DOCSLIB.ORG

Construction

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

WIND SYSTEMS MAGAZINE GIVING WIND DIRECTION O&M: O&M: OPERATIONS O&M: Operations The Shift Toward Optimization • Predictive maintenance methodology streamlines operations • Safety considerations for the offshore wind site » Siemens adds two » Report: Global policy vessels to offshore woes dampen wind service fleet supply chain page 08 page 43 FEBRUARY 2015 FEBRUARY 2015 Moog has developed direct replacement pitch control slip rings for today’s wind turbines. The slip ring provides Fiber Brush Advantages: reliable transmission of power and data signals from the nacelle to the control system for the rotary blades. • High reliability The Moog slip ring operates maintenance free for over 100 million revolutions. The slip ring uses fiber brush • Maintenance free Moog hasMoog developed has developed direct direct replacement replacement pitch pitch controlcontrol slipslip rings rings for for today’s today’s wind wind turbines. turbines. The slip The ring slip provides ring provides Fiber Brush Advantages: technology to achieve long life without lubrication over a wide range of temperatures, humidity and rotational • Fiber Minimal Brush wear Advantages: debris reliablereliable transmission transmission of power of power and and data data signals signals from from thethe nacelle nacelle to to the the control control system system for the for rotary the rotaryblades. blades. • High reliability speeds. In addition, the fiber brush has the capability to handle high power while at the same time transferring data • generated High reliability signals.The Moog slip ring operates maintenance free for over 100 million revolutions. The slip ring uses fiber brush • Maintenance free The Moog slip ring operates maintenance free for over 100 million revolutions. The slip ring uses fiber brush • • No Maintenance lubrication required free Moogtechnology has developeddeveloped to achieve direct direct long replacement replacement life without pitch pitchlubrication control control slipover slip rings a ringswide for forrangetoday’s today’s of wind temperatures, wind turbines. turbines. The humidity slipThe ringslip and providesring rotational provides • Fiber Minimal Brush wear Advantages: debris technology to achieve long life without lubrication over a wide range of temperatures, humidity and rotationalFiber Brush• Advantages: Minimal wear debris Moog’sreliablereliablespeeds. proventransmissiontransmission In addition, fiber of brushof the power power fiber technology and andbrush data data has signals has signalsthe become capability from from the synonymousthe tonacelle handlenacelle to high theto with the controlpower controlhigh whilesystem system at for the the forsame rotary the time rotary blades. transferring blades. data generated• Wide operating speeds. In addition, the fiber brush has the capability to handle high power while at the same time transferring• data High • Highreliability reliability performancesignals. slip rings around the world. With over 50 years of experience and • No lubricationtemperaturegenerated required range signals.moreThe Moog than 10,000slip ring slip operates ring designs, maintenance our engineers free for work over together 100 million with revolutions.your The slip ring uses fiber brush • Maintenance• Maintenance free free The Moog slip ring operates maintenance free for over 100 million revolutions. The slip ring uses fiber brush • Wide• • Loweroperating No lubricationlife-cycle cost required designtechnologytechnologyMoog’s team proven toto to achieve achievefind fiber a solution long brushlong life lifetechnology thatwithout without is right lubrication has lubrication for become you. over synonymous over a widea wide range with range highof temperatures,of temperatures, humidity humidity and rotationaland rotational • Minimal wear debris Moog has developed direct replacement pitch control slip rings for today’s wind turbines. The slip ring provides • Fiber Minimal Brush wear Advantages: debris Moog’sspeeds.speeds.performance proven InIn addition,addition, fiber slip brush the ringsthe fiber fiber aroundtechnology brush brush the has has world. the has the capability become Withcapability over to synonymous 50 handleto yearshandle high of highexperience power with power whilehigh and while at the at samethe same time timetransferring transferring data data temperature• Wide range operating reliablemore transmission than 10,000 of powerslip ring and designs, data oursignals engineers from the work nacelle together to the with control your system for the rotary blades. generatedgenerated performance signals.signals. slip ringsLooking around for the more? world. With over 50 years of experience and • HighLower reliability life-cycle cost design team to find a solution that is right for you. • No• lubrication No lubricationtemperature required required range moreThe Moog than 10,000slip ring slip Scanoperates ring to designs, viewmaintenance specifications our engineers free for for overwork direct 100 together million with revolutions. your The slip ring uses fiber brush • Maintenance free Moog’s proven fiber brush technology has become synonymous with high • Wide• Wide operating• Loweroperating life-cycle cost designtechnology Moog’s team provento to achieve find fiber replacementa solution longbrush life technology thatwithout pitch is right lubrication hascontrol for become you. slip over synonymous rings. a wide range with highof temperatures, humidity and rotational • Minimal wear debris performance slip ringsLooking around for the more? world. With over 50 years of experience and temperature range speeds.performance In addition, slip the ringsScan fiber around to brush view the has specifications world. the capability With over for to 50 directhandle years high of experience power while and at the same time transferring data temperature range more than 10,00010,000 slip slip ring ring designs, designs, our our engineers engineers work work together together with with your your generated signals. Lookingreplacement for more? pitch control slip rings. • Lower• Lower life-cycle life-cycle cost cost design team toto findfind a a solution solution that that is isright right for for you. you. • No lubrication required Scan to view specifications for direct Motion Technology | Fiber Optics | Electronic Systems Moog’s proven fiber brush technology has become synonymous+1-540-552-3011 with high 800-336-2112 (USA) [email protected] • Wide operating replacementLookingLooking for for more? more?pitch control slip rings. performance slip rings around the world. With over 50 years ofMotion experience Technology and | Fiber Optics | Electronic Systems temperature range ScanScan to to view view specifications specifications for for direct direct more than 10,000 slipreplacement ring designs, pitch our engineerscontrol slip work rings. together+1-540-552-3011 with your 800-336-2112 (USA) [email protected] • Lower life-cycle cost design team to find areplacement solution that ispitch right control for you. slip rings. www.moog.com/components Motion Technology | Fiber Optics | Electronic Systems +1-540-552-3011 800-336-2112 (USA) [email protected] www.moog.com/componentsLooking for more? Motion Technology | Fiber Optics | Electronic Systems #4808Scan to view specifications for direct+1-540-552-3011 Motion Technology 800-336-2112 | Fiber (USA) Optics | [email protected] Systems replacement pitch control slip rings. +1-540-552-3011 800-336-2112 (USA) [email protected] www.moog.com/components www.moog.com/components www.moog.com/components Motion Technology | Fiber Optics | Electronic Systems #4808 +1-540-552-3011 800-336-2112 (USA) [email protected] www.moog.com/components inFOCUS: O&M: OPERATIONS FEBRUARY 2015 18 The shift toward optimization By Barry Logue,Vaisala, Inc. ALSO IN INFOCUS 22 Predictive maintenance methodology 26 Profile: Renew Energy streamlines operations Maintenance 30 Conversation: 28 Safety considerations for the offshore Dallas Dixon, wind site Sales & Marketing Manager, Sage Oil Vac 2 FEBRUARY | 2015 SECTIONS Volume 07 Issue 02 08 DIRECTION Policy • Advocacy • Business • Finance • Legal • Environment • International Siemens adds two 10 Apex sells 300 MW 12 Northern Power vessels to offshore Balko Wind Project to Systems plans initial service fleet D.E. Shaw public offering TRANSMISSION CONSTRUCTION 34 ABB sets world record in 37 MidAmerican Energy completes HVDC Light voltage level construction on three Iowa wind farms 39 Samsung and Pattern Energy inaugurate Ontario project MANUFACTURING INNOVATION 40 PGE’s ‘smart’ gas plant helps balance wind, solar 44 SKF debuts custom machined seals for OEM or existing wind turbine applications CROSSWINDS DOE seeks to improve wind 42 Brooklyn home to Big Apple’s first commercial forecasting in complex terrain 48 wind turbine Wind Systems (ISSN 2327-2422) is published monthly by Media Solutions, Inc., 266D Yeager Parkway Pelham, AL 35124. Phone (205) 380-1573 Fax (205) 380-1580 International subscription rates: $72.00 per year. Periodicals Postage Paid at Pelham AL and at additional mailing offices. Printed in the USA. POSTMASTER: Send address changes to Wind Systems magazine, P.O. Box 1210 Pelham AL 35124. Publications mail agreement No. 41395015 return undeliverable Canadian addresses to P.O. Box 503 RPO West Beaver Creek Richmond Hill, ON L4B4R6. Copyright 2006 by Media Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved. 4 FEBRUARY | 2015 SNAP-ON INDUSTRIAL HAS ALL YOUR WIND ENERGY TORQUE NEEDS COVERED From U.S. made click-type and electronic torque wrenches, to high-output electric torque
Recommended publications
  • WASHINGTON – the Energy Department Released Two New

    WASHINGTON – the Energy Department Released Two New

    Wind Scalability and Performance in the real World: A performance analysis of recently deployed US Wind Farms G. Bothun and B. Bekker, Dept. of Physics, University of Oregon. Abstract We are engaged in researching the real world performance, costs, and supply chain issues regarding the construction of wind turbines in the United States for the purpose of quantitatively determining various aspects of scalability in the wind industry as they relate to the continued build out of wind energy in the US. Our analysis sample consists of ~600 individual wind farms that have come into operation as of January 2011. Individual unit turbine capacity in these farms ranges from 1-5 to 3 MW, although the bulk of the installations are ≤ 2.0 MW. Starting in late 2012, however, and continuing with current projects, turbines of size 2.5 – 3.0 MW are being installed. As of July 1, 2014 the Horse Hollow development in Texas has the largest individual wind farm nameplate capacity of 736 MW and 10 other locations have aggregate capacity that exceeds 500 MW. Hence, large scale wind farm operations are now here. Based on our analysis our overall findings are the following: 1) at the end of 2014, cumulative wind nameplate capacity in the US will be at ~ 70 GW or ~ 5% of total US electrical infrastructure 2) over the period of 2006—2012, cumulative wind capacity growth was sustained at a rate of 23.7% per annum, 3) production in 2013 was dramatically lower than in 2012 and was just starting to pick up in 2014 due to lingering uncertainty about the future of the
  • 2020 ANNUAL REPORT Table of CONTENTS EDITOR’S COMMENTS

    2020 ANNUAL REPORT Table of CONTENTS EDITOR’S COMMENTS

    2020 ANNUAL REPORT table of CONTENTS EDITOR’S COMMENTS ...................................................................................................... 3 ENERGY SITES OF NORTH DAKOTA ................................................................................... 4 A VIEW FROM ABOVE ....................................................................................................... 4 NORTH DAKOTA GENERATION .......................................................................................... 5 GENERATION ................................................................................................................... 6 Mining ..................................................................................................................... 6 Reclamation ............................................................................................................. 7 Coal-Based ................................................................................................................. 8 Peaking Plants ............................................................................................................. 9 Wind .........................................................................................................................10 Hydroelectric ..............................................................................................................14 Geothermal ................................................................................................................15 Solar .........................................................................................................................16
  • Maine Wind Energy Development Assessment

    Maine Wind Energy Development Assessment

    MAINE WIND ENERGY DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT Report & Recommendations – 2012 Prepared by Governor’s Office of Energy Independence and Security March 2012 Acknowledgements The Office of Energy Independence and Security would like to thank all the contributing state agencies and their staff members who provided us with assistance and information, especially Mark Margerum at the Maine Department of Environmental Protection and Marcia Spencer-Famous and Samantha Horn-Olsen at the Land Use Regulation Commission. Jeff Marks, Deputy Director of the Governor’s Office of Energy Independence and Security (OEIS) served as the primary author and manager of the Maine Wind Energy Development Assessment. Special thanks to Hugh Coxe at the Land Use Regulation Commission for coordination of the Cumulative Visual Impact (CVI) study group and preparation of the CVI report. Coastal Enterprises, Inc. (CEI), Perkins Point Energy Consulting and Synapse Energy Economics, Inc. prepared the economic and energy information and data needed to permit the OEIS to formulate substantive recommendations based on the Maine Wind Assessment 2012, A Report (January 31, 2012). We appreciate the expertise and professional work performed by Stephen Cole (CEI), Stephen Ward (Perkins Point) and Robert Fagan (Synapse.). Michael Barden with the Governor’s Office of Energy Independence and Security assisted with the editing. Jon Doucette, Woodard & Curran designed the cover. We appreciate the candid advice, guidance and information provided by the organizations and individuals consulted by OEIS and those interviewed for the 2012 wind assessment and cited in Attachment 1 of the accompanying Maine Wind Assessment 2012, A Report. Kenneth C. Fletcher Director Governor’s Office of Energy Independence and Security 2 Table of contents ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ...........................................................................................................................
  • Wind-Power Politics - Nytimes.Com

    Wind-Power Politics - Nytimes.Com

    Wind-Power Politics - NYTimes.com http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/14/magazine/14wind-t.html?pagewante... September 14, 2008 Wind-Power Politics By MARK SVENVOLD “The moment I read that paper,” the wind entrepreneur Peter Mandelstam recalled, “I knew in my gut where my next wind project would be.” I was having lunch with Mandelstam last fall to discuss offshore wind in general and how he and his tiny company, Bluewater Wind, came to focus on Delaware as a likely place for a nascent and beleaguered offshore wind industry to establish itself. Mandelstam had been running late all morning. I knew this because I received a half-dozen messages on my cellphone from members of his staff, who relayed his oncoming approach like air-traffic controllers guiding a wayward trans-Atlantic flight into Kennedy. This was the Bluewater touch — crisp, informative, ever-helpful, a supercharged, Eagle Scout attentiveness that was part corporate style, part calculated public-relations approach. It would pay off tremendously in his company’s barnstorming campaign of Delaware town meetings and radio appearances to capture what he had reason to believe would be the first offshore-wind project in the country’s history. These features were, unsurprisingly, manifestations of Mandelstam himself, who arrived in a suit and tie, a wry smile, his wiry hair parted in the middle and tamped down like someone who had made a smooth transition from a Don Martin cartoon. Mandelstam, a 47-year-old native New Yorker who is capable of quoting Central European poets and oddball meteorological factoids with ease, had long committed himself — and the tiny company he formed in 1999 — to building utility-scale wind-power plants offshore, a decision that, to many wind-industry observers, seemed to fly in the face of common sense.
  • Structure, Equipment and Systems for Offshore Wind Farms on the OCS

    Structure, Equipment and Systems for Offshore Wind Farms on the OCS

    Structure, Equipment and Systems for Offshore Wind Farms on the OCS Part 2 of 2 Parts - Commentary pal Author, Houston, Texas Houston, Texas pal Author, Project No. 633, Contract M09PC00015 Prepared for: Minerals Management Service Department of the Interior Dr. Malcolm Sharples, Princi This draft report has not been reviewed by the Minerals Management Service, nor has it been approved for publication. Approval, when given, does not signify that the contents necessarily reflect the views and policies of the Service, nor does mention of trade names or commercial products constitute endorsement or recommendation for use. Offshore : Risk & Technology Consulting Inc. December 2009 MINERALS MANAGEMENT SERVICE CONTRACT Structure, Equipment and Systems for Offshore Wind on the OCS - Commentary 2 MMS Order No. M09PC00015 Structure, Equipment and Systems: Commentary Front Page Acknowledgement– Kuhn M. (2001), Dynamics and design optimisation of OWECS, Institute for Wind Energy, Delft Univ. of Technology TABLE OF CONTENTS Authors’ Note, Disclaimer and Invitation:.......................................................................... 5 1.0 OVERVIEW ........................................................................................................... 6 MMS and Alternative Energy Regulation .................................................................... 10 1.1 Existing Standards and Guidance Overview..................................................... 13 1.2 Country Requirements. ....................................................................................
  • Bogle Wind Turbine Project Draft

    Bogle Wind Turbine Project Draft

    Draft Environmental Impact Report Bogle Wind Turbine Project State Clearinghouse No.: 2015102072 Yolo County Department of Community Services Technical Assistance Provided by: Aspen Environmental Group March 2017 DRAFT Environmental Impact Report Bogle Wind Turbine Project State Clearinghouse No. 2015102072 Prepared for: Yolo County Department of Community Services Technical Assistance Provided by: March 2017 Bogle Wind Turbine Project CONTENTS Contents Executive Summary .................................................................................................................................................................................................. ES-1 ES.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................................................................................. ES-1 ES.2 Project Overview ..................................................................................................................................................................................... ES-1 ES.3 Summary of Public Involvement ................................................................................................................................................. ES-2 ES.4 Areas of Controversy ............................................................................................................................................................................ ES-2 ES.5 Issues to Be Resolved ..........................................................................................................................................................................
  • Attitudes Toward Offshore Wind Power in the Midcoast Region of Maine James Acheson University of Maine, Acheson@Maine.Edu

    Attitudes Toward Offshore Wind Power in the Midcoast Region of Maine James Acheson University of Maine, [email protected]

    Maine Policy Review Volume 21 | Issue 2 2012 Attitudes toward Offshore Wind Power in the Midcoast Region of Maine James Acheson University of Maine, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.library.umaine.edu/mpr Part of the Energy Policy Commons, Environmental Policy Commons, and the Oil, Gas, and Energy Commons Recommended Citation Acheson, James. "Attitudes toward Offshore Wind Power in the Midcoast Region of Maine." Maine Policy Review 21.2 (2012) : 42 -55, https://digitalcommons.library.umaine.edu/mpr/vol21/iss2/7. This Article is brought to you for free and open access by DigitalCommons@UMaine. MAINE OFFSHORE WIND POWER Attitudes toward Given the likelihood of the development of offshore wind farms in Maine and the increasingly politicized Offshore nature of discussions about wind power in general, Wind Power there is a need for more systematic information on Mainers’ opinions about offshore wind power. In this in the article, James Acheson provides information on the Midcoast range of public opinion about offshore wind power based on a survey of people in Midcoast Maine. He Region also assesses the accuracy of some public concerns and of Maine discusses the broader policy issues raised about offshore wind development. by James M. Acheson 42 · MAINE POLICY REVIEW · Summer/Fall 2012 View current & previous issues of MPR at: digitalcommons.library.umaine.edu/mpr/ MAINE OFFSHORE WIND POWER …public support eveloping alternative energy sources is not just a and a reduction in the balance Dtechnical or scientific problem. Sociocultural and of payments problem (Curtis or opposition to political factors are also important components.
  • Maine Wind Energy Development Assessment, 2012 Governor’S Office Ofne E Rgy Independence and Security

    Maine Wind Energy Development Assessment, 2012 Governor’S Office Ofne E Rgy Independence and Security

    Maine State Library Maine State Documents Governor's Energy Office Documents Governor 3-2012 Maine Wind Energy Development Assessment, 2012 Governor’s Office ofne E rgy Independence and Security Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalmaine.com/energy_docs Recommended Citation Governor’s Office of Energy Independence and Security, "Maine Wind Energy Development Assessment, 2012" (2012). Governor's Energy Officeo D cuments. Paper 13. http://digitalmaine.com/energy_docs/13 This Text is brought to you for free and open access by the Governor at Maine State Documents. It has been accepted for inclusion in Governor's Energy Office Documents by an authorized administrator of Maine State Documents. For more information, please contact [email protected]. MAINE WIND ENERGY DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT Report & Recommendations – 2012 Prepared by Governor’s Office of Energy Independence and Security March 2012 Acknowledgements The Office of Energy Independence and Security would like to thank all the contributing state agencies and their staff members who provided us with assistance and information, especially Mark Margerum at the Maine Department of Environmental Protection and Marcia Spencer-Famous and Samantha Horn-Olsen at the Land Use Regulation Commission. Jeff Marks, Deputy Director of the Governor’s Office of Energy Independence and Security (OEIS) served as the primary author and manager of the Maine Wind Energy Development Assessment. Special thanks to Hugh Coxe at the Land Use Regulation Commission for coordination of the Cumulative Visual Impact (CVI) study group and preparation of the CVI report. Coastal Enterprises, Inc. (CEI), Perkins Point Energy Consulting and Synapse Energy Economics, Inc. prepared the economic and energy information and data needed to permit the OEIS to formulate substantive recommendations based on the Maine Wind Assessment 2012, A Report (January 31, 2012).
  • Current Real World Wind Report

    Current Real World Wind Report

    Wind Scalability and Performance in the real World: A performance analysis of recently deployed US Wind Farms G. Bothun and B. Bekker, Dept. of Physics, University of Oregon. Abstract Real world performance, costs, and supply chain issues determine the rate at which wind turbines can be constructed, deployed and installed. To study this issue for the case of the US, a sample of ~600 individual US wind farms that have come into operation as of January 2010 has been assembled and analyzed using standard statistical procedures. Results for wind farm turbine composition and overall wind energy installation rates are: a) individual unit turbine capacity ranges from 1-5 to 3 MW, although the bulk of the installations are ≤ 2.0 MW; b) starting in late 2012, turbines of size 2.5 – 3.0 MW are being installed but there are logistical transport problems that come into play on this scale; c) as of July 1, 2014 the Horse Hollow development in Texas has the largest individual wind farm nameplate capacity of 736 MW and 10 other locations have aggregate capacity that exceed 500 MW; d) over the period of 2006—2012, cumulative wind capacity growth was sustained at a rate of 23.7% per annum and by January 1 2013, total installed US wind energy was 60,000 MW; e) if this growth rate could be sustained over a ten year period beginning at the end of 2012, then the US would achieve a total nameplate capacity of ~ 475 GW for wind, which would be approximately 40% of the entire US electrical generating nameplate capacity; f) due to considerable uncertainty over the future of the federal production tax credit (PTC), continued growth in 2013 did not occur and this flattening has now placed US wind energy growth on a significantly more subdued trajectory; g) a small extension of the PTC in 2014 allowed for an additional 4800 MW to come on line bringing the total US installed capacity to 66,000 MW as of January 1, 2015.
  • Economic Impact of the Pleasant Ridge Wind Energy Project

    Economic Impact of the Pleasant Ridge Wind Energy Project

    PLEASANT RIDGE EXHIBIT 115 Economic Impact of the Pleasant Ridge Wind Energy Project October 2013 David G. Loomis, Ph.D. 2705 Kolby Court Bloomington, IL 61704 309-242-4690 Dr. David G. Loomis is About the Professor of Economics at Illinois State University and Director Author of the Center for Renewable Energy. He has over 10 years experience in the wind industry and has performed economic analyses at the county, region, state and national levels for both wind farms and the wind turbine supply chain. He has served as a consultant for the State of Illinois, Illinois Finance Authority, Illinois State Energy Office, Invenergy, Clean Line Energy Partners, Illinois Chamber of Commerce, Geronimo Energy and others. He has testified on the economic impacts of wind energy before the Illinois Senate Energy and Environment Committee and the LaSalle and Livingston County Boards in Illinois. 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 15 peer-reviewed articles in leading energy policy and economics journals. He has raised and managed over $5 million in grant 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. I. Executive Summary of Findings .................................................................. 1 Table of II. U.S. Wind Industry Growth and Economic Development....................... 2 Contents a.
  • Article 10 Application Alle-Catt Wind Farm Case 17-F-0282 Allegany, Cattaraugus, and Wyoming Counties, New York

    Article 10 Application Alle-Catt Wind Farm Case 17-F-0282 Allegany, Cattaraugus, and Wyoming Counties, New York

    Article 10 Application Alle-Catt Wind Farm Case 17-F-0282 Allegany, Cattaraugus, and Wyoming Counties, New York 1001.1 Exhibit 1 General Requirements Alle-Catt Wind Farm Article 10 Application Case 17-F-0282 Exhibit 1 Exhibit 1 General Requirements This exhibit presents general information required by PSL 1001.1(f) 1.f Required Contents 1.f.1 Applicant Name Alle-Catt Wind Energy LLC c/o Invenergy LLC Address One South Wacker Drive, Suite 1800, Chicago, Illinois 60606 Telephone Number (312) 224-1400 1.f.2 Project Website www.alle-catt.com 1.f.3 Public Contact Name Eric Miller, Vice President Address 120 N. Lee Street, Falls Church, VA 22046 Telephone Number (301) 610-6413 Emails [email protected] [email protected] 1.f.4 Principal Officer Name Bryan Schueler, Executive Vice President Address One South Wacker Drive, Suite 1800, Chicago, Illinois 60606 Telephone Number (312) 224-1400 Email [email protected] 1.f.5 Agent Name John Dax, The Dax Law Firm, P.C. Address 54 State Street, Suite 805, Albany, New York 12207 Telephone Number (518) 432-1002 Email [email protected] 1-1 Alle-Catt Wind Farm Article 10 Application Case 17-F-0282 Exhibit 1 1.f.6 Explanation of Applicant’s Business Alle-Catt Wind Energy LLC (ACWE) is a Delaware limited liability company formed April 12, 2016 for developing, owning, and operating a wind powered wholesale generating facility in Allegany, Cattaraugus, and Wyoming Counties, New York. Alle-Catt Wind Energy LLC is an affiliate of Invenergy Renewables LLC (Invenergy). Invenergy is a power producer developing utility-scale renewable energy projects including in the New York State energy market.
  • Before the Public Service Commission of the State of Delaware, the Delaware Energy Office, the Office of Management and Budget, and the Controller General

    Before the Public Service Commission of the State of Delaware, the Delaware Energy Office, the Office of Management and Budget, and the Controller General

    BEFORE THE PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE, THE DELAWARE ENERGY OFFICE, THE OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET, AND THE CONTROLLER GENERAL IN THE MATTER OF INTEGRATED RESOURCE ) PLANNING FOR THE PROVISION OF ) STANDARD OFFER SUPPLY SERVICE BY ) DELMARVA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY UNDER ) 26 DEL. C. § 1007(c) & (d): REVIEW ) PSC DOCKET NO. 06-241 AND APPROVAL OF THE REQUEST FOR ) PROPOSALS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF NEW ) GENERATION RESOURCES UNDER 26 DEL. C. ) § 1007(d) (OPENED JULY 25, 2006) ) FINDINGS, OPINION AND ORDER NO. 7328 BEFORE: ARNETTA McRAE, Chair JAYMES B. LESTER, Commissioner JOANN T. CONAWAY, Commissioner J. DALLAS WINSLOW, Commissioner JEFFREY J. CLARK, Commissioner and John A. Hughes, Secretary Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control, Delaware Energy Office Jennifer W. Davis, Director Office of Management and Budget Russell T. Larson, Controller General Office of the Controller General APPEARANCES: For the Staff of the Delaware Public Service Commission: JAMES McC. GEDDES, ESQUIRE BROOKE E. LEACH, ESQUIRE Ashby & Geddes Rate Counsel BRUCE H. BURCAT, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR MICHAEL SHEEHY, DEPUTY DIRECTOR KAREN J. NICKERSON, SECRETARY For the Division of the Public Advocate: G. ARTHUR PADMORE, ESQUIRE JOHN CITROLO JUSTIN MURPHY, ESQUIRE For Delmarva Power & Light Company: TODD L. GOODMAN, ESQUIRE, Associate General Counsel GARY STOCKBRIDGE, President MARK FINFROCK, Director of Risk Management WILLIAM MOORE, JR. GARY COHEN MARIA SCHELLER For NRG Energy, Inc.: DAVID L. DAVIS Vice President of Development NRG Energy, Inc. For Bluewater Wind LLC: THOMAS P. MCGONIGLE, ESQ. PETER MANDELSTAM, President For Conectiv Energy Inc.: I. DAVID ROSENSTEIN, ESQUIRE THE STATUTORY BACKGROUND. The EURCSA 1.