, Geronimo Energy, Invenergy, J-Power, the National Renewable Energy Laboratories, Ranger Power, State of Illinois, Tradewind, and others. He has testified on the economic impacts of energy projects before the Illinois Commerce Commission, Missouri Public Service Commission, Illinois Senate Energy and Environment Committee, the Wisconsin Public Service Commission, and numerous county boards. Dr. Loomis is a widely recognized expert and has been quoted in the Wall Street Journal, Forbes Magazine, Associated Press, and Chicago Tribune as well as appearing on CNN.
    [Show full text]
  • Owens Creek Exhibit G
    Economic Impact of Owens Creek Solar Project June 2021 Strategic by David G. Loomis Strategic Economic Research, LLC S E R Economic strategiceconomic.com Research , LLC 815-905-2750 About the Author Dr. David G. Loomis Professor of Economics, Illinois State University Strategic Economic Research, LLC Co-Founder of the Center for Renewable Energy President of Strategic Economic Research, LLC Dr. David G. Loomis is Professor of Economics at Illinois Strategic Economic Research, LLC State University and Co-Founder of the Center for (SER) has produced over 120 economic Renewable Energy. He has over 10 years of experience in impact reports in 27 states for renewable the renewable energy field and has performed economic energy projects across the US. SER analyses at the county, region, state and national levels specializes in economic analysis at the for utility-scale wind and solar generation. He has county, regional, state or national levels served as a consultant for Apex Clean Energy, Clean Line to analyze the jobs, income, taxes and Energy Partners, EDF Renewables, E.ON Climate and economic output that will flow from a Renewables, Geronimo Energy, Invenergy, J-Power, the particular industry. National Renewable Energy Laboratories, Ranger Power, State of Illinois, Tradewind, and others. He has testified on the economic impacts of energy projects before the Research Associates Illinois Commerce Commission, Iowa Utilities Board, Missouri Public Service Commission, Illinois Senate Bryan Loomis, MBA Energy and Environment Committee, the Wisconsin Property Tax and Land Use Director Public Service Commission, Kentucky Public Service Commission, Ohio Public Siting Board, and numerous Ethan Loomis, Director of Marketing county boards.
    [Show full text]
  • A World-Class University-Industry Consortium for Wind Energy Research, Education, and Workforce Development Final Technical Report
    A World-Class University-Industry Consortium for Wind Energy Research, Education, and Workforce Development Final Technical Report DOE Award Number: DE-EE0002979 Project Period: January 15, 2010 to August 1, 2012 Principle Investigator: Dr. Mohammad Shahidehpour, Director Galvin Center for Electricity Innovation Email: [email protected] Phone: 312-567-5737 Illinois Institute of Technology 3300 South Federal Street Chicago, IL 60616-3793 Project Team Members (in Alphabetical Order): Acciona Wind Energy USA, Alstom Grid, Dakota Power, Electric Power Research Institute, EnerNex, Innovative Technology Applications Company, Intellergy, Intelligent Power Solutions, Invenergy, Keyworks, McCoy Energy, S&C Electric, SmartSignal (Now GE Intelligent Platforms), Southern Illinois University, Three Point Square, University of Chicago, Wiedman Power System Consulting October 30, 2012 i Acknowledgment This report is based upon the work supported by the U. S. Department of Energy under Award Number DE-EE0002979. On behalf of the Consortium members of this project, I would like to thank the U.S. Department of Energy for making this study possible. The many tasks of this two-year study could not have been completed without the dedicated effort of all Consortium members. We look forward to continuing our technical and educational collaborations, and utilize the expertise developed as part of this study, beyond the completion of the proposed tasks. Mohammad Shahidehpour, Principal Investigator Bodine Chair Professor and Director Robert W. Galvin Center for Electricity Innovation Illinois Institute of Technology Chicago, IL 60616 ii Disclaimer Any findings, opinions, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this report are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Department of Energy.
    [Show full text]
  • The Relationship Between Cooling Water Capacity Utilization, Electric
    New York State Department of Environmental Conservation The Relationship between Cooling Water Capacity Utilization, Electric Generating Capacity Utilization, and Impingement and Entrainment at New York State Steam Electric Generating Facilities Technical Document William C. Nieder, Biologist II (Ecology) Steam Electric Unit Bureau of Habitat Division of Fish, Wildlife, and Marine Resources Albany, NY 12233 July 2010 Citations This report was prepared by: New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Bureau of Habitat Division of Fish, Wildlife, and Marine Resources 625 Broadway Albany, NY 12233 This report is a New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Technical Document and should be cited in the literature in the following manner: Nieder, W.C. 2010. The Relationship between Cooling Water Capacity Utilization, Electric Generating Capacity Utilization, and Impingement and Entrainment at New York State Steam Electric Generating Facilities. New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Technical Document. Albany, NY. July 2010. Page 1 of 27 Abstract Throughout New York State, many industrial facilities operate cooling water intake structures and use large volumes of surface waters for cooling machinery or for condensing steam. The steam electric generating industry uses the largest percentage of this cooling water: up to 17 billion gallons per day. The federal Clean Water Act (CWA) and 6 NYCRR § 704.5 requires that the location, design, construction and capacity of cooling water intake structures reflect the “best technology available” (BTA) to minimize adverse environmental impact (i.e., impingement and entrainment). Understanding the relationship between cooling water use, electric generation and the associated adverse environmental impact is critical to determining how this impact can be minimized by managing flow and generation at a facility.
    [Show full text]