DOCSLIB.ORG

Wind Gauge NEUTRAL

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Wind Gauge NEUTRAL c Nordic Capital Goods 08 June 2004 Sector Update Sector view: Wind Gauge NEUTRAL Growth will come – what about profitability? We have made only minor revisions to our market forecasts – we now expect growth of 2% in 2004 and 31% in 2005 (assuming the extension of the PTC). We remain confident about the long-term growth prospects, with several projects under development in new markets such as Mexico, Taiwan, the Czech Republic, Bulgaria, Hungary and South Korea. The tough competitive landscape is not set to improve – Gamesa and GE VESTAS Wind are moving rapidly into new markets – and it could be further UNDERPERFORM aggravated by a new round of industry consolidation (Bonus and HIGH RISK DKK88 Repower are up for sale). Peter Rothausen +45 32 88 03 20 We expect Vestas’s sales(04) to come in at the low end of the guidance [email protected] range (EUR2.7bn), but see it falling short of its 5% EBITA guidance (Carnegie: 4%). There is downside to our numbers if US sales do not materialise. We keep the UNDERPERFORM rating. There is huge uncertainty about Vestas’s future profitability and short-term earnings capabilities; there is also a high risk relating to the integration of NEG Micon. The premium valuation (19–20% on 2005e earnings) to the Engineering peer group is unjustified. Please see disclosures at the back of this report Carnegie Securities Research Sector Update Wind Gauge Valuation Change (%) in valuation since 21 January 2004 (last wind gauge) Ch. in EV/EBITA (%) Ch. in Adj. P/E (%) 2003 2004e 2005e 2003 2004e 2005e Vestas n.m. 3% 37% n.m. 1% 32% Gamesa *) 39% 35% 20% 30% 26% 18% Nordex n.m. n.m. n.m. n.m. n.m. n.m. Repower *) 187% 126% 87% 106% 47% 17% Ch. in EBITA (%) Ch. in Adj. EPS (%) Price ch. 2003 2004e 2005e 2003 2004e 2005e Vestas n.m. -7% -24% n.m. -16% -36% -6% Gamesa *) -4% 0% 13% 6% 9% 17% 37% Nordex n.m. n.m. n.m. n.m. n.m. n.m. 0% Repower *) -48% -35% -21% -55% -37% -22% -8% Current multiples (x) EV/EBITA(x) Adjusted P/E(x) PEG EPS CAGR 2003 2004e 2005e 2003 2004e 2005e 2003e (2003-05e) Vestas 59.2 13.4 10.9 Neg. 20.5 15.4 n.m. n.m. Gamesa *) 14.6 11.8 10.2 13.8 11.8 11.0 1.12 12% Nordex n.m. n.m. n.m. n.m. n.m. n.m. n.m. n.m. Repower *) 9.9 7.9 5.7 14.5 10.3 7.5 0.37 39% Average (simple) 27.9 11.0 9.0 14.1 14.2 11.3 0.75 26% Relative to Vestas Vestas 1.00 1.00 1.00 n.m. 1.00 1.00 n.m. n.m. Gamesa 0.25 0.88 0.94 n.m. 0.58 0.71 n.m. n.m. Nordex n.m. n.m. n.m. n.m. n.m. n.m. n.m. n.m. Repower 0.17 0.59 0.53 n.m. 0.51 0.49 n.m. n.m. Consensus valuation Vestas 32.8 16.8 10.5 38.3 25.3 13.5 0.56 69% Carnegie relative to consensus Vestas n.m. 0.80 1.04 n.m. 0.81 1.14 n.m. n.m. Nordex n.m. n.m. n.m. n.m. n.m. n.m. n.m. n.m. *) consensus estimates from JCF Quant. Source: Carnegie Research and JCF Quant Stock performance (%) Stock performance (%) Price Curr. 21-Jan -1W -1M -3M -6M -12M YTD Vestas * 87.0 DKK -6% 6% 10% -15% 14% 32% 0% Gamesa 12.9 EUR 37% 5% 12% 14% 56% 102% 48% Nordex 0.95 EUR 0% 10% 13% -18% 19% -12% 42% Repower 18.5 EUR -8% 2% 3% 6% -4% -11% -3% Developers Energiekontor 1.64 EUR -25% 2% 1% -31% -34% -84% -29% P&T Technology 0.30 EUR -33% -3% -33% -45% -12% -96% -30% Plambeck Neue 2.32 EUR 4% 17% 5% -16% -28% -76% 5% Umweltkontor 0.94 EUR 3% 45% 38% -7% -30% -67% 4% Average (simple) -3% 10% 6% -14% -2% -26% 5% DJ Euro Stoxx 250.5 -1% 2% 1% -4% 18% -35% 3% * Correction factor 0.90 Source: Carnegie Research and JCF Quant 08 June 2004 2 Carnegie Securities Research Sector Update Wind Gauge Peer group: Engineering P/E (x) EV/EBIT (x) PEG (03) EPS gr. 2003 2004e 2005e 2006e 2003 2004e 2005e 2006e CAGR 03-05e Assa Abloy 27.913.912.711.440.515.913.111.50.5848% Atlas Copco 15.7 13.6 12.1 11.6 11.3 10.3 8.7 7.9 1.15 14% Gamesa 14.9 12.6 11.6 10.2 11.6 12.4 10.6 8.7 1.13 13% Linde AG 21.6 13.3 11.9 11.0 14.3 12.6 9.6 8.5 0.62 35% Man AG 21.4 15.7 11.8 10.7 8.4 8.3 6.4 5.7 0.62 35% Rolls Royce Group 19.4 17.6 15.3 12.4 9.1 11.0 9.8 8.5 1.24 16% Schneider Electric 20.0 16.0 13.7 13.5 11.5 10.4 9.0 8.5 0.95 21% Siemens 21.8 17.1 14.3 12.7 19.5 12.4 9.5 8.2 0.93 24% SKF 14.4 12.0 10.3 9.8 10.3 8.3 6.9 6.2 0.82 17% ABB n.m. 22.2 13.2 11.8 19.4 11.7 7.9 6.6 n.m. n.m. Ingersoll Rand Co 20.5 15.1 12.7 n.a. 15.6 12.3 10.1 n.a. 0.73 28% Emerson Electric Co 23.5 21.3 18.7 n.a. 16.3 13.1 11.6 n.a. 1.79 13% Sandvik 17.8 14.8 13.6 12.7 15.3 11.4 10.0 8.7 1.25 14% United Technologies 18.6 16.6 14.8 13.5 12.6 10.9 9.5 n.a. n.m. n.m. Peers (median) 20.0 15.4 13.0 11.7 13.4 11.5 9.6 8.5 0.94 19% Peers (simple average) 19.8 15.9 13.3 11.8 15.4 11.5 9.5 8.1 0.98 23% Vestas (DKK87) n.m. 20.5 15.4 11.1 n.m. 14.3 11.5 8.0 n.m. n.m. Vestas Rel (median) n.m. 1.33 1.19 0.95 n.m. 1.24 1.20 0.95 n.m. n.m. Source: JCF Quant and Carnegie Research Vestas sensitivities Carnegie Vestas' Scenarios (changes to base case) Base - case guidance 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) 7) scenario WACC 9.9% 9.9% 9.9% 9.9% 9.9% 9.9% 10.6% 10.6% 9.9% Asset beta 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.40 1.40 1.25 Equity beta 1.39 1.39 1.39 1.39 1.39 1.39 1.56 1.56 1.39 Sales growth 02 12% 12% 12% 12% 12% 12% 12% 12% 12% Sales growth 03 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% 6% Sales growth 04e 14% 14% 14% 14% 14% 15% 14% 14% 14% Sales growth 05e 13% 13% 13% 13% 13% 15% 13% 13% 13% Sales CAGR 06-10e 13% 15% 13% 13% 13% 15% 13% 13% 13% Sales growth TP 3.5% 3.5% 3.5% 3.5% 3.5% 3.5% 3.5% 3.5% 3.5% EBITA margin 02 5.2% 5.4% 5.2% 5.2% 5.2% 5.2% 5.2% 5.2% 5.2% EBITA margin 03 1.4% 1.4% 1.4% 1.4% 1.4% 1.4% 1.4% 1.4% 1.4% EBITA margin 04e 6.5% 7.5% 6.5% 6.5% 6.5% 6.5% 6.5% 6.5% 6.5% EBITA margin 05e 6.9% 10.0% 6.9% 6.9% 6.9% 6.9% 6.9% 6.9% 6.9% EBITA-margin 06-10e 8.6% 10.0% 8.0% 7.5% 8.6% 8.6% 8.6% 8.0% 8.0% EBITA margin TP 8.6% 10.0% 8.0% 7.5% 8.6% 8.6% 8.6% 8.0% 8.0% NWC/Sales 02 42.6% 42.6% 42.6% 42.6% 42.6% 42.6% 42.6% 42.6% 42.6% NWC/Sales 03 35.1% 35.0% 35.1% 35.1% 35.1% 35.1% 35.1% 35.1% 35.1% NWC/Sales 04e 35.3% 35.3% 35.3% 35.3% 35.3% 35.3% 35.3% 35.3% 35.0% NWC/Sales 05e 31.6% 25.0% 31.6% 31.6% 35.0% 31.6% 31.6% 31.6% 35.0% NWC/Sales 06-10e 30.1% 25.0% 30.1% 30.1% 35.0% 30.1% 30.1% 30.1% 35.0% NWC/Sales TP 30.1% 25.0% 30.1% 30.1% 35.0% 30.1% 30.1% 30.1% 35.0% DCF value per share (DKK) 99.6 153 87 77 84 104 86 76 73 Change in DCF value - 54%-13%-23%-16%5%-14%-24%-27% Potential (current price: DKK87) 14% 76% 0% -11% -3% 20% -1% -13% -16% Source: Carnegie Research 08 June 2004 Carnegie Securities Research 3 Sector Update Wind Gauge Investment highlights Vestas (NewCo) Nordex Gamesa Repower Investment Vestas is being squeezed by hot Restructuring case (NOT The most profitable turbine No competitive advantages case & steel prices, tough competition, RATED).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Black Law Windfarm Which Comprises 54 Operational Turbines, Only Two of Which Are Located Within the North Lanarkshire Area
    AGENDA ITEM Ma. ..*.-'k...).. Application No: Proposed bevelopment: 11/00544/CNS Black Law Wind Farm Extension Phase 2 (Erection of 11 Turtdnes 80m to hub and 126.5m to blade tip) and assodated infrastructure. Site Address: Black Law W indfarm Allanton MEQPJ Date Registered: 12th May 201 1 Applicant: Agent: Scottish Power Renewables NIA Cathcart Business Park Spean Street Glasgow (344 4BE Appllcatlon Level: Contrary to Development Plan: Other Application Level No Ward: Repremntatlone: 01 2 Fortissat 334 letters of representation received. Charles Cefferty, Thomas Cochrane, James Robe ttson , Recommendation: Object for the Following Reaeone:- 1. The proposed development is contrary to policies DSP4, NEE 38, EDI 3A of the North Lanarkshire Local Plan, supplementary planning guidance SPG 12 "Assessing Wind Turbine Developments" and Scottish Planning Policy In that the submitted ES, Addendum and additional supporting information have not sufficiently addressed the potential cumulative noise impact of the proposed windfarm. In addition, given the proximity of the turbines to the settlements; adverse visual impact on selected recepton and furVler erosion of recreational space there are concerns that this extension (in addition to the already approved schemes) is such that the amenity enjoyed by local residents will be reduced to an unacceptable level. Margaret Mitcheli MSP, Neii Findlay MSP, Siobhan McMahon, Parneta Nash MP, 15 Outwith the piEtn 8FBa Prcrdumd bv Ptrnn In$ and DevalWm &fit N Emironmrntil Srrvi No rM LJnrkthlrr C Fleming How*
    [Show full text]
  • Positive Planning for Onshore Wind
    POSITIVE PLANNING FOR ONSHORE WIND EXPANDING ONSHORE WIND ENERGY CAPACITY WHILE CONSERVING NATURE A REPORT BY THE INSTITUTE FOR EUROPEAN ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY COMMISSIONED BY THE ROYAL SOCIETY FOR THE PROTECTION OF BIRDS MARCH, 2009 Authors Catherine Bowyer David Baldock Graham Tucker Carolina Valsecchi Megan Lewis Peter Hjerp Sonja Gantioler Acknowledgements Our thanks to all those whose contributions made this report possible. Too mamy to name individually, this includes representatives from government departments, industry and power companies, RSPB and Birdlife International and experts from across Germany, Spain and Denmark who gave up their time to discuss these issues with IEEP’s research team. Without their detailed knowledge it would have been impossible to review this issue in a robust and independent way. We would also like to specifically thank Ruth Davis and her colleagues at RSPB for their input and support. This report can be downloaded for free from www.ieep.eu and www.rspb.org.uk. For more information about this research please contact Catherine Bowyer at IEEP or Ruth Davis at RSPB. 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY There is a pressing need to decarbonise the UK energy supply system. This will require more focused attention upon efficiency measures as well as a step change in the delivery of new renewable energy supplies. The timeline for the delivery of new capacity is short, driven by targets for emission reductions and renewable energy deployment set at the national and EU levels. Wind turbines, as a market ready technology suited to the UK’s bountiful natural wind resource, will need to be constructed rapidly both on and offshore to deliver new sustainable, renewable sources of energy.
    [Show full text]
  • Renewable Energy
    Renewable energy Planning and Building Standards Services South Lanarkshire Local development plan supplementary guidance10 Community and Enterprise Resources Page 1 Supplementary Guidance 10: Renewable Energy Contents 1 Introduction 2 2 Policy Context 4 3 Wind energy context 8 4 Spatial framework for wind energy 13 5 Renewable energy developments 19 6 Development management considerations 26 7 Assessment checklist 58 8 Monitoring and review 66 Appendix 1 - Further sources of information 67 Appendix 2 - Glossary of terms 68 Appendix 3 - Community benefit contributions 71 Appendix 4 - Settlements in South Lanarkshire 73 Appendix 5 - Contacts 74 Chapter 1 Supplementary Guidance 10: Renewable Energy Page 2 Introduction 1.0 Introduction 1.1 This Supplementary Guidance was approved for consultation by South Lanarkshire Council at its meeting on 8th September 2015 and placed on public consultation for six weeks until 30 October 2015. Eighty five representations were received from eight contributing consultees. Background 1.2 This Supplementary Guidance (SG) has been prepared under the provisions of Section 22 of the Planning etc. (Scotland) Act 2006 and Regulation 27 of the Town and Country Planning (Development Planning) (Scotland) Regulations 2006. It forms part of the Development Plan for South Lanarkshire which consists of the Glasgow and the Clyde Valley Strategic Development Plan 2012 (SDP), the Minerals Local Development Plan 2012 (MLDP) and the South Lanarkshire Local Development Plan 2015 (SLLDP). 1.3 This SG supports Policy 19 Renewable Energy in the SLLDP by providing more detailed policy and guidance for developers on the requirements for wind energy and other renewable energy development. Assessments 1.4 A series of assessments informed the preparation of the SG.
    [Show full text]
  • Landscape Capacity Study for Wind Turbine Development in Glasgow and the Clyde Valley
    Landscape Capacity Study for Wind Turbine Development in Glasgow and the Clyde Valley Overview Report Prepared by LUC for the Glasgow and the Clyde Valley Strategic Development Plan Authority September 2014 Project Title: Landscape Capacity Study for Wind Turbine Development in Glasgow and the Clyde Valley Client: Glasgow and the Clyde Valley Strategic Development Plan Authority In association with: Scottish Natural Heritage East Dunbartonshire Council East Renfrewshire Council Glasgow City Council Inverclyde Council North Lanarkshire Council Renfrewshire Council South Lanarkshire Council West Dunbartonshire Council Version Date Version Details Prepared by Checked by Approved by Principal 0.1 15 November Internal draft LUC PDM NJ 2013 0.2 22 November Interim draft for LUC PDM NJ 2013 discussion 1.0 25 March Draft LUC NJ NJ 2014 2.0 6 June 2014 Final LUC PDM NJ 3.0 11 September Revised LUC PDM NJ 2014 H:\1 Projects\58\5867 LIVE GCV wind farm study\B Project Working\REPORT\Overview report\GCV Report v3 20140911.docx Landscape Capacity Study for Wind Turbine Development in Glasgow and the Clyde Valley Overview Report Prepared by LUC for the Glasgow and the Clyde Valley Strategic Development Plan Authority September 2014 Planning & EIA LUC GLASGOW Offices also in: Land Use Consultants Ltd Registered in England Design 37 Otago Street London Registered number: 2549296 Landscape Planning Glasgow G12 8JJ Bristol Registered Office: Landscape Management Tel: 0141 334 9595 Edinburgh 43 Chalton Street Ecology Fax: 0141 334 7789 London NW1
    [Show full text]
  • A Two-Stage Multi-Criteria Decision for Distributed Wind and Solar Integration Jin, Tongdan ; Chen, Yi
    A two-stage multi-criteria decision for distributed wind and solar integration Jin, Tongdan ; Chen, Yi Publication date: 2015 Document Version Peer reviewed version Link to publication in ResearchOnline Citation for published version (Harvard): Jin, T & Chen, Y 2015, 'A two-stage multi-criteria decision for distributed wind and solar integration'. General rights Copyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights. Take down policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright please view our takedown policy at https://edshare.gcu.ac.uk/id/eprint/5179 for details of how to contact us. Download date: 29. Apr. 2020 See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: http://www.researchgate.net/publication/281716832 A Two-Stage Multi-Criteria Decision for Distributed Wind and Solar Integration CONFERENCE PAPER · JULY 2015 DOWNLOAD 1 1 AUTHOR: Yi Chen Glasgow Caledonian University 39 PUBLICATIONS 107 CITATIONS SEE PROFILE Available from: Yi Chen Retrieved on: 14 September 2015 A Two-Stage Multi-Criteria Decision for Distributed Wind and Solar Integration TongdanJin, Ph.D. Ingram School of Engineering, Texas State University Yi Chen, Ph.D. Glasgow Caledonian University, UK 1 Outline l Toward Distributed Generation l Characterizing Wind and Solar Generation l Multi-Criteria Planning Model l Numerical Experiment l Conclusion Renewable Portfolio Standards in 2040 3 US=25% EU=40% China=20-25% wind wind wind Nuclear coal Gas 3 The Rise of Distributed Power Service Distributed Power Rise of Distributed Central Power Period Age Power 1880 1910 2000 Wind and Solar Farms Onsite Generation Wind power in Scotland Wind power is Scotland's fastest growing renewable energy technology, with 2574 MW of installed capacity as of April 2011.
    [Show full text]
  • 6 Landscape and Visual
    Heathland Wind Farm Chapter 6 EIA Report Landscape and Visual 6 LANDSCAPE AND VISUAL 6.1 INTRODUCTION This Chapter of the Environmental Impact Assessment Report (EIA Report) evaluates the effects of the Development on the landscape and visual resource. The Development (up to 14 turbines at up to 180m to tip) represents a revised proposal to that of the consented Heathland Wind Farm (17 turbines at 132m to tip). A comparison between the effects identified for the consented scheme and Development assessed here is provided in the Planning Statement. This assessment was undertaken by LUC on behalf of Arcus Consultancy Services Limited (Arcus). This Chapter of the EIA Report is supported by the following Technical Appendix documents provided in Volume 3 Technical Appendices: Appendix A6.1 – Landscape and Visual Assessment Methodology; Appendix A6.2 – Visualisation Methodology; Appendix A6.3 – Residential Visual Amenity Assessment; and Appendix A6.4 – Aviation Lighting Assessment. This chapter includes the following elements: Legislation, Policy and Guidance; Consultation; Assessment Methodology and Significance Criteria; Landscape Baseline Conditions; Visual Baseline Conditions; Assessment of Potential Effects; Mitigation and Residual Effects; Cumulative Effect Assessment; Summary of Effects; Statement of Significance; and Glossary. Volume 2 of the EIA Report contains the EIA Report Figures. This chapter is supported by Volume 2b LVIA Figures and Volume 2c LVIA Visualisations. 6.2 LEGISLATION, POLICY AND GUIDANCE The following
    [Show full text]
  • Triton Knoll Offshore Wind Farm Limited Triton Knoll Electrical System …………………………………………………
    Triton Knoll Offshore Wind Farm Limited Triton Knoll Electrical System ………………………………………………… Appendix 6: Credentials Outline - Triton Knoll Team Date: 30th November 2015 Appendix 6 of the Applicant’s response to Deadline 3 Triton Knoll Offshore Wind Farm Limited Triton Knoll Electrical System Triton Knoll Offshore Wind Farm Limited Triton Knoll Offshore Wind Farm Limited 4th Floor One Kingdom Street Triton Knoll Electrical System Paddington Central London W2 6BD Appendix 6: Credentials Outline - Triton Knoll T: 0845 026 0562 Team Email: [email protected] www.rweinnogy.com/tritonknoll Appendix 6 of the Applicant’s response to Deadline 3 Date: 30th November 2015 Drafted By: Burgess Salmon Approved By: Kim Gauld-Clark Date of Approval: 30/11/15 Revision: 1.0 Triton Knoll Offshore Wind Farm Limited Copyright © 2015 RWE Innogy UK Ltd All pre-existing rights reserved 2 Triton Knoll Offshore Wind Farm Limited Triton Knoll Electrical System TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. CREDENTIALS OUTLINE - TRITON KNOLL TEAM 4 Sub-Heading 4 TABLE OF TABLES Table 1: Triton Knoll Team 4 3 Triton Knoll Offshore Wind Farm Limited Triton Knoll Electrical System Name Kristen Read Position Solicitor Company Burges Salmon Qualifications BSc. Biochemistry, LLB, Dip. Legal Practice Relevant Experience Has particular expertise advising on major planning applications, appeals and public inquiries in both Scotland and England. Recent experience includes: advising on the s36 application for the Dorenell wind farm, including drafting and advising on conditions agreements; advising on the Tom Nan Clach wind farm and appeal, including the conjoined inquiry with the s36 Glenkirk wind farm and advising on the Harbour Revision Order inquiry for the Rosyth International Container Terminal.
    [Show full text]
  • Between Barriers and Energy Visions
    COUNTRY SPECIAL s member of the European Union, Great Brit- ain is liable to provide at least 15 % of the Between country’s primary energy demand by renewa- ble energies until the year 2020. Scotland, Wales, England and Northern Ireland in 2007 Amet 1.95 % of that volume. But while there is still a long barriers way for the sector, action must also be taken by the po- litical leadership. Experts at the Department for Busi- ness, Enterprise & Regulatory Reform (BERR) believe that without a change of the political course, the share and energy of renewables until 2020 will not be able to reach above 5 %. Most of that energy today is contributed by bio- mass (81.8 %) and wind generation (8.8 %) meaning that these energy forms dominate the market for re- visions newable energies in Great Britain and receive most of the political backing. But there are also doubts arising on how the targets of the EU commission of 10 % of renewables in the en- ergy consumption until 2010 could be met. In a report In the production of renewable tech­ of May 2008, the British consultancy Cambridge Econo- metrics estimates that 6 % would at best be realistic. nologies, Great Britain has missed the Britain’s conservative Tory party remains committed to renewable energies and smiles as the Labour Party boat – but as a sales market, the United hits a record poll low. On occasion of this year’s region- Kingdom is increasingly attractive. al election campaign, conservative leader David Cam- eron chose the slogan “Vote Blue, Go Green”.
    [Show full text]
  • Experience of the Use of Smarter Connection Arrangements for Distributed Wind Generation Facilities
    Experience of the use of smarter connection arrangements for distributed wind generation facilities By Karim L. Anaya and Michael G. Pollitt1 Electricity Policy Research Group University of Cambridge December 2012 Abstract The aim of this study is to explore different practices for accelerating the integration of generating facilities to the electricity network using smart solutions. Case studies from the United Kingdom, Ireland and Northern Ireland and the Unites States were selected. The paper assesses and compares the different Principles of Access that have been implemented in these countries, such as Last-in First- out (LIFO), Pro Rata and Market-based. The social optimality of these approaches is also discussed. The paper also evaluates how the risk (regarding curtailment and investment) is allocated between parties (distributor network operators, generators and customers). Even though the cases are diverse, important findings and lessons have been identified which may assist UK Power Networks to address the issue of increasing the connection of distributed generation while managing efficiently and economically energy exports from generators in the context of the Flexible Plug and Play Low Carbon Networks trial. 1 The authors wish to acknowledge the financial support of UK Power Networks via the Low Carbon Networks Fund’s Flexible Plug and Play Project. The views expressed herein are those of the authors and do not reflect the views of the EPRG or any other organisation that is also involved in the Flexible Plug and Play Low Carbon Networks (FPP) project. We are very grateful to National Grid, Southern California Edison and Smarter Grid Solutions for the provision of relevant information and helpful clarifications on the revision and analysis of the different case studies.
    [Show full text]
  • Dawn Bodill Ecotricity (Next Generation) Ltd Russell Street Unicorn House Stroud Gloucestershire GL5 3AX Our Ref: APP/F2605/A/12
    Dawn Bodill Our Ref: APP/F2605/A/12/2185306 Ecotricity (Next Generation) Ltd Your ref: Russell Street Unicorn House Stroud Gloucestershire 25 September 2014 GL5 3AX Dear Madam TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING ACT 1990 (SECTION 78) APPEAL BY ECOTRICTY (NEXT GENERATION) LTD LAND AT WOOD FARM, CHURCH LANE, SHIPDHAM IP25 7JZ APPLICATION REF: 3PL/2011/0854/F 1. I am directed by the Secretary of State to say that consideration has been given to the report of the Inspector, JP Watson BSc MICE FIHT MCMI, who held an inquiry into your client’s appeal under Section 78 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 against the decision of Breckland District Council (“the Council”) to refuse an application for planning permission for two wind turbines with a maximum overall height of up to 100 metres, together with access tracks, crane pad areas, electricity substation and temporary construction compound, dated 29 July 2011, in accordance with application ref: 3PL/2011/0854/F. 2. The appeal was recovered for the Secretary of State’s determination on 11 October 2013, in pursuance of section 79 of, and paragraph 3 of Schedule 6 to, the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 on the grounds that it involves a renewable energy development. Inspector’s recommendation 3. The Inspector recommended that the appeal be dismissed and planning permission refused. For the reasons given below, the Secretary of State agrees with the Inspector’s conclusions and recommendation. A copy of the Inspector’s report (IR) is enclosed. All references to paragraph numbers, unless otherwise stated, are to that report.
    [Show full text]
  • Wind Turbines Factsheet
    Small Wind Turbines Factsheet Content Page Page Introduction 2 Microrenewable technologies 3 Measuring your wind speed 4 Why you should measure your wind speed 5 Case Study: Installing FuturEnergy turbine 8 Wind turbine planning permissions 11 Getting planning permission 12 Wind turbine building course 14 DIY wind turbines 15 Small wind turbines impact on birds 16 Wind turbines: Noise and vibration 19 Selling your electricity to the grid 20 ROCs 23 Future information and contact details 24 1 Introduction Green energy factsheets Here we have heaped together a ton of information on saving energy in your home, generating green energy, and a whole load of supporting facts on stuff like the grants available to help you get started. 2 Micro renewable technologies So you've done everything you can to save energy? What next? In this booklet we take a look at wind turbines, explaining how they work and what factors you should consider before getting started on generating your own green energy. Wind turbines These are either mounted on a pole in your garden, or in some cases fixed to your roof. A lot of different makes are now on the market, but which is best for you? And what about planning permission and grants? In this booklet you can... • Read about the options available for measuring your wind speed prior to investing in a turbine. • Find out why we recommend you should measure your wind speed with an anemometer. • Read a case study on installing the FuturEnergy turbine. • Find out more information regarding planning permission for wind turbines.
    [Show full text]
  • HEATHLAND WIND FARM Volume 4 – Non-Technical Summary January 2021
    HEATHLAND WIND FARM Volume 4 – Non-Technical Summary January 2021 Prepared By: Arcus Consultancy Services 7th Floor 144 West George Street Glasgow G2 2HG www.arcusconsulting.co.uk Registered in England & Wales No. 5644976 Non-Technical Summary Heathland Wind Farm TABLE OF CONTENTS PREFACE ................................................................................................................................I 1 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................ 1 2 SITE SELECTION & DESIGN EVOLUTION .................................................................. 3 3 DEVELOPMENT DESCRIPTION .................................................................................. 5 4 ENERGY AND PLANNING POLICY .............................................................................. 8 5 EIA PROCESS & METHODOLOGY ............................................................................... 9 6 LANDSCAPE AND VISUAL AMENITY ........................................................................ 10 7 ARCHAEOLOGY AND CULTURAL HERITAGE ............................................................ 12 8 ECOLOGY ................................................................................................................. 12 9 ORNITHOLOGY ........................................................................................................ 13 10 HYDROLOGY AND HYDROGEOLOGY ....................................................................... 14 11 GEOLOGY AND PEAT ...............................................................................................
    [Show full text]