OFFSHORE WIND ENERGY DEVELOPMENT
IN NORTH CAROLINA:
IS IT WORTH IT?
Public and International Affairs
Master of Coastal and Ocean Policy 2015
Johanna Colburn, Lindsey Cole, Jessica Gray, Evan Gruetter,
Sara Marriott, Miles Murphy, Michelle Shreve, Bailey Stearns
2
• Background
• Implementation Challenges
• Environmental Impacts
• Economic Analysis
• Political Feasibility
• Conclusions
• Recommendations
http://www.2050publications.com/140000-offshore-wind-turbines-enough-to-supply-one-third-of-us-power-needs-study-concludes/
*Please leave questions until the end*
NORTH CAROLINA’S
POTENTIAL
4
www.arcgis.com
5
Why is this important for North Carolina?
Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Portfolio Standard (REPS)
•
Electric Public Utilities:
12.5% of North Carolina retail sales by 2021 must come from a renewable energy resource
or by implementing energy efficiency measures
Sustainable Energy
6
Legislative Framework
Federal
•
Acts/Regulations
Department of the Interior (DOI)
•
•
•
Department of Energy (DOE)
•
Department of Commerce (DOC)
•
•
Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM)
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)
•
National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS)
•
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
•
Marine Mammal Commission (MMC)
•
Department of Defense (DOD)
•
Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE)
•
United States Coast Guard (USCG)
State
•
NC Department of Environmental and Natural Resources (NCDENR)
•
Local Governments: New Hanover County, Dare County, Brunswick
County, Currituck County
Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (OCSLA)
•
Energy Policy Act (EPAct)
•
Endangered Species Act (ESA)
•
Marine Mammal Protection Act (MMPA)
•
Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA)
•
Magnuson-Stevens Act (MFCMA)
•
Coastal Zone Management Act (CZMA) &
Coastal Area Management Act (CAMA)
•
National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA)
•
International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships
(MARPOL)
•
Clean Water Act (CWA)
•
Clean Air Act (CAA)
•
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
7
Historical Context
•
Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPAct)
•
April 2009: Finalized OCS Renewable
Energy Program
•
Fall 2010: “Smart from the Start”
•
Wind Energy Areas (WEAs)
8
9
Wind Energy Areas
•
August 11, 2014:
WEA’s Announced
•
Kitty Hawk WEA
122,405 acres
24 nautical miles offshore
•
Wilmington West WEA
51,595 acres
10 nautical miles offshore
•
Wilmington East WEA
133,590 acres
15 nautical miles offshore
IMPLEMENTATION
CHALLENGES
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
User Conflicts
•
Available Wind Resources
•
Bird and Bird Habitat
•
Fishery and Fish Habitat
•
Geological Suitability
•
Military Uses
•
Vessel Transportation Routes
•
Electrical Transmission Infrastructure
19
20
21
BOEM Process
22
Site Assessment
•
Site Characterization
•
•
Surveying
Site Assessment
•
•
Meteorological Towers
Buoys
23
Construction
Hub stations picture
24
Operation
25
Decommission
26
ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACTS
28
Impacts
•
Impact Sectors
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Benthic Resources
Marine Mammals
Air & Water Quality
Birds and Bats
Coastal Habitats
Sea Turtles
Essential Fish Habitat and Finfish
•
Impact Factors
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Site Surveying
Pile Driving
Vessel Traffic
Vessel Dumping
Electric and Magnetic Fields
Collisions
Turbine Noise Generation
29
North Atlantic Right Whale
•
Federal Status
•
•
•
ESA Endangered
MMPA Depleted
Concerns
•
•
Noise
Vessel Traffic
30
Negligible
Minor
Moderate
Major
 No measurable impacts.
 Most impacts on the affected resource could be avoided with proper mitigation.
 If impacts occur, the affected resource would recover completely without any
mitigation once the impacting agent is eliminated.
 Impacts on the affected resource are unavoidable.
 The viability of the affected resource is not threatened although some impacts may be
irreversible, or the affected resource would recover completely if proper mitigation is
applied during the life of the project or proper remedial action is taken once the
impacting agent is eliminated.
 Impacts on the affected resource are unavoidable.
 The viability of the affected resource may be threatened, and the affects resource
would not fully recover even if proper mitigation is applied during the life of the project
or remedial action is taken once the impacting agent is eliminated.
31
Impacts from Site Assessment
•
Site Surveying
•
Pile Driving
•
Vessel Traffic
•
Vessel Dumping
Phase
Impacted Sector
Site Characterization
Site Assessment
Benthic Resources
Negligible
Negligible to Minor
Marine Mammals
Negligible to Minor
Negligible to Moderate
Air Quality
Minor
Minor
Water Quality
Minor
Minor
Birds and Bats
Negligible
Negligible to Minor
Coastal Habitats
Negligible
Negligible
Sea Turtles
Minor
Minor to Moderate
Essential Fish Habitat
and Finfish
Negligible to Minor
Negligible
32
Impacts from Construction
•
Pile Driving
•
Vessel Traffic
•
Vessel Dumping
Phase
Impacted Sector
Construction
Benthic Resources
Negligible to Minor
Marine Mammals
Minor to Moderate
Air Quality
Minor
Water Quality
Minor
Birds and Bats
Negligible
Coastal Habitats
Negligible
Sea Turtles
Negligible
Essential Fish Habitat
and Finfish
Minor
33
Impacts from Operation
•
Collision
•
Electric and Magnetic Fields
•
Turbine Noise Generation
•
Positive Impacts
•
•
•
Food production
Habitat utilization
Fish Aggregating Devices (FAD)
Phase
Impacted Sector
Operation
Benthic Resources
Negligible to Minor
Marine Mammals
Negligible to Moderate
Air Quality
Negligible
Water Quality
Negligible
Birds and Bats
Negligible to Moderate
Coastal Habitats
Negligible
Sea Turtles
Negligible to Minor
Essential Fish Habitat
and Finfish
Negligible to Moderate
34
Notes on Decommission Phase
•
Impacts similar to Construction Phase
•
•
Vessel traffic and dumping
Noise from foundation removal
•
Reduction of collisions
•
Altered biodiversity
35
Phase
Impacted Sector
Site Characterization Site Assessment
Construction
Operation
Benthic Resources
Negligible
Negligible to Minor
Negligible to Minor
Negligible to Minor
Marine Mammals
Negligible to Minor
Negligible to Moderate
Minor to Moderate
Negligible to Moderate
Air Quality
Minor
Minor
Minor
Negligible
Water Quality
Minor
Minor
Minor
Negligible
Birds and Bats
Negligible
Negligible to Minor
Negligible
Negligible to Moderate
Coastal Habitats
Negligible
Negligible
Negligible
Negligible
Sea Turtles
Minor
Minor to Moderate
Negligible
Negligible to Minor
Essential Fish Habitat
and Finfish
Negligible to Minor
Negligible
Minor
Negligible to Moderate
ECONOMIC
ANALYSIS
36
37
38
Analysis Details
•
To evaluate the economic viability of a offshore wind project in North Carolina
using two different economic evaluations
•
Cost-Benefit analysis (CBA)
•
•
An analysis that evaluates the economic outcome of various costs and benefits over a set time
period.
Cost Effectiveness analysis (CEA)
An analysis that evaluates the most cost effective method of achieving a goal. In this case that
goal is the efficient production of electricity.
• Common in healthcare field
• Often utilizes levelized costs
•
39
Data and Caveats
•
Data Sources
•
•
•
•
•
•
EIA – Levelized Costs of Electricity
Government Agencies
Foreign Studies
Consultation Reports
Professional Articles and Reports
Comparison between Cape May New
Jersey and Brunswick County
Same distance, or further, from shore (6+
miles)
• Different populations
• Different population density
• Different property values
•
•
Lack of reliable monetized, economic
data
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Real Estate
Tourism
Aesthetics
Noise
Hurricane Reduction
Impact of Region Branding
Wildlife
Seafloor Damage
No proposed project, only extrapolations
40
COST BENEFIT
ANALYSIS
41
Costs
Direct
Indirect
Tangible
Intangible
Tangible
Intangible
Construction
Alternative Use
Real Estate Property
Values
Aesthetics
Operation and
Maintenance
Seafloor Damage
Prices (Competition)
Noise
Grid/Infrastructure
Wildlife
Taxes
Recreation
Lost Jobs (Competition)
Disaster
Tourism
42
Costs included in Analysis
Direct
Indirect
Tangible
Intangible
Tangible
Intangible
Construction
Alternative Use
Real Estate Property
Values
Aesthetics
Operation and
Maintenance
Seafloor Damage
Prices (Competition)
Noise
Grid/Infrastructure
Wildlife
Taxes
Recreation
Lost Jobs (Competition)
Disaster
Tourism
43
Benefits
Direct
Indirect
Tangible
Intangible
Tangible
Intangible
Renewable NRG
Pollution Reduction
Price (Competition)
Hurricane Reduction
Fish Habitat
Hurricane Reduction
Econ Growth
Jobs/Econ Growth
Diversify NRG
Decommission Coal
Tourism
Business Attraction
Real Estate Property
Values
Health
44
Benefits included in Analysis
Direct
Indirect
Tangible
Intangible
Tangible
Intangible
Renewable NRG
Pollution Reduction
Price (Competition)
Hurricane Reduction
Fish Habitat
Hurricane Reduction
Econ Growth
Jobs/Econ Growth
Diversify NRG
Decommission Coal
Tourism
Business Attraction
Real Estate Property
Values
Health
45
Costs and Benefits Examined
Costs
Direct
Tangible
Intangible
Construction
Operation and
Maintenance
Grid/
Infrastructure
Benefits
Indirect
Tangible
Intangible
Real Estate
Property Values
Prices
Seafloor Damage
(Competition)
Alternative Use
Direct
Tangible
Intangible
Aesthetics
Renewable NRG
Noise
Fish Habitat
Pollution
Reduction
Hurricane
Reduction
Taxes
Jobs/
Econ Growth
Diversify NRG
Recreation
Lost Jobs
(Competition)
Tourism
Business
Attraction
Disaster
Tourism
Health
Wildlife
Indirect
Tangible
Intangible
Price
(Competition)
Econ Growth
Decommission
Coal
Real Estate
Property Values
Hurricane
Reduction
46
Cost Benefit Analyses Conducted
CBA
Iteration
Discount
Rate
Growth
Rate
Disaster
Turbines
CBA 1
3.0%
1.0%
No
100
CBA 2
7.0%
1.0%
No
100
CBA 3
3.0%
1.0%
No
200
CBA 4
3.0%
1.0%
No
340
CBA 5
3.0%
1.0%
Yes
100
CBA 6
3.0%
1.0%
Yes
200
CBA 7
3.0%
1.0%
Yes
340
47
Costs - Monetized
Costs (Million of dollars)
Turbine Construction Cost
One-Time
Grid Integration Cost
Property Value Loss
Tourism Revenue Loss
Disaster
On-Going
Turbine Maintenance
100 Turbines
200 Turbines
340 Turbines
Year
$1,085
$2,169
$3,688
0
$21
$42
$71
0
$549
$549
$549
0
$4
$4
$4
1
$731
$1,462
$2,485
15
$35
$70
$119
1
48
Benefits - Monetized
Benefits (Millions of dollars)
One-Time
100 Turbines
200 Turbines
340 Turbines
$478
$956
$1,625
0
$1
$1
$2
1
Energy Generated
$65
$130
$220
1
O/M Jobs
$20
$40
$68
1
$6
$6
$6
2
Construction Jobs
CO2 Reduction
On-Going
Tourism Revenue Gain
Year
49
CBA Results
CBA
Iteration
Description
Disaster
Total Costs
(Millions)
Total Benefits
(Millions)
NPV
(Millions)
BCR
CBA 1
100 Turbines
No
2,878
3,638
58
1.26
CBA 2
100 Turbines (7%)
No
2,878
3,638
(419)
1.26
CBA 3
200 Turbines
No
5,202
7,090
552
1.36
CBA 4
340 Turbines
No
8,457
11,922
1,244
1.41
CBA 5
100 Turbines
Yes
3,508
3,638
(346)
1.01
CBA 6
200 Turbines
Yes
6,462
7,090
(256)
1.06
CBA 7
340 Turbines
Yes
10,597
11,922
(130)
1.09
50
COST EFFECTIVENESS
ANALYSIS
51
CEA: Capacity Factor
Energy Source
MWh/Year
Natural Gas
28,704,000
Coal
47,676,000
Nuclear
39,132,000
Hydro Electric
3,720,000
Solar
59,616
Wind
1,752,000
Capacity
Factor (%)
Levelized
Capital Cost
($/MWh)
O&M,
Fuel, Misc
($/MWh)
Total Cost
($/MWh)
87
85
90
30.3
97.8
71.4
59.8
48.4
23.6
91.3
147.4
96.1
53
25
40
72.0
114.5
175.4
10.5
11.4
22.8
84.5
130.0
204.1
52
CEA: Levelized Capital Cost
Energy Source
MWh/Year
Natural Gas
28,704,000
Coal
47,676,000
Nuclear
39,132,000
Hydro Electric
3,720,000
Solar
59,616
Wind
1,752,000
Capacity
Factor (%)
Levelized
Capital Cost
($/MWh)
O&M,
Fuel, Misc
($/MWh)
Total Cost
($/MWh)
87
85
90
30.3
97.8
71.4
59.8
48.4
23.6
91.3
147.4
96.1
53
25
40
72.0
114.5
175.4
10.5
11.4
22.8
84.5
130.0
204.1
53
CEA: O&M, Fuel, Miscellaneous
Energy Source
MWh/Year
Natural Gas
28,704,000
Coal
47,676,000
Nuclear
39,132,000
Hydro Electric
3,720,000
Solar
59,616
Wind
1,752,000
Capacity
Factor (%)
Levelized
Capital Cost
($/MWh)
O&M,
Fuel, Misc
($/MWh)
Total Cost
($/MWh)
87
85
90
30.3
97.8
71.4
59.8
48.4
23.6
91.3
147.4
96.1
53
25
40
72.0
114.5
175.4
10.5
11.4
22.8
84.5
130.0
204.1
54
CEA: Total Cost
Energy Source
MWh/Year
Natural Gas
28,704,000
Coal
47,676,000
Nuclear
39,132,000
Hydro Electric
3,720,000
Solar
59,616
Wind
1,752,000
Capacity
Factor (%)
Levelized
Capital Cost
($/MWh)
O&M,
Fuel, Misc
($/MWh)
Total Cost
($/MWh)
87
85
90
30.3
97.8
71.4
59.8
48.4
23.6
91.3
147.4
96.1
53
25
40
72.0
114.5
175.4
10.5
11.4
22.8
84.5
130.0
204.1
55
CEA: Summary Table
Energy Source
MWh/Year
Natural Gas
28,704,000
Coal
47,676,000
Nuclear
39,132,000
Hydro Electric
3,720,000
Solar
59,616
Wind
1,752,000
Capacity
Factor (%)
Levelized
Capital Cost
($/MWh)
O&M,
Fuel, Misc
($/MWh)
Total Cost
($/MWh)
87
85
90
30.3
97.8
71.4
59.8
48.4
23.6
91.3
147.4
96.1
53
25
40
72.0
114.5
175.4
10.5
11.4
22.8
84.5
130.0
204.1
56
Offshore Wind vs Natural Gas/Coal
Energy Source
Coal
Natural Gas
Wind
147.4
91.3
204.1
47.7
28.7
1.8
35,040
35,040
-
1,361
819
-
Total Cost (Billions of dollars)
$ 7.03
$ 2.62
$ 0.36
Wind Adapted Cost (Billions of dollars)
$ 9.73
$ 5.86
-
Total Cost ($/MWh)
MWh (Million)
Offshore MWh (5MW turbine)
Turbines Required
POLITICAL
FEASIBILITY
58
Data Sources
•
Public Comments
•
•
•
•
•
BOEM public workshops
WWAY News
Newspaper articles
Comments to BOEM
•
Public Survey
•
•
North Carolina residents
Political officials
Political Climate
•
•
•
•
•
NC Executive Office
U.S. Senators (NC)
U.S. Representatives (NC)
State Senators
State Representatives
http://mediad.publicbroadcasting.net/p/michigan/files/201406/wind_farm_Middelgrunder_KimHansen.jpg
59
Political Climate
•
Concerns:
•
•
•
•
•
Development costs
Effects on tourism and coastal economies
Political viability
Legal Framework
DOI Secretary
Sally Jewell
NC House Rep.
Susi Hamilton
(D-18th District)
NC Governor
Pat McCrory
NCDENR Secretary
Donald van der Vaart
Federal and State Stakeholders
60
Elected Official
Yes
NC Governor Pat McCrory (R)
U.S. Senator Richard Burr (R)
Congressman Walter Jones, Jr. (R) – 3rd District
X
State Senator William “Bill” Peter Rabon (R) – 8th District: Bladen, Brunswick, New Hanover
X
X
State Senator Michael Lee (R) – 9th District: New Hanover
State Senator Jane Smith (D) 13th District: Columbus & Robeson
State Representative Susi Hamilton (D) – 18th District: New Hanover & Brunswick
State Representative Chris Millis (R) – 16th District: Pender & Onslow
State Representative Frank Ller (R) – 17th District: Brunswick
State Representative Ted Davis, Jr. (R) – 19th District – New Hanover
State Representative Rick Catlin (R) – 20th District – New Hanover
State Representative Paul Tine (Unaffiliated) – District 6: Beaufort, Dare, Hyde, Washington
Unsure
X
X
X
X
U.S. Senator Thom Tillis (R)
Congressman David Rouzer (R) – 7th District
No
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
61
Public Comments
•
Areas of concern:
•
•
•
•
North Atlantic Right Whale
Environmental impacts
Economic impacts to coastal communities
Aesthetics
•
NC residents show support for offshore wind
development
•
No direct opposition
Brian Skerry
62
Visualization Study
Currituck Lighthouse
Holden
Beach
Bald Head
Island
C
U
R
R
I
T
U
C
K
63
L
I
G
H
T
H
O
U
S
E
B
A
L
D
H
E
A
D
64
O
A
K
I
S
L
A
N
D
65
H
O
L
D
E
N
B
E
A
C
H
66
67
Survey
•
Respondents
•
•
Coastal residents
Associations
Real Estate
Development
Environmental
•
•
Elected officials
Five Question Categories
•
•
•
•
•
Political Viability
Implementation Challenges
Economic Analysis
Environmental Impacts
General household questions
•
Demographics
•
82 Respondents
•
35 respondents own property on the
beach
•
Split evenly between male and female
•
60% have at least a Bachelor’s Degree
•
Majority over 45 years of age
68
All 82 Respondents
35 Beach Property Owners
69
35 Beach Property Owners
70
Comparison Data
•
Narragansett Beaches Clean Energy Survey
•
Fishermen’s Energy LLC. Survey
•
The general attitude toward offshore wind power is very positive.
•
The majority of respondents:
•
•
•
thought it was very important to move away from fossil fuels and use more clean
energy.
are very likely to frequent a local beach with a visible wind turbine.
feel that offshore wind facilities would benefit job creation, air quality and electricity
rates.
CONCLUSIONS
72
Environmental Impacts: Conclusion
•
Most impacted sector:
•
•
•
•
•
Marine Mammals
Birds
Finfish & Essential Fish Habitat
Sea Turtles
Factors with most impact:
•
•
Site surveying
Pile driving
•
Proper mitigation will reduce impacts
•
Most harmful impacts are temporary
73
Economic Analysis: Conclusion
•
Renewable and Clean VS. Efficient and Fossil Fuel
•
BCRs were above 1, but below USACE standard of 3.2 for new projects
•
Project will require subsidies
•
Minimal impact on tourism and real estate
•
Further investigation:
•
•
•
•
Fisheries
Recreational water sports
Electricity provider competition
Cost of electricity
74
Political Feasibility: Conclusion
•
Political Climate
•
•
•
Varied opinions among elected officials
Many elected officials have no public
stance
Concerns:
• Development costs
• Effects on tourism and coastal
economies
• Political viability
• Legal Framework
•
Public Opinion
•
Areas of concern:
North Atlantic Right Whale
• Environmental impacts
• Economic impacts to coastal
communities and tourism
• Aesthetics
•
•
Survey
•
Larger sample size needed
OFFSHORE WIND ENERGY DEVELOPMENT
IN NORTH CAROLINA:
IS IT WORTH IT?
76
Acknowledgements
Many thanks to the faculty and staff that support the Master of Coastal and Ocean
Policy program at the University of North Carolina at Wilmington. Their
participation, advise, and input was crucial for the completion of this Capstone. We,
as the first graduating class of the MCOP program, appreciate all the support
received from the University and the community.
77
QUESTIONS?
78
79
BOEM Process
80
Phase
Impacted Sector
Site Characterization Site Assessment
Construction
Operation
Benthic Resources
Negligible
Negligible to Minor
Negligible to Minor
Negligible to Minor
Marine Mammals
Negligible to Minor
Negligible to Moderate
Minor to Moderate
Negligible to Moderate
Air Quality
Minor
Minor
Minor
Negligible
Water Quality
Minor
Minor
Minor
Negligible
Birds and Bats
Negligible
Negligible to Minor
Negligible
Negligible to Moderate
Coastal Habitats
Negligible
Negligible
Negligible
Negligible
Sea Turtles
Minor
Minor to Moderate
Negligible
Negligible to Minor
Essential Fish Habitat
and Finfish
Negligible to Minor
Negligible
Minor
Negligible to Moderate
81
CBA Results
CBA
Iteration
Description
Disaster
Total Costs
(Millions)
Total Benefits
(Millions)
NPV
(Millions)
BCR
CBA 1
100 Turbines
No
2,878
3,638
58
1.26
CBA 2
100 Turbines (7%)
No
2,878
3,638
(419)
1.26
CBA 3
200 Turbines
No
5,202
7,090
552
1.36
CBA 4
340 Turbines
No
8,457
11,922
1,244
1.41
CBA 5
100 Turbines
Yes
3,508
3,638
(346)
1.01
CBA 6
200 Turbines
Yes
6,462
7,090
(256)
1.06
CBA 7
340 Turbines
Yes
10,597
11,922
(130)
1.09
82
CEA: Summary Table
Energy Source
MWh/Year
Natural Gas
28,704,000
Coal
47,676,000
Nuclear
39,132,000
Hydro Electric
3,720,000
Solar
59,616
Wind
1,752,000
Capacity
Factor*
Levelized
Capital Cost
($/MWh)
O&M,
Fuel, Misc
($/MWh)
Total Cost
($/MWh)
87
85
90
30.3
97.8
71.4
59.8
48.4
23.6
91.3
147.4
96.1
53
25
40
72
114.5
175.4
10.5
11.4
22.8
84.5
130
204.1
83
Elected Official
Yes
NC Governor Pat McCrory (R)
U.S. Senator Richard Burr (R)
Congressman Walter Jones, Jr. (R) – 3rd District
X
State Senator William “Bill” Peter Rabon (R) – 8th District: Bladen, Brunswick, New Hanover
X
X
State Senator Michael Lee (R) – 9th District: New Hanover
State Senator Jane Smith (D) 13th District: Columbus & Robeson
State Representative Susi Hamilton (D) – 18th District: New Hanover & Brunswick
State Representative Chris Millis (R) – 16th District: Pender & Onslow
State Representative Frank Ller (R) – 17th District: Brunswick
State Representative Ted Davis, Jr. (R) – 19th District – New Hanover
State Representative Rick Catlin (R) – 20th District – New Hanover
State Representative Paul Tine (Unaffiliated) – District 6: Beaufort, Dare, Hyde, Washington
Unsure
X
X
X
X
U.S. Senator Thom Tillis (R)
Congressman David Rouzer (R) – 7th District
No
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
84
Picture Sources
•
http://urbanomnibus.net/redux/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/Super-Post-Panamax-liner.jpg
•
http://ibc.lynxeds.com/files/pictures/_DSC3072.JPG
•
http://media.dma.mil/2014/Dec/10/2000956693/-1/-1/0/140708-M-IY869-689.JPG
•
http://iss-foundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/bluefin-photo.jpg
•
http://www.power-technology.com/projects/sheringham-shoal/images/1-wind-farm.jpg
•
http://www.siemens.com/press/pool/de/pressebilder/photonews/PN200826/300dpi/PN200826-07_300dpi.jpg
•
http://www.maritimejournal.com/__data/assets/image/0011/726896/MJ-Newsletter-19-4-12-French.jpg
•
http://sbstatesman.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/WindFarm_Mariusz.Pa%C5%BAdziora.jpg
•
Slide 4: Esri, GEBCO, IHO-IOC GEBCO, DeLorme, NGS | General Bathymetric Chart of the Oceans (GEBCO), NOAA Environmental Satelite, Data, & Information Service (NESDIS), National Geophysical
Data Center (NGDC) | Stephen Creed and Christine Taylor Bureau of Ocean Energy Management | BOEM Office of Renewable Energy Programs, MarineCadastre.gov |Esri, DeLorme, FAO, USGS, NOAA,
EPA, NPS
•
http://www.governor.state.nc.us/sites/all/themes/govpat/images/GovPatMcCrory-HQ.jpg
•
http://www.doi.gov/news/photos/images/SecretaryJewell.jpg
•
http://portal.ncdenr.org/web/guest/secretary-bio
•
https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/whitehouse.gov/files/images/Administration/People/president_official_portrait_hires.jpg
•
http://www.fisheries.noaa.gov/pr/images/cetaceans/rightwhale_baleen_georgiadnr_permit15488.jpg