DOCSLIB.ORG

Existing Wind Projects

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Existing Wind Projects EXISTING WIND PROJECTS Existing ProjectOwner Date Online MW Power Purchaser/ Turbine / State or Area User Units 1. KotzebueKotzebue Electric Assoc. 1997 0.15 Kotzebue Electric Assoc. Atlantic Orient (3) Alaska (KEA) Alaska St. Paul Island Tanadgusix Corp. Mar-99 0.225 Tanadgusix Corp. Vestas (1) Alaska 1. Kotzebue Kotzebue Electric Assoc. May 1999 0.35 Kotzebue Electric Assoc. Atlantic Orient 15/50 (7) (Phases II and III) Wales Wind Energy Kotzebue Electric Assoc. Oct-00 0.1 Alaska Village Electric Atlantic Orient 15/50 (2) Alaska Project Coop Alaska 1. Kotzebue Kotzebue Elec. Assoc. 2002 0.1 Kotzebue Elec. Assoc. NPS Northwind 100 (1) Selawik Wind Project Kotzebue Electric Assoc. 2003 0.2 Alaska Village Electric AOC 15/50 (4) Alaska Coop Selawik Wind Project KEA/ Alaska Village 2004 0.15 Alaska Village Electric AOC 15/50 (3) Alaska Electric Coop Coop Kotzebue Wind Project Alaska Village Elec Coop 2005 0.3 Alaska Village Elec Coop Northern Power Systems 100 kW Alaska (3) Arkansas Bitworks Bitworks, Inc. 0.1 2003 Bitworks, Inc. NEG Micon (1) Prairie Grove Industrial Park Altamont Pass 1985 Zond Windsystem GE Energy 1985 18 PG&E Vestas V-17 (200) California Partners Series 85C California Venture Wind SeaWest mid- 1980's 2.89 PG&E Polenko/ Wind- matic (38) (old Los Vaqueros) California Altech Energy, Ltd SeaWest 1981-1995 5.76 PG&E Enertech (144) California C.W.E.S. SeaWest 1981-1995 1.32 PG&E Enertech (24) California SeaWest Energy SeaWest 1981-1995 0.065 PG&E Micon Group (a) (1) California Viking Energy 83 SeaWest 1981-1995 1.69 PG&E Micon (26) California SeaWest Energy SeaWest 1981-1995 0.975 PG&E Micon Group (b) (15) California SeaWest Windfarms SeaWest 1981-1995 11.57 PG&E Micon (178) California Patterson Pass Int'l Wind Companies 1981-1995 21.84 PG&E Nordtank/ Bonus (336) California Tres Vaqueros Int'l Wind Companies 1981-1995 28.8 PG&E Howden (86) California Buena Vista Int'l Wind Companies 1981-1995 36.93 PG&E Windmaster (211) California Green Ridge Power FPL Energy 1981-1995 159.9 PG&E Kenetech/ USWP (1517) California U.S. Windpower FPL Energy 1981-1995 161 PG&E USWP (1610) California WPP 87 Pacific Winds 1987 50 PG&E Kenetech 500 (100) California WPP 88 Pacific Winds 1988 30 PG&E Kenetech 300 (100) California Altamont Project 87 Pacific Winds 1987 10 PG&E Kenetech 100 (100) WEG Project 87 Pacific Winds 1987 5 PG&E WEG (20) California California Various Names Various Owners 1981-1995 2.58 PG&E Various Page 1 of 13 EXISTING WIND PROJECTS Existing ProjectOwner Date Online MW Power Purchaser/ Turbine / State or Area User Units Pacheco Pass International Turbine NA mid- 1980's 16 PG&E Wincon, Nordtank, Vestas (167) Claifornia Research San Georgio Pass California Various Names Various 1981-1995 156.1 So Cal Ed Various California Kenetech FPL Energy 1981-1995 7.4 So Cal Ed Kenetech (74) California Altech 3 (a) SeaWest 1981-1995 3.3 So Cal Ed NEG Micon (51) California Altech 3 (b) SeaWest 1981-1995 21.708 So Cal Ed NEG Micon (201) California San Jacinto SeaWest 1981-1995 5 So Cal Ed Vanguard Windmatic (42) California Edom Hill SeaWest 1981-1995 11 So Cal Ed Vanguard Windmatic (63) California Painted Hills B&C GE Energy 1981-1995 3.97 So Cal Ed Vestas V-15 (61) California GE Energy 1981-1995 15.3 So Cal Ed Vestas V-17 (170) California Zond-PanAero NA 1981-1995 29.9 So Cal Ed Vestas V-15 Windsystems (460) Whitewater Hill (San San Gorgonio Farms 1984 - 1994 31 So Cal Ed DWT 400 (35), Bonus 120 (56), California Gorgonio Farms) Vestas 500 (5), Bonus 65 (85) California Dutch Pacific Dutch Pacific, LLC 1994 10 So Cal Ed NedWind (20) California Karen Avenue (San San Gorgonio Farms 1995 3 So Cal Ed Vestas Gorgonio Farms) (6) California East Winds (formerly Nichimen America 1997 4.2 So Cal Ed NEG-Micon Altech III) (7) California Invest I-IX K/S Whitewater 1999 10 So Cal Ed Nordex Project Web Site (10) Pacific West I PacifiCorp 1999 2.1 SCE - Green Mt. Energy NEG Micon - (3) California California Cabazon GE Energy 1999 39.75 So Cal Ed Zond Z-750 (Re-power) (53) California Westwind Cinergy & Caithness May-99 46.5 So Cal Ed NEG Micon (Re-power) Project Info California GE Wind / Earth Smart/ GE Energy Jun-99 16.5 Electricity Marketers Zond Z-50 Green Power (22) California Westwind- Pacificorp/ May1.5 SCE - Green Mt. Energy NEG-Micon Pacificorp (Re-Power) GMER 1999 (2) California Mountain View Power PGE-NEGOct 22.2 PG&E Mitsubishi MWT600 (37) Partners II 2001 California Mountain View Power PGE-NEGOct 44.4 PG&E Mitsubishi MWT600 (74) Partners I 2001 Whitewater Hill Shell Wind Energy Dec-02 61.5 Dept. of Water Resources GE Energy 1500 (41) California California Cabazon Shell Wind EnergyDec 40.92 Dept of Water Resources Vestas V-47 (62) 2002 California Karen Avenue II San Gorgonio Farms Jun-03 4.5 So Cal Ed GE Wind Energy 1500 (3) Karen Avenue II Phase II Whitewater Energy Corp./ Dec-04 4.5 GE Wind Energy 1500 (3) California San Gorgonio Farms California Mountain View III San Diego Gas & Electric4th Q 22.44 San Diego Gas & Electric Vestas 650 (34) 2003 Page 2 of 13 EXISTING WIND PROJECTS Existing ProjectOwner Date Online MW Power Purchaser/ Turbine / State or Area User Units Solano County California Solano County/ NA 1985 60 PG&E U.S. Wind- power (600) Kenetech California Sacramento Municipal SMUD 1994 3.6 Sac Mun Kenetech Utility District (SMUD) Utility District (12) California SMUD SMUD 1999 0.66 Sac Mun Vestas Utility District (1) California SMUD SMUD 2003 9.9 Sac Mun Vestas 660kW (15) Utility District California High Winds SMUD 2003 162 Sac Mun Vestas 1.8 MW Utility District (90) California SMUD II SMUD 2004 4.62 Sac Mun Vestas 660kW (7) Utility District Tehachapi California Zond Systems GE Energy 1986 0.2 So Cal Ed. Vestas (1) California Victory Gardens, Phase GE Energy 1990 22.05 So Cal Ed. Vestas V-27 IV (98) California Sky River GE Energy 1993 76.95 So Cal Ed. Vestas V-27 (342) California Oak Creek Energy Oak Creek Energy 2002 0.8 So Cal Ed. NEG Micon Systems Systems (1) California Oak Creek Energy Oak Creek Energy 1981-1995 3.45 So Cal Ed. Micon Systems Systems (36) California AB Energy NA 1981-1995 7 So Cal Ed. Vestas V27 (31) California Calwind Resources NA 1981-1995 14.1 So Cal Ed. Bonus (217) California Calwind Resources NA 1981-1995 8.7 So Cal Ed. Nordtank (134) Coram Energy Group NA 1981-1995 0.12 So Cal Ed. Aeroman (3) California California Mogul Energy NA 1981-1995 4 So Cal Ed. Mitsubishi (8) California Mohave 3, 4, 5 Tomen/ FPL 1981-1995 75 So Cal Ed. Mitsubishi (300) California Mohave 16, 17, 18 Tomen/ FPL 1981-1995 85 So Cal Ed. Mitsubishi (340) California Windridge NA 1981-1995 2.34 So Cal Ed. Windmatic (36) California Victory Gardens I & IV NA 1981-1995 1 So Cal Ed. Vestas (2) California Cannon NA 1981-1995 13.46 So Cal Ed. Micon, Vestas (8, 28) California Cannon NA 1981-1995 4.54 So Cal Ed. Micon, Vestas (Various) (42) California Ridgetop Energy NA 1981-1995 32.6 So Cal Ed. Nordtank, Micon (329) California Zond Systems GE Energy 1982-1987 23.99 So Cal Ed. Vestas (369) California Zond Systems GE Energy 1982-1987 64 So Cal Ed. Vestas (711) California Windland (Boxcar II) Windland, Inc. Mid- 1980's 14.3 So Cal Ed. Various (711) Page 3 of 13 EXISTING WIND PROJECTS Existing ProjectOwner Date Online MW Power Purchaser/ Turbine / State or Area User Units California Oak Creek Energy Oak Creek Energy 2002 1.35 So, Cal Ed NEG Micon Systems (711) California Oak Creek Phase 1Nichimen & Oak Creek Sept4.2 So Cal Ed. NEG Micon (ON Energy)Energy 1997 (7) California Oak Creek Phase 2A Oak Creek Energy Jun-99 1.6 So Cal Ed NEG Micon (Re-power) (2) California Pacific Crest FPL Energy Jun-99 45.54 So Cal Ed Vestas (69) Oak Creek Wind Power Caithness 1999, 2005 23.06 So Cal Ed NEG Micon-700 Project Info California Phase 2 (Repower) / Vestas V47 (32/1) California Cameron RidgeFPL & Caithness Mar 56 So Cal Ed NEG Micon (Re-power) 1999 (80) Project Info California Victory Gardens Enron Wind Corp. Jun-99 6.75 So Cal Ed Zond Z-50 (Repower) (9) California Tehachapi Coram Energy LLC 2004-2005 15 So Cal Ed GE Wind 1500 (10) (Coram Energy) Oasis Wind Power enXco Dec-04 60 San Diego Gas & Electric Mitsubishi 1000 (60) California Project Others California U.S. Navy/ NEG Micon U.S. Navy 1998 0.675 U.S. Navy NEG Micon San Clemente Island (3) California Los Angeles Co. Wind Turbine Company 2001 0.5 Southern Cal Ed. WTC (1) California Lake Palmdale Palmdale Water District 2004 0.95 Palmdale Water District 950 kW (1) Kumeyaay Wind Power Superior Renewable 2005 50 San Diego Gass & Electric Gamesa 2MW (25) California Project Energy California Victorville Victorville Prison 2005 0.66 Victorville Vestas 660 kW (1) Prison K/S Ponnequin Jan-99 5.1 Xcel NEG Micon Colorado 1. Ponnequin (EIU) WindSource (Phase I) & Energy Resources (7) Colorado 1. Ponnequin Xcel Feb-June 1999 16.5 Xcel NEG Micon (Xcel) (22) Project Info Colorado 1. Ponnequin New Century2001 9.9 New Century Vestas (15) (Phase III) (Xcel) (Xcel) Colorado Peetz Table Wind FarmNew Century Sep-01 29.7 New Century NEG Micon (33) (Xcel) (Xcel) Colorado Green, Lamar Xcel Energy / GE Wind Dec-03 162 Xcel GE Wind 1500 (108) Colorado (Prowers County) Wind Corp.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • P501 Numerical Simulation of Wind Power Potential in Upstate New York
    P501 NUMERICAL SIMULATION OF WIND POWER POTENTIAL IN UPSTATE NEW YORK Robert Ballentine *, Scott Steiger and Daniel Phoenix State University of New York at Oswego 1. INTRODUCTION 2. METHODOLOGY Consistent with the national goal of moving away 2.1 Grid Arrangement from our dependence on carbon-based fuels, there is considerable interest in New York State in developing We are running the ARW-core of WRF on a wind power especially in areas with highest potential. doubly-nested grid (Fig. 1) to ensure that both large- The purpose of this research is to simulate low-level scale meteorological forcing and local geographical winds over upstate New York by running the Weather effects are well-represented. The grid spacings of the Research and Forecasting (WRF, Skamarock, et al large, intermediate and fine grids are 12 km, 4 km and 2005) model every day on a high-resolution (1.333 1.333 km respectively. We use 33 sigma levels where km) domain. Using the standard wind speed-versus- the lowest levels correspond to 10m, 40m and 80m power generation curve for a GE 1.5 MW wind above ground under typical meteorological conditions. turbine, we can estimate the monthly and seasonal We employ the Noah LSM and Yonsei PBL schemes. average wind power potential at all of our grid points (covering much of upstate New York and adjacent Lake Ontario). To determine the accuracy of WRF wind predictions, we are comparing winds simulated by WRF at 10 m AGL with hourly observations at three regularly reporting sites near Lake Ontario. 1.1 Brief Description of Wind Power Sites As of November 2009, New York State had more than 1200 MW of wind generating capacity from sites such as Horizon Wind Energy's Maple Ridge Wind Farm in Lewis County and farms operated by Noble Environmental Power in Clinton, Franklin and Wyoming Counties.
    [Show full text]
  • 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.
    [Show full text]
  • US Department of Energy Wind and Hydropower Technologies: Top 10 Program Accomplishments
    U.S. Department of Energy Wind and Hydropower Technologies Top 10 Program Accomplishments U.S. Department of Energy Wind and Hydropower Technologies Top 10 Program Accomplishments Important activities or technologies developed by or with the support of the Wind Energy Program that have led to the vibrant wind energy market of today. Advancing Wind Turbines Clipper Windpower Wind Powered Electricity 2.5-MW Liberty wind Although the wind has been harnessed to deliver power for centuries, it was only as turbine, Medicine Bow, Wyoming, 2006. recently as the 1970s, through the efforts of the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE’s) new Wind Energy Program, that wind power evolved into a viable source for clean commercial power. During that decade, the Wind Energy Program designed, built, and tested the 100-kilowatt (kW) “Mod” series (100 kW was the benchmark for large wind at the time) of wind turbines. These early machines proved the feasibility of large turbine technology and paved the way for the multimegawatt wind turbines in use today. DOE’s MOD-5B 3.2-MW wind turbine, Kahuku, Oahu, Hawaiian GE Energy 1.5-MW wind turbine, Islands, 1987. Hagerman, Idaho, 2005. The Quintessential American Turbine Wind Energy Program researchers have worked with GE Energy and its predeces- sors, Zond and Enron Wind, since the early 1990s to test components such as blades, generators, and control systems on vari- ous generations of machines. This work led to the development of GE’s 1.5-megawatt (MW) wind turbine. By the end of 2007, more than 6,500 of these turbines, gener- ally considered the quintessential American wind turbine, had been installed worldwide.
    [Show full text]
  • Wind Powering America FY07 Activities Summary
    Wind Powering America FY07 Activities Summary Dear Wind Powering America Colleague, We are pleased to present the Wind Powering America FY07 Activities Summary, which reflects the accomplishments of our state Wind Working Groups, our programs at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, and our partner organizations. The national WPA team remains a leading force for moving wind energy forward in the United States. At the beginning of 2007, there were more than 11,500 megawatts (MW) of wind power installed across the United States, with an additional 4,000 MW projected in both 2007 and 2008. The American Wind Energy Association (AWEA) estimates that the U.S. installed capacity will exceed 16,000 MW by the end of 2007. When our partnership was launched in 2000, there were 2,500 MW of installed wind capacity in the United States. At that time, only four states had more than 100 MW of installed wind capacity. Seventeen states now have more than 100 MW installed. We anticipate five to six additional states will join the 100-MW club early in 2008, and by the end of the decade, more than 30 states will have passed the 100-MW milestone. WPA celebrates the 100-MW milestones because the first 100 megawatts are always the most difficult and lead to significant experience, recognition of the wind energy’s benefits, and expansion of the vision of a more economically and environmentally secure and sustainable future. WPA continues to work with its national, regional, and state partners to communicate the opportunities and benefits of wind energy to a diverse set of stakeholders.
    [Show full text]
  • A Review of International Experience with Policies to Promote Wind Power Industry Development
    A Review of International Experience with Policies to Promote Wind Power Industry Development FINAL REPORT Prepared by: Joanna Lewis, Consultant to the Center for Resource Solutions Ryan Wiser, Consultant to the Center for Resource Solutions Prepared for: Energy Foundation China Sustainable Energy Program March 10, 2005 Table of Contents Executive Summary...................................................................................................................... 4 1. Introduction........................................................................................................................... 9 2. Strategies for Localization ................................................................................................. 11 2.1. Models for wind turbine manufacturing ........................................................................ 11 2.2. Models for technology acquisition: purchasing versus internal development............... 11 2.3. Incentives for technology transfers................................................................................ 12 2.4. Implications.................................................................................................................... 12 3. Potential Benefits of Localization...................................................................................... 14 3.1. Domestic economic development and employment ...................................................... 14 3.2. International exports.....................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Planning for Wind Energy
    Planning for Wind Energy Suzanne Rynne, AICP , Larry Flowers, Eric Lantz, and Erica Heller, AICP , Editors American Planning Association Planning Advisory Service Report Number 566 Planning for Wind Energy is the result of a collaborative part- search intern at APA; Kirstin Kuenzi is a research intern at nership among the American Planning Association (APA), APA; Joe MacDonald, aicp, was program development se- the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), the nior associate at APA; Ann F. Dillemuth, aicp, is a research American Wind Energy Association (AWEA), and Clarion associate and co-editor of PAS Memo at APA. Associates. Funding was provided by the U.S. Department The authors thank the many other individuals who con- of Energy under award number DE-EE0000717, as part of tributed to or supported this project, particularly the plan- the 20% Wind by 2030: Overcoming the Challenges funding ners, elected officials, and other stakeholders from case- opportunity. study communities who participated in interviews, shared The report was developed under the auspices of the Green documents and images, and reviewed drafts of the case Communities Research Center, one of APA’s National studies. Special thanks also goes to the project partners Centers for Planning. The Center engages in research, policy, who reviewed the entire report and provided thoughtful outreach, and education that advance green communities edits and comments, as well as the scoping symposium through planning. For more information, visit www.plan- participants who worked with APA and project partners to ning.org/nationalcenters/green/index.htm. APA’s National develop the outline for the report: James Andrews, utilities Centers for Planning conduct policy-relevant research and specialist at the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission; education involving community health, natural and man- Jennifer Banks, offshore wind and siting specialist at AWEA; made hazards, and green communities.
    [Show full text]
  • U.S. Offshore Wind Power Economic Impact Assessment
    U.S. Offshore Wind Power Economic Impact Assessment Issue Date | March 2020 Prepared By American Wind Energy Association Table of Contents Executive Summary ............................................................................................................................................................................. 1 Introduction .......................................................................................................................................................................................... 2 Current Status of U.S. Offshore Wind .......................................................................................................................................................... 2 Lessons from Land-based Wind ...................................................................................................................................................................... 3 Announced Investments in Domestic Infrastructure ............................................................................................................................ 5 Methodology ......................................................................................................................................................................................... 7 Input Assumptions ............................................................................................................................................................................................... 7 Modeling Tool ........................................................................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • U.S. Wind Turbine Manufacturing: Federal Support for an Emerging Industry
    U.S. Wind Turbine Manufacturing: Federal Support for an Emerging Industry Updated January 16, 2013 Congressional Research Service https://crsreports.congress.gov R42023 U.S. Wind Turbine Manufacturing: Federal Support for an Emerging Industry Summary Increasing U.S. energy supply diversity has been the goal of many Presidents and Congresses. This commitment has been prompted by concerns about national security, the environment, and the U.S. balance of payments. Investments in new energy sources also have been seen as a way to expand domestic manufacturing. For all of these reasons, the federal government has a variety of policies to promote wind power. Expanding the use of wind energy requires installation of wind turbines. These are complex machines composed of some 8,000 components, created from basic industrial materials such as steel, aluminum, concrete, and fiberglass. Major components in a wind turbine include the rotor blades, a nacelle and controls (the heart and brain of a wind turbine), a tower, and other parts such as large bearings, transformers, gearboxes, and generators. Turbine manufacturing involves an extensive supply chain. Until recently, Europe has been the hub for turbine production, supported by national renewable energy deployment policies in countries such as Denmark, Germany, and Spain. However, support for renewable energy including wind power has begun to wane across Europe as governments there reduce or remove some subsidies. Competitive wind turbine manufacturing sectors are also located in India and Japan and are emerging in China and South Korea. U.S. and foreign manufacturers have expanded their capacity in the United States to assemble and produce wind turbines and components.
    [Show full text]
  • State Attorneys General: Empowering the Clean Energy Future
    Copyright © 2019 by the State Energy and Environmental Impact Center. All rights reserved. State Energy and Environmental Impact Center NYU School of Law https://www.law.nyu.edu/centers/state-impact The primary authors of this report are Jessica R. Bell, Clean Energy Attorney at the State Energy and Environmental Impact Center, and Hampden Macbeth, Staff Attorney at the State Energy and Environmental Impact Center. The authors and the Center are grateful for the research contributions of Ryan Levandowski, a student at the Georgetown University Law Center, and Maggie St. Jean, a student at the Elisabeth Haub School of Law at Pace University. This report does not necessarily reflect the views of NYU School of Law, if any. Executive Summary ........................................................................................................ 1 Section I. Overview of the Role of Attorney General Activities in Energy Matters ............................................................ 5 Protecting States’ Energy Rights ................................................................................... 5 Background .................................................................................................................... 5 Mutual Accommodation of Federal and State Energy Rights .............................. 6 Defending States’ Rights Against Preemption and Dormant Commerce Clause Claims .......................................................................................... 7 Defending States’ Rights Against Discriminatory Federal
    [Show full text]
  • Energy Highlights
    G NER Y SE E CU O R T I A T Y N NATO ENERGY SECURITY C E CENTRE OF EXCELLENCE E C N T N R E E LL OF EXCE ENERGY HIGHLIGHTS ENERGY HIGHLIGHTS 1 Content 7 Introduction 11 Chapter 1 – Wind Energy Systems and Technologies 25 Chapter 2 – Radar Systems and Wind Farms 36 Chapter 3 – Wind Farms Interference Mitigation 46 Chapter 4 – Environmental and societal impacts of wind energy 58 Chapter 5 – Wind Farms and Noise 67 Chapter 6 – Energy Storage and Wind Power 74 Chapter 7 – Case Studies 84 Conclusions 86 A Way Forward 87 Bibliography This is a product of the NATO Energy Security Centre of Excellence (NATO ENSEC COE). It is produced for NATO, NATO member countries, NATO partners, related private and public institutions and related individuals. It does not represent the opinions or policies of NATO or NATO ENSEC COE. The views presented in the articles are those of the authors alone. © All rights reserved by the NATO ENSEC COE. Articles may not be copied, reproduced, distributed or publicly displayed without reference to the NATO ENSEC COE and the respective publication. 2 ENERGY HIGHLIGHTS ENERGY HIGHLIGHTS 3 Role of windfarms for national grids – challenges, risks, and chances for energy security by Ms Marju Kõrts ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AND KEY have arisen in other countries wher wind power RECOMMENDATIONS The author would like to acknowledge the work and insights of the people who contributed to this is expanding. study either via the conducted interviews or their fellowship at the NATO Energy Security Center of apid growth of wind energy worldwide Excellence in summer and autumn 2020.
    [Show full text]
  • SYSTEMS Giving Wind Direction MAGAZINE
    WIND SYSTEMS WIND Giving Wind Direction MAGAZINE SYSTEMS Construction • Company Profile: CONSTRUCTION Crane Service, Inc. • UMaine-Led Offshore Wind Project Receives Additional $3.7 Million from DOE » Composite Electroless Nickel Coatings for the Wind Energy Industry Varieties and Performance Advantages page 30 » Condition Monitoring Does DECEMBER 2015 DECEMBER Not Need To Be Overwhelming page 34 DECEMBER 2015 NO ONE UNDERSTANDS THE SUBTLE NUANCES OF WIND ENERGY LIKE WE DO. Whether you’re acquiring, developing, or building and operating wind projects, we can help you achieve success at every stage of the process. See the Droel difference at droellaw.com. HOURS OF DOMINANCE AMSOIL products are installed in more than 10,000 MW class wind turbines in North America. Running more than 7 years strong on our original formula. OUR COMPETITION KNOWS ABOUT AMSOIL. DO YOU? Bringing a better product to the wind market since 2008. Come see why more and more wind farms are switching to AMSOIL. www.amsoilwind.com The AMSOIL Wind Group 715-399-6305 inFOCUS: CONSTRUCTION DECEMBER 2015 16 UMaine-Led Offshore Wind ALSO IN inFOCUS Project Receives Additional $3.7 Million from DOE 22 Profile: Crane Service, Inc. 28 Conversation: 18 Siemens Reduces Transport Costs for Offshore Rob Lee Wind Turbines by Up to 20 Percent Wanzek Construction, Inc. 2 DECEMBER | 2015 inFOCUS: CONSTRUCTION DECEMBER 2015 TORK ELECTRONIC DIGITAL CONTROLLED S O L UTI O N S A V A I L A B L E TORQUE TECHNOLOGY . DIGITAL TORQUE CONTROL THAT WORX FOR YOUR MAINTENANCES The leading electronic torque control system in ERAD electronic torque control sys- All RAD torque guns are designed to the Wind Industry assembled for your WTG.
    [Show full text]
  • Before the State of New York Board on Electric
    15-F-0122 Sokolow Post Hearing Brief BEFORE THE STATE OF NEW YORK BOARD ON ELECTRIC GENERATION SITING AND THE ENVIRONMENT In the Matter of Baron Wind LLC Case 15-F-0122 INITIAL POST-HEARING BRIEF Alice Sokolow Case #15-F-0122 also for Parties: Thomas Flansburg Mary Ann McManus Bert Candee Virginia Gullam Dated: 4/15/2019 1 15-F-0122 Sokolow Post Hearing Brief TABLE OF CONTENTS I Introduction 2 II Facility 2 III Legal Background 2-3 IV. Issues- Fremont Wind Law 3 V. Nature of Env Impact-Avian & Bat 5 VI. Nature of Env Impact –Safety Exh1001.6 11 Exh 1001.15 29 VII Nature of Env Viewshed & Flicker 54 VIII Not Addressed 70 IX Conclusions 70 I Introduction We are five individual parties with grave concerns over conditions and completeness of Baron Winds Applications for a Certificate of Environmental Compatibility and Public Need Pursuant to Article 10 to Construct a Wind Energy Facility. II. Facility Description Baron Winds LLC (the Applicant) is proposing to construct the Baron Winds Project, a wind energy generation facility and associated infrastructure (the Facility) in the Towns of Cohocton, Dansville, Fremont, and Wayland in Steuben County, New York (See Figure 1).The Facility will consist of up to 69 utility scale wind turbines with a total generating capacity of up to 242 Megawatts (MW). Other proposed components will include: access roads, buried collection lines, up to four permanent meteorological (met) towers, one operations and maintenance (O&M) building, up to two temporary construction staging/laydown areas, and a collection/point of interconnection.
    [Show full text]