DOCSLIB.ORG

Green Power Marketing in the United States: a Status Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

September 2004 • NREL/TP-620-36823 Green Power Marketing in the United States: A Status Report Seventh Edition Lori Bird and Blair Swezey National Renewable Energy Laboratory 1617 Cole Boulevard, Golden, Colorado 80401-3393 303-275-3000 • www.nrel.gov Operated for the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy by Midwest Research Institute • Battelle Contract No. DE-AC36-99-GO10337 September 2004 • NREL/TP-620-36823 Green Power Marketing in the United States: A Status Report Seventh Edition Lori Bird and Blair Swezey Prepared under Task No. ASG4.1003 National Renewable Energy Laboratory 1617 Cole Boulevard, Golden, Colorado 80401-3393 303-275-3000 • www.nrel.gov Operated for the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy by Midwest Research Institute • Battelle Contract No. DE-AC36-99-GO10337 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. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States government or any agency thereof. Available electronically at http://www.osti.gov/bridge Available for a processing fee to U.S. Department of Energy and its contractors, in paper, from: U.S. Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information P.O. Box 62 Oak Ridge, TN 37831-0062 phone: 865.576.8401 fax: 865.576.5728 email: mailto:[email protected] Available for sale to the public, in paper, from: U.S. Department of Commerce National Technical Information Service 5285 Port Royal Road Springfield, VA 22161 phone: 800.553.6847 fax: 703.605.6900 email: [email protected] online ordering: http://www.ntis.gov/ordering.htm Printed on paper containing at least 50% wastepaper, including 20% postconsumer waste Table of Contents Overview of Green Power Marketing in the United States .............................................................1 Introduction.............................................................................................................................1 Utility Green Pricing Programs ..............................................................................................2 Competitive Green Power Markets.........................................................................................6 Renewable Energy Certificate Markets ................................................................................11 Summary and Observations ..................................................................................................13 Utility Green Pricing Programs .....................................................................................................16 Competitive Green Power and Renewable Energy Certificate Marketing ....................................39 Retail Green Power and REC Marketers ..............................................................................39 Utility/Marketer Partnerships................................................................................................46 Selected Wholesale Marketers..............................................................................................47 Certificate Brokers................................................................................................................49 Selected Green Power Customers..................................................................................................50 Businesses.............................................................................................................................50 Universities ...........................................................................................................................53 Local Government ................................................................................................................56 State Government..................................................................................................................58 Federal Government..............................................................................................................59 References......................................................................................................................................62 Appendix A....................................................................................................................................63 List of Tables Table 1: Price Premiums Charged for Utility Green Pricing Products ...........................................3 Table 2: Estimated Cumulative Number of Customers Participating in Utility Green Pricing Programs...............................................................................................................4 Table 3: Customer Participation Rates in Utility Green Pricing Programs by Year.......................5 Table 4: Annual Sales of Green Energy through Utility Green Pricing Programs .........................5 Table 5: New Renewable Energy Capacity Supplying Green Pricing Programs (2003)................6 Table 6: Cumulative Number of Customers Purchasing Green-e Certified Power........................8 Table 7: Annual Sales of Green-e Certified Green Energy in Competitive Markets .....................9 Table 8: New Renewables Capacity Supplying Competitive Markets and Renewable Energy Certificates (2003)..............................................................................................10 Table 9: Number of Customers and Sales of Green-e Certifited REC Products ..........................13 Table 10: Estimated Green Power Customers and Sales by Market Segment (2003)..................13 Table 11: New Renewables Capacity Supplying Green Power Markets (2003)..........................14 Table A-1: Utilities Offering Green Pricing Programs.................................................................63 Table A-2: Utility Green Pricing Programs by State....................................................................64 Table A-3: Retail Green Power Product Offerings in Competitive Electricity Markets ..............73 Table A-4: Renewable Energy Certificate Product Offerings ......................................................78 List of Figures Figure 1: U.S. Map of Green Pricing Activities............................................................................2 Figure 2: States with Competitive Green Power Offerings...........................................................7 iii Acknowledgments This work was funded by the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE). The authors wish to thank Linda Silverman, David McAndrew, and the DOE renewable energy technology programs for their support of this work. The authors also wish to thank Ed Holt of Ed Holt and Associates Inc., Gabe Petlin of the Center for Resource Solutions, John Halley and Byron Woodman of Community Energy Inc., and Jørn Aabakken of NREL for their thoughtful review of the document; as well as Michelle Kubik of NREL for her editorial support. Finally, the authors wish to thank the many industry contacts that provided much of the information summarized in this report. Additional information on green power market trends and activities can be found on the U.S. DOE’s Green Power Network Web site (http://www.eere.energy.gov/greenpower/). iv An Overview of Green Power Marketing in the United States Introduction Voluntary consumer decisions to purchase electricity supplied by renewable energy sources represent a powerful market support mechanism for renewable energy development. Beginning in the early 1990s, a small number of U.S. utilities began offering “green power” options to their customers. Since then, these products have become more prevalent, both from utilities and in states that have introduced competition into their retail electricity markets. Today, more than 50% of all U.S. consumers have an option to purchase some type of green power product from a retail electricity provider. Currently, about 15% of utilities offer green power programs to customers in 34 states. These programs allow customers to purchase some portion of their power supply—almost always at a higher price—as renewable energy or to contribute funds for the utility to invest in renewable energy development. The term “green pricing” is typically used to refer to these utility programs offered in noncompetitive electricity markets. In some competitive (or restructured) retail electricity markets, electricity customers can purchase electricity generated from renewable sources by switching to an alternative electricity supplier that offers green power. To date, nearly a dozen states that have opened their markets to competition have experienced some degree of green power marketing activity. Finally, any consumer can purchase green power through renewable energy certificates (RECs), which represent the unique or “green” attributes of
Recommended publications
  • Energy Information Administration (EIA) 2014 and 2015 Q1 EIA-923 Monthly Time Series File

    Energy Information Administration (EIA) 2014 and 2015 Q1 EIA-923 Monthly Time Series File

    SPREADSHEET PREPARED BY WINDACTION.ORG Based on U.S. Department of Energy - Energy Information Administration (EIA) 2014 and 2015 Q1 EIA-923 Monthly Time Series File Q1'2015 Q1'2014 State MW CF CF Arizona 227 15.8% 21.0% California 5,182 13.2% 19.8% Colorado 2,299 36.4% 40.9% Hawaii 171 21.0% 18.3% Iowa 4,977 40.8% 44.4% Idaho 532 28.3% 42.0% Illinois 3,524 38.0% 42.3% Indiana 1,537 32.6% 29.8% Kansas 2,898 41.0% 46.5% Massachusetts 29 41.7% 52.4% Maryland 120 38.6% 37.6% Maine 401 40.1% 36.3% Michigan 1,374 37.9% 36.7% Minnesota 2,440 42.4% 45.5% Missouri 454 29.3% 35.5% Montana 605 46.4% 43.5% North Dakota 1,767 42.8% 49.8% Nebraska 518 49.4% 53.2% New Hampshire 147 36.7% 34.6% New Mexico 773 23.1% 40.8% Nevada 152 22.1% 22.0% New York 1,712 33.5% 32.8% Ohio 403 37.6% 41.7% Oklahoma 3,158 36.2% 45.1% Oregon 3,044 15.3% 23.7% Pennsylvania 1,278 39.2% 40.0% South Dakota 779 47.4% 50.4% Tennessee 29 22.2% 26.4% Texas 12,308 27.5% 37.7% Utah 306 16.5% 24.2% Vermont 109 39.1% 33.1% Washington 2,724 20.6% 29.5% Wisconsin 608 33.4% 38.7% West Virginia 583 37.8% 38.0% Wyoming 1,340 39.3% 52.2% Total 58,507 31.6% 37.7% SPREADSHEET PREPARED BY WINDACTION.ORG Based on U.S.
  • Planning for Wind Energy

    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.
  • Appendix D Avian Fatality Studies in the Western Ecosystems Technology, Inc

    Appendix D Avian Fatality Studies in the Western Ecosystems Technology, Inc

    Appendix D Avian Fatality Studies in the Western Ecosystems Technology, Inc. (WEST) Database This page intentionally left blank. Avian Fatality Studies in the Western Ecosystems Technology, Inc (West) Database Appendix D APPENDIX D. AVIAN FATALITY STUDIES IN THE WESTERN ECOSYSTEMS TECHNOLOGY, INC. (WEST) DATABASE Alite, CA (09-10) Chatfield et al. 2010 Alta Wind I, CA (11-12) Chatfield et al. 2012 Alta Wind I-V, CA (13-14) Chatfield et al. 2014 Alta Wind II-V, CA (11-12) Chatfield et al. 2012 Alta VIII, CA (12-13) Chatfield and Bay 2014 Barton I & II, IA (10-11) Derby et al. 2011a Barton Chapel, TX (09-10) WEST 2011 Beech Ridge, WV (12) Tidhar et al. 2013 Beech Ridge, WV (13) Young et al. 2014a Big Blue, MN (13) Fagen Engineering 2014 Big Blue, MN (14) Fagen Engineering 2015 Big Horn, WA (06-07) Kronner et al. 2008 Big Smile, OK (12-13) Derby et al. 2013b Biglow Canyon, OR (Phase I; 08) Jeffrey et al. 2009a Biglow Canyon, OR (Phase I; 09) Enk et al. 2010 Biglow Canyon, OR (Phase II; 09-10) Enk et al. 2011a Biglow Canyon, OR (Phase II; 10-11) Enk et al. 2012b Biglow Canyon, OR (Phase III; 10-11) Enk et al. 2012a Blue Sky Green Field, WI (08; 09) Gruver et al. 2009 Buffalo Gap I, TX (06) Tierney 2007 Buffalo Gap II, TX (07-08) Tierney 2009 Buffalo Mountain, TN (00-03) Nicholson et al. 2005 Buffalo Mountain, TN (05) Fiedler et al. 2007 Buffalo Ridge, MN (Phase I; 96) Johnson et al.
  • Stephen John Stadler

    Stephen John Stadler

    STEPHEN JOHN STADLER Professor Fall 2018 Address: Department of Geography Oklahoma State University Stillwater, Oklahoma 74078-4073 Phones: Office (405) 744-9172 Home (405) 624-2176 Fax: Office (405) 744-5620 Electronic mail: [email protected] EDUCATION Date Institution Degree 1979 Indiana State University Ph.D (Physical Geography) 1976 Miami University M.A. (Geography) 1973 Miami University B.S. Ed., Cum Laude, (Social Studies) PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE 2017-Date National Geographic Society Geography Steward of Oklahoma 2015-Date State Geographer Emeritus of Oklahoma (gubernatorial designation) 1993-Date Professor, Department of Geography Oklahoma State University 2013-Date President, Oklahoma Alliance for Geography Education 2012-Date Member, Smart Energy Source team 2011-Date Member, National Energy Solutions Institute committee, Oklahoma State University 2009-Date Geography Program Advisory Board, University of Central Oklahoma 2008-2008 Elected Representative, Oklahoma State University Faculty Council 2008-Date Wind Turbine Program advisory board, Oklahoma State University—Oklahoma City 2008-Date Geography Program advisory board, University of Central Oklahoma 2004-2015 The State Geographer of Oklahoma (gubernatorial appointment) 2004-Date Member, State GIS Council 2004-Date Board Member, Oklahoma Alliance for Geographic Education 1988-Date Steering Committee, Oklahoma Mesonetwork Project 1991-1994 Faculty Supervisor, OSU Center for Applications of Remote Sensing 1985-1993 Associate Professor, Department of Geography, Oklahoma State University. 1980-1985 Assistant Professor, Department of Geography, Oklahoma State University. 1979-1980 Temporary Assistant Professor, Department of Geography, Michigan State University. Spring 1979 Instructor, Indiana State University Short Course in Remote Sensing. Spring 1978 Lecturer, Department of Earth and Space Sciences, Indiana University - Purdue University at Fort Wayne.
  • GWEC Global Wind Report 2016

    GWEC Global Wind Report 2016

    GLOBAL WIND REPORT ANNUAL MARKET UPDATE 2016 Opening up new markets for business: Mongolia 8TH NATIONAL RENEWABLE ENERGY FORUM Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia 5 May 2017 Mongolia’s wind has the technical potential of 1TW. GWEC is paving the road to that potential. www.gwec.net TABLE OF CONTENTS Preface . 4 Foreword from our sponsor . 6 Corporate Sourcing of Renewables – A New Market Driver for Wind . 8 Global Status of Wind Power in 2016 . 12 Market Forecast 2017-2021 . 20 Argentina . 26 Australia . 28 Brazil . 30 Canada . 32 Chile . 34 PR China . 36 Denmark . 40 The European Union . 42 Finland . 44 Germany . 46 India . 48 Japan . 50 Mexico . 52 Netherlands . 54 Norway . 56 Offshore Wind . 58 South Africa . 66 Turkey . 68 United States . 70 Vietnam . 72 About GWEC . 74 GWEC – Global Wind 2016 Report 3 PREFACE verall, the wind industry fi nished up 2016 in good installations of 8,203 MW were about the same as 2015’s, and shape, with solid prospects for 2017 and beyond. The despite the political goings-on, seem to be on track for a strong O economics of the industry continue to improve, with 2017, with 18+ GW either under construction or in advanced record low prices for the winning tender in Morocco last year stages of development. So far so good – fi ngers crossed! of about $30/MWh, and very competitive prices in auctions Europe’s numbers were surprisingly strong, actually sur- around the world, while more and more companies’ P&Ls have passing 2015 for Europe as a whole on the strength of Turkey’s come out of the red and into the black.
  • Summary Report of Wind Farm Data September 2008 Yih-Huei Wan

    Summary Report of Wind Farm Data September 2008 Yih-Huei Wan

    Technical Report Summary Report of Wind NREL/TP-500-44348 Farm Data May 2009 September 2008 Yih-huei Wan Technical Report Summary Report of Wind NREL/TP-500-44348 Farm Data May 2009 September 2008 Yih-huei Wan Prepared under Task No. WER8.5001 National Renewable Energy Laboratory 1617 Cole Boulevard, Golden, Colorado 80401-3393 303-275-3000 • www.nrel.gov NREL is a national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy Operated by the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC Contract No. DE-AC36-08-GO28308 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. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States government or any agency thereof. Available electronically at http://www.osti.gov/bridge Available for a processing fee to U.S. Department of Energy and its contractors, in paper, from: U.S. Department of Energy Office of Scientific and Technical Information P.O.
  • Perceived Risk and Response to the Wind Turbine Ice Throw

    Perceived Risk and Response to the Wind Turbine Ice Throw

    PERCEIVED RISK AND RESPONSE TO THE WIND TURBINE ICE THROW HAZARD: COMPARING COMMUNITY STAKEHOLDERS AND OPERATIONS AND MAINTENANCE PERSONNEL IN TWO REGIONS OF TEXAS by Greg Klaus, B.S., M.A.G. A dissertation submitted to the Graduate Council of Texas State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy with a major in Environmental Geography May 2017 Committee Members: Denise Blanchard-Boehm, Chair Richard Dixon Richard Earl Todd Moore COPYRIGHT by Greg Klaus 2017 FAIR USE AND AUTHOR’S PERMISSION STATEMENT Fair Use This work is protected by the Copyright Laws of the United States (Public Law 94-553, section 107). Consistent with fair use as defined in the Copyright Laws, brief quotations from this material are allowed with proper acknowledgment. Use of this material for financial gain without the author’s express written permission is not allowed. Duplication Permission As the copyright holder of this work I, Greg Klaus, authorize duplication of this work, in whole or in part, for educational or scholarly purposes only. DEDICATION The author would like to dedicate this dissertation to the men and women who work in the wind energy industry who at times put themselves in harm’s way in order to provide for their families and also supply this great nation with a clean, renewable source of electricity. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The author would like to thank his committee chair Dr. Denise Blanchard for all of her support and guidance throughout the dissertation process; as well as thank committee members Dr. Richard Dixon, Dr. Richard Earl, and Dr.
  • A WEC Energy Forum Gubernatorial Candidates Speak to Costs, Climate Change, and Vermont’S Energy Future

    A WEC Energy Forum Gubernatorial Candidates Speak to Costs, Climate Change, and Vermont’S Energy Future

    www.washingtonelectric.coop Vol. 71, No. 4 The newsletter of Washington Electric Cooperative, Inc., East Montpelier, Vermont. June 2010 A WEC Energy Forum Gubernatorial Candidates Speak to Costs, Climate Change, and Vermont’s Energy Future hey came to discuss energy, the Republican candidate had come, “One of the most important but I think people learned more Tissues facing our state today about these Democratic candidates and in the coming years,” as WEC by being in the room with them and President Barry Bernstein framed it. hearing them answer the questions Line Foreman Tim Pudvah at work in the forest canopy off the County Road in Washington Electric Co-op’s Board and display their personalities. I East Montpelier. The veteran WEC lineman is shown replacing transmission- of Directors had extended think it went really well.” line insulators, part of a project to replace 495 of them this summer. an invitation to all of It was nearly 7 the major-party p.m. – almost candidates for a half-hour governor of after the Vermont in scheduled An Open House 2010 to par- 6:30 start ticipate in an – when In Plainfield energy forum the five at the Co-op’s candidates WEC Member’s House Was Too ‘Open’ May 12 Annual arranged Membership themselves on Before Home Performance Work Meeting, and the Matt Dunne (center), shown with the dais in the five Democratic WEC President Barry Bernstein Montpelier Elks udy Cyprian opened up her idea. In 2009 she contracted with contend- (right), was one of five Democratic Club dining Plainfield home to strangers Montpelier Construction L.L.C., a ers accepted.
  • Ride Like the Wind: Selected Issues in Multi-Party Wind Lease Negotiations

    Ride Like the Wind: Selected Issues in Multi-Party Wind Lease Negotiations

    Texas A&M Journal of Property Law Volume 1 Number 3 Wind Farming: Obstacles to Planning Article 5 and Development 2014 Ride Like the Wind: Selected Issues in Multi-Party Wind Lease Negotiations Rod E. Wetsel University of Texas School of Law Steven K. DeWolf University of Texas School of Law Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.tamu.edu/journal-of-property-law Part of the Energy and Utilities Law Commons Recommended Citation Rod E. Wetsel & Steven K. DeWolf, Ride Like the Wind: Selected Issues in Multi-Party Wind Lease Negotiations, 1 Tex. A&M J. Real Prop. L. 447 (2013). Available at: https://doi.org/10.37419/JPL.V1.I3.5 This Symposia Article is brought to you for free and open access by Texas A&M Law Scholarship. It has been accepted for inclusion in Texas A&M Journal of Property Law by an authorized editor of Texas A&M Law Scholarship. For more information, please contact [email protected]. \\jciprod01\productn\T\TWR\1-3\TWR305.txt unknown Seq: 1 5-MAY-14 16:43 RIDE LIKE THE WIND:† SELECTED ISSUES IN MULTI-PARTY WIND LEASE NEGOTIATIONS By Rod E. Wetsel and Steven K. DeWolf ‡ I. INTRODUCTION .......................................... 448 R II. HISTORY OF WIND DEVELOPMENT IN TEXAS: THE WIND BOOM ............................................ 448 R III. THE TEXAS WIND LEASE ............................... 452 R A. Origins and Evolution .............................. 452 R B. Major Elements ..................................... 453 R IV. MULTI-PARTY WIND LEASE NEGOTIATIONS ............ 453 R A. The Town Hall Meeting Concept .................... 454 R B. Some Wind Groups and their Creators: Signing Parties .............................................
  • Ethical Wind Power and Wildlife

    Ethical Wind Power and Wildlife

    BREATH OF LIFE: ETHICAL WIND POWER AND WILDLIFE Reed Elizabeth Loder∗ TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction................................................................................................................507 I. Wind Power in Vermont’s Green Mountain National Forest.............................509 II. Federal Public Lands: What Public, What Uses? ..............................................512 III. Benefits, Costs, and Precautions .......................................................................517 IV. Implementing Precautions: Alternatives, On-Site Mitigation, and Off-Site Mitigation..............................................................................................................518 A. Alternatives.......................................................................................518 B. On-Site Mitigation...........................................................................519 C. Off-Site Mitigation..........................................................................520 V. Bears Themselves................................................................................................522 VI. Relationships, Wildlife, and Community .........................................................525 VII. Distributive Justice Issues ................................................................................526 VIII. Virtue and Bears..............................................................................................529 Conclusion .................................................................................................................530
  • Statewide Air Emissions Calculations from Wind and Other Renewables

    Statewide Air Emissions Calculations from Wind and Other Renewables

    ESL-TR-20-07-01 STATEWIDE AIR EMISSIONS CALCULATIONS FROM WIND AND OTHER RENEWABLES VOLUME I A Report to the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality For the Period January 2019 – December 2019 Juan-Carlos Baltazar, Ph.D., P.E.; Jeff Haberl, Ph.D.; Bahman Yazdani, P.E.; David Claridge, Ph.D., P.E.; Sungkyun Jung; Farshad Kheiri; Chul Kim July 2020 Page 1 ENERGY SYSTEMS LABORATORY July 15, 2020 Mr. Robert Gifford Air Quality Division Texas Commission on Environmental Quality Austin, TX 78711-3087 Dear Mr. Gifford, The Energy Systems Laboratory (ESL) at the Texas Engineering Experiment Station of The Texas A&M University System is pleased to provide its annual report, “Statewide Emissions Calculations From Wind and Other Renewables,” as required by the 79th Legislature. This work has been performed through a contract with the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ). In this work, the ESL is required to obtain input from public/private stakeholders, and develop and use a methodology to annually report the energy savings from wind and other renewables. This report summarizes the work performed by the ESL on this project from January 2019 to December 2019. Please contact me at (979) 845-9213 should you have questions concerning this report or the work presently being done to quantify emissions reductions from renewable energy measures as a result of the TERP implementation. Sincerely, David E. Claridge, Ph.D., P.E. Director Enclosure . Page 2 Disclaimer This report is provided by the Texas Engineering Experiment Station (TEES) as required under Section 388.003 (e) of the Texas Health and Safety Code and is distributed for purposes of public information.
  • Usa Wind Energy Resources

    Usa Wind Energy Resources

    USA WIND ENERGY RESOURCES © M. Ragheb 2/7/2021 “An acre of windy prairie could produce between $4,000 and $10,000 worth of electricity per year.” Dennis Hayes INTRODUCTION Wind power accounted for 6 percent of the USA’s total electricity generation capacity, compared with 19 percent for Nuclear Power generation. A record 13.2 GWs of rated wind capacity were installed in 2012 including 5.5 GWs in December 2012, the most ever for a single month. The total rated wind capacity stands at about 60 GWs. Utilities are buying wind power because they want to, not because they have to, to benefit from the Production Tax Credit PTC incentive. The credit has been extended for a year to cover wind farms that start construction in 2013. Previously it only covered projects that started working by the expiration date. Asset financing for USA wind farms was $4.3 billion in the second-half compared with $9.6 billion in the first six months of 2012. Component makers are the General Electric Company (GE), Siemens AG, Vestas AS, Gamesa Corp Tecnologica SA and Clipper Windpower Ltd., which is owned by Platinum Equity LLC. Equipment prices for wind have dropped by more than 21 percent since 2010, and the performance of turbines has risen. This has resulted in a 21 percent decrease in the overall cost of electricity from wind for a typical USA project since 2010. From 2006 to 2012 USA domestic manufacturing facilities for wind turbine components has grown 12 times to more than 400 facilities in 43 states.