National Wind Generation Picture
Outline
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
US energy today
Legislative landscape
The future
Long-term national planning
Conclusions
1. US energy today:
Existing US resource mix by capacity
3
Source: AWEA 2009 Annual Wind Report
1. US energy today:
Retail Prices - 2007
4
1. US energy today:
US wind capacity historical growth
5
Source: AWEA 2009 Annual Wind Report
1. US energy today:
Wind capacity by state
6
Source: AWEA Website: www.awea.org
1. US energy today:
Wind capacity and 2008 growth by state
State
In construction Rank by Capacity
Texas
1,096
1
Illinois
703
10
Indiana
505
14
Oregon
426
6
Iowa
409
2
Washington
405
5
Pennsylvania
356
16
North Dakota
345
13
Wyoming
269
12
Utah
204
29
Oklahoma
200
11
Colorado
174
8
Missouri
150
19
Montana
104
21
West Virginia
101
18
New Mexico
100
15
Maine
92
25
Arizona
63
37
Nebraska
42
22
Minnesota
40
47
State
Texas
Iowa
California
Minnesota
Washington
Oregon
New York
Colorado
Kansas
Illinois
Oklahoma
Wyoming
North Dakota
Indiana
New Mexico
Pennsylvania
Wisconsin
West Virginia
Missouri
South Dakota
Existing
8,361
3,043
2,787 ?
1,805 ?
1,575
1,408
1,264 ?
1,068
1,014 ?
915
831
816 ?
714
531
497
463
449 ?
330
309
288
Source: AWEA Website: www.awea.org
1. US energy today:
Wind % capacity by state
8
Source: AWEA 2009 Annual Wind Report
1. US energy today:
Market share of total US wind fleet
9
Source: AWEA 2009 Annual Wind Report
1. US energy today:
Market share of 2008 wind installations
10
Source: AWEA 2009 Annual Wind Report
1. US energy today:
Ownership by company and by utility
11
Source: AWEA 2009 Annual Wind Report
1. US energy today:
Power purchase agreements+ownership
12
Source: AWEA 2009 Annual Wind Report
1. US energy today:
Wind plant size
13
Source: AWEA 2009 Annual Wind Report
2. Legislative landscape: Renewable
portfolio standards (on energy)
29 states, differing in % (10-40), timing (latest is 2030), eligible
technologies/resources (all include wind)
WA: 15% by 2020*
MN: 25% by 2025
MT: 15% by 2015
☼ OR: 25% by 2025
(large utilities)*
5% - 10% by 2025 (smaller utilities)
VT: (1) RE meets any increase
in retail sales by 2012;
(2) 20% RE & CHP by 2017
(Xcel: 30% by 2020)
MI: 10% + 1,100 MW
ND: 10% by 2015
WI: Varies by utility;
10% by 2015 goal
☼ NV: 25% by 2025*
☼ CO: 20% by 2020
IA: 105 MW
(IOUs)
10% by 2020 (co-ops & large munis)*
CA: 33% by 2020
UT: 20% by 2025*
KS: 20% by 2020
(Class I Renewables)
RI: 16% by 2020
CT: 23% by 2020
☼ OH: 25% by 2025†
☼ PA: 18% by 2020†
WV: 25% by 2025*†
☼ NJ: 22.5% by 2021
VA: 15% by 2025*
☼ MD: 20% by 2022
☼ MO: 15% by 2021
☼ AZ: 15% by 2025
☼ DE: 20% by 2019*
☼ NC: 12.5% by 2021 (IOUs)
☼ DC: 20% by 2020
10% by 2018 (co-ops & munis)
☼ NM: 20% by 2020 (IOUs)
☼ NH: 23.8% by 2025
+ 1% annual increase
☼ NY: 24% by 2013
☼ IL: 25% by 2025
New RE: 10% by 2017
☼ MA: 15% by 2020
by 2015*
SD: 10% by 2015
ME: 30% by 2000
10% by 2020 (co-ops)
TX: 5,880 MW by 2015
HI: 40% by 2030
29 states
& DC
have an RPS
State renewable portfolio standard
State renewable portfolio goal
Solar water heating eligible
☼ Minimum solar or customer-sited requirement
*†
6 states have goals
Extra credit for solar or customer-sited renewables
Includes non-renewable alternative resources
14
2. Legislative landscape:
Tax incentives
• Federal Incentives:
• Renewed incentives Feb 2009 through 12/31/12, via ARRA
• 2.1 cents per kilowatt-hour PTC,or 30% investment tax credit (ITC)
• State incentives:
• IA: 1.5¢/kWhr, small wind, Utah, Oklahoma,
15
• Various other including sales & property tax reductions
2. Legislative landscape:
Federal, congressional bills
Waxman-Markey (House, passed)
Kerry-Boxer (Senate)
2012 renewables target
6% of electric energy renewable
2020 renewables target
20%
2012 emissions target
Cuts by 3% (2005 baseline)
2020 Emissions target
Cuts by 17%
Cuts by 20% (2005 baseline)
2030 Emissions target
42%
42%
2050 Emissions target
83%
83%
In separate bill (Bingaman)
See http://www.grist.org/article/2009-06-03-waxman-markey-bill-breakdown/
16
2. Legislative Landscape
Building Transmission
$60 billion AEP plan
Joint Coordinated System Plan
(20%wind). Cost: $82 billion (2024 $)
17
2. Legislative Landscape
Building Transmission
•Multi-state transmission is very difficult
• FERC’s authority – national interest corridors
• Regional efforts
• 2008: Uppr Mdwst Trns Dvlpmnt Initiative: MN,ND,SD,IA,WI
• 2008: Joint Coord Sys Planning: MISO, PJM, SPP, TVA, MAPP
• 2010: DOE transmission planning grants:
 Eastern Interconnection Planning Collaborative: PJM, NYISO,
ISO-NE, MISO, SoCo, TVA, MAPP, Entergy
 WECC: Most of the western companies
• Will FERC mandate if a state rejects T-plans?
18
3. The future:
US wind potential by state
Annual wind energy
potential (1012 w-hrs)
R=
Annual wind energy potential
-----------------------------------------2006 state annual retail sales
States with high production and R-ratio have high
export potential
(Montana, Dakotas, Wyoming, Nebraska, Kansas)
Analysis assumes (a) only sites having capacity factor > 20% included; (a) loss of 20%
and 10% of potential power for onshore and offshore, respectively, caused by interturbine
interference, (c) offshore siting distance within 50 nm (92.6 km) of nearest shoreline.
19
Source: Xi Lua, M. McElroya, and J. Kiviluomac, “Global
potential for wind-generated electricity,”
Proc. of the National Academy of Sciences, 2009, www.pnas.orgcgidoi10.1073pnas.0904101106.
3. The future:
US wind potential
Contiguous US annual wind energy
potential , 1015 wh
Multiples of 2008
Total US Energy Consumption*
Onshore
62
2.12
Offshore, 0-20 meter
1.2
.041
Offshore, 20-50 m
2.1
.072
Offshore, 50-200 m
2.2
.075
Total
68
2.321
•Total 2008 US Energy consumption across all sectors is 100 Quads:
100Q 
1E15BTU
kwh
1000wh


 29.3E15wh
Q
3413BTU
kwh
20
Source: Xi Lua, M. McElroya, and J. Kiviluomac, “Global
potential for wind-generated electricity,”
Proc. of the National Academy of Sciences, 2009, www.pnas.orgcgidoi10.1073pnas.0904101106.
Long-term national planning:
How wind fits in
Energy system: Electric, Fuels, Transportation
LIQUID FUEL
NATURAL GAS
Washington
Montana
New Hampshire
Maine
Minnesota
North Dakota
Oregon
Vermont
Wisconsin
Massachusetts
Idaho
New York
Michigan
South Dakota
Wyoming
Rhode Island
Nebraska
Pennsylvania
Iowa
Utah
Indiana
Delaware
Ohio
Illinois
Nevada
West Virginia
Maryland
Virginia
Colorado
Kansas
California
Missouri
Kentucky
Arizona
North Carolina
Tennessee
Oklahoma
South Carolina
Arkansas
New Mexico
Georgia
Alabama
Mississippi
Legend
Louisiana
Interstate Pipelines
Texas
Intrastate Pipelines
Florida
ELECTRIC
RAIL
AIR
22
Interstate
Connecticut
New Jersey
Energy system: Today
23
US ENERGY USE IS 69% ELECTRIC &
TRANSPORTATION
GREENING ELECTRIC & TRANSPORTATION ENERGY
SOLVES THE EMISSIONS PROBLEM
US CO2 EMISSIONS IS 74% ELECTRIC &
TRANSPORTATION
Energy system: Today
Solar, 0.09
Nuclear,
8.45
Hydro, 2.45
8.45
6.82
20.54
Electric
Generation
39.97
12.68
27.39
Wind, 0.51
Unused
Energy
(Losses)
57.07
Residential
11.48
Geothermal
0.35
Natural Gas
23.84
Commercial
8.58
Coal
22.42
Industrial
23.94
8.58
Used
Energy
42.15
20.9
Biomass
3.88
26.33
Petroleum
37.13
24
LightDuty: 17.12Q
Freight:
7.55Q
Aviation:
3.19Q
Transportation
27.86
6.95
Energy System: Transport goes electric!
A modified French high-speed
train has set a new world
speed record for a train on
conventional rails of 357 mph.
Warren Buffet's
MidAmerican Energy
Holdings bought 9.9%
of BYD for $232 million.
World's first all-electric
locomotive has over 1,000
batteries, runs 24 hours
on a single charge.
A possible future
Solar, 1.0
Nuclear, 15
Hydro, 2.95
15
INCREASE Non-CO2
6.82
12Q to
30Q
20.54
Electric
Generation
49.72
12.68
25.7
Wind, 8.1
Residential
11.48
Geothermal
3.04
Commercial
8.58
Natural Gas
23.84
Used
Energy
42.15
IGCC, 3
Old Coal
10.42
8.58
Industrial
23.94
8.5
Biomass
3.88
Petroleum
15.13
26
Unused
Energy
(Losses)
43.0
26.33
REDUCE PETROLEUM 37Q15Q
LightDuty:
Freight:
Aviation:
8.56Q
3.75Q
3.19Q
Transportation
15.5
6.95
Infrastructure planning: Environmental Impacts
22Quads Petroleum reduction×156.4lbs/MBTU*0.4535
=1560 MMT CO2
12Q Old Coal reduction×212.7lbs/MBTU*0.4535
=1157 MMT CO2
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TOTAL CO2 REDUCTION= 2717 MMT CO2
2717
100% 
 37.3%
7282
Total US 2007 GHG
If we achieve this worldwide
by 2035, there is a 75%
chance of not exceeding the
2 degree guardrail.
27
Infrastructure planning: Unit Costs
Technology
Overnight cost $/kW
Prod cost $/MWhr
(Fuel costs +
environmental cost*)
Solar thermal
5021
0
Solar PV
6038
0
Nuclear
3318
2.00
Wind onshore
1923
0
Wind offshore
3851
0
Geothermal
4000
0
Coal conventional
2058
2.95
Clean coal (IGCC+seq)
3500
4.50
*Environmental cost s assumed to be $1.5/MWhr, for nuclear, $3/MWhr
28
for conventional
coal, and $1.5/MWhr for clean coal.
Infrastructure planning: Solution Cost
Technology
Additional
capacity, GW
Overnight cost
Change in annual fuel
cost
Solar thermal
65.5
0.329
0
Solar PV
58.9
0.356
0
Nuclear
60.9
0.202
+0.0038
Wind onshore
630
1.211
0
Wind offshore
80
0.307
0
Geothermal
106
0.181
0
Reduced
0
-0.0053
29.5
0.103
+0.0010
-
1.0
-0.264
1031
3.7
-0.264
Coal conventional
Clean coal (IGCC+seq)
Elec. Transprt.
TOTALS
29
Trillion dollars
Infrastructure planning: Solution explanation
Internal
combustion
engines
Coal-fired
power plants
Why do we reduce production cost and emissions?

Because we
reduced the
use of
combustion!

30
Infrastructure planning: more questions
SOLAR
CLEAN-FOSSIL GEOTHERMAL
Where, when, & how
to interconnect?
BIOMASS
NUCLEAR
31
Wind
Conclusions
1. Wind resource not large player today.
2. Legislative landscape intent on changing that.
3. US wind energy potential: could supply 2ב08
total (100Q) energy consumption.
4. Wind must be a major player in economic
solutions to global warming.
5. 710 GW of wind by 2035, plus a little of all
other non-CO2 resources, represents US
contribution towards a feasible solution to
global warming.
32