REW: Renewable Energy Generation with Small Wind Systems Dennis Scanlin
Appalachian State University Wind Application Center
• Funding from DOE, NC State Energy Office, TVA, Wind Industry
• Goals– Test & Demonstrate turbines– Technical Assistance– Workshops– Presentations – Resource Assessment – Anemometer Loan Program– Wind for Schools
• wind.appstate.edu
• Call or email for a consultation– [email protected]– 828-262-7333
Workshop ScheduleNovember 2 – 4:
• Intro to Wind• Wind Resource Assessment
Techniques• Met. Tower Installation
November 9 – 11: • Turbine Technology• Energy Production Estimating
Wind Resource Assessment Workshop
• Agenda– Friday, November 2nd
• 8:30 – 8:45 Introductions• 8:45 – 10:00 Intro to Wind
Energy• 10:00 – 10:15 Break• 10:15 – 11:30 Wind
Resource Assessment• 11:30 – 12:30 Wind map
Activity• 12:30 – 1:30 Lunch
• 1:30 – 3:00 Met Towers & Sensors
• 3:00 – 3:15 Break• 3:15 – 4:30 Laying
out, building and setting up a met tower
• 4:30 – 5:30 Met Tower layout activity
Wind Resource Assessment Workshop
• Agenda– Saturday, 11/5
• 8:30 – 9:30 Review tower construction & raising
• 9:30 – 11:30 Tower Raising• 11:30 – 12:30 Sensors & data loggers• 12:30 – 1:30 Lunch• 1:30 – 3:00 Installation of sensors &
data logger• 3 – 3:15 Break• 3:15 – 4:30 Analyzing Wind data• 4:30 – 5:30 NRG Symphonie Data
Retriever Software
– Sunday, 11/16• 8:30 – 10:00 Met Tower
takedown• 10:00 – 11:00
Windographer Software Intro
• 11 – 12:30 Windographer activity
Wind Energy Intro
Wind Energy Benefits
1. Economically competitive
2. Valuable crop of the future for farmers and ranchers
3. Unlike most other energy sources, wind turbines don’t consume water
4. Indigenous, homegrown energy source that contributes to national security
5. Inexhaustible and infinitely renewable
6. Many environmental benefits
7. Reduces the risk of volatile fossil fuel prices
8. The fuel of today and tomorrow
9. Can be used in a variety of applications
10.People want renewable energy
Wind Power has become the least expensive and fastest growing source of electricity in the world
• Annual average growth rate over last ten years more than 30%; 24% in 2011
• Currently close to 250,000 MW installed
• Powering nearly 75 million homes
• 10% world’s electricity by 2020 if current trends continues (DOE estimate)
Global Wind Energy Council (GWEC) –www.gwec.net
Why such growth…costs!
1979: 40 cents/kWh
• Increased Turbine Size
• R&D Advances
• Manufacturing Improvements
NSP 107 MW Lake Benton wind farm
4 cents/kWh (unsubsidized)
2011: 5 cents/kWh
2000:4 - 6 cents/kWh
Annual & Cumulative Installed World Capacity in MW, 2011
World PV Capacity, 2010
Installed Wind capacity is 6 times larger than PV
2010 Cumulative Installed PV Capacity
2011 US Energy Consumption by Source
• 6.8 GW of wind power added in 2011 in U.S., 31% higher than in 2010 • $14 billion invested in wind power project additions• Cumulative wind power capacity up by 16%, bringing total to 47 GW
Wind Power Additions Increased in 2011, but Remained Below 2008 and 2009 Levels
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
Annual US Capacity (left scale)
Cumulative US Capacity (right scale)
Cum
ulat
ive
Cap
acity
(G
W)
Ann
ual C
apac
ity (
GW
)
Wind Power Comprised 32% of Electric Generating Capacity Additions in 2011
• Wind power in 2011 was again the 2nd-largest resource added (after gas, and for the 6th time in the past seven years)
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
0
20
40
60
80
100
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Tota
l Ann
ual
Cap
acity
Ad
diti
ons
(GW
)
Wind Gas Coal
Other Renewable Other Non-Renewable Wind (% of Total)
Win
d Ca
pacit
y Ad
ditio
ns(%
of T
otal
Ann
ual C
apac
ity A
dditi
ons)
Despite Ongoing Proliferation of New Entrants, “Big 3” Turbine Suppliers Gained Market Share
• Increase in number of turbine vendors serving market since 2005, but top three (in aggregate) have gained market share since 2008-09
• 2011 installations by Chinese and South Korean manufacturers included: Sany Electric, Samsung, Goldwind, Hyundai, Sinovel, and Unison
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Other
Acciona
Gamesa
REpower
Clipper
Nordex
Mitsubishi
Suzlon
Siemens
Vestas
GE Wind
Tur
bine
Man
ufac
ture
r U
.S. M
arke
t Sha
re
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
14%
16%
18%
20%
22%
24%
26%
28%
30%
De
nm
ark
Po
rtu
ga
l
Sp
ain
Ire
lan
d
Ge
rma
ny
Gre
ece UK
Sw
ed
en
Ne
the
rla
nd
s
Ita
ly
Ind
ia
Po
lan
d
U.S
.
Fra
nce
Ch
ina
Tu
rke
y
Au
stra
lia
Ca
na
da
Bra
zil
Jap
an
TO
TA
L
Approximate Wind Penetration, end of 2011
Approximate Wind Penetration, end of 2010
Approximate Wind Penetration, end of 2009
Approximate Wind Penetration, end of 2008
Approximate Wind Penetration, end of 2007
Approximate Wind Penetration, end of 2006
Est
ima
ted
Win
d G
en
era
tion
as
aP
rop
ort
ion
of
Ele
ctri
city
Co
nsu
mp
tion
U.S. Lagging Other Countries in Wind As a Percentage of Electricity Consumption
Note: Figure only includes the 20 countries with the most installed wind power capacity at the end of 2011
Note: Numbers within states represent cumulative installed wind capacity and, in parentheses, annual additions in 2011.
California Added the Most Wind Capacity in 2011; Six States Exceed 10% Wind Energy
At end of 2011:
• Texas continued to lead in cumulative capacity, by a large margin
• 20 states had >500 MW of capacity (8 had >2000 MW)
• 2 states had the ability to provide >20% of total in-state generation from wind (6 states >10%, 14 states >5%)
Capacity (MW) Percentage of In-State Generation Annual (2011) Cumulative (end of 2011) Actual (2011)* Estimated (end of 2011)**
California 921 Texas 10,394 South Dakota 22.3% South Dakota 22.1%
Illinois 692 Iowa 4,322 Iowa 18.8% Iowa 20.0%
Iowa 647 California 3,917 North Dakota 14.7% Minnesota 14.9% Minnesota 542 Illinois 2,742 Minnesota 12.7% North Dakota 14.1%
Oklahoma 525 Minnesota 2,718 Wyoming 10.1% Colorado 10.7% Colorado 506 Washington 2,573 Colorado 9.2% Oregon 10.5%
Oregon 409 Oregon 2,513 Kansas 8.2% Idaho 9.7%
Washington 367 Oklahoma 2,007 Idaho 8.2% Kansas 9.2% Texas 297 Colorado 1,805 Oregon 8.2% Oklahoma 9.1%
Idaho 265 North Dakota 1,445 Oklahoma 7.1% Wyoming 8.8% Michigan 213 Wyoming 1,412 Texas 6.9% Texas 7.3%
Kansas 200 New York 1,403 New Mexico 5.4% Maine 6.5% Wisconsin 162 Indiana 1,340 Washington 5.3% New Mexico 5.8%
West Virginia 134 Kansas 1,274 Maine 4.5% Washington 5.5%
Maine 131 Pennsylvania 789 Montana 4.2% California 4.7% New York 129 South Dakota 784 California 4.0% Montana 3.8%
Nebraska 125 New Mexico 750 Illinois 3.1% Illinois 3.7% Utah 102 Wisconsin 631 Hawaii 3.1% Hawaii 3.7%
Ohio 102 Idaho 618 Nebraska 2.9% Indiana 3.0% South Dakota 75 West Virginia 564 Indiana 2.7% Nebraska 2.9%
Rest of U.S. 274 Rest of U.S. 2,915 Rest of U.S. 0.4% Rest of U.S. 0.5%
TOTAL 6,816 TOTAL 46,916 TOTAL 2.9% TOTAL 3.2% * Based on 2011 wind and total generation by state from EIA’s Electric Power Monthly. ** Based on a projection of wind electricity generation from end-of-2011 wind power capacity, divided by total in-state electricity generation in 2011. Source: AWEA project database, EIA, Berkeley Lab estimates
Average Turbine Size Increased in 2011
• 42% of turbines installed in 2011 were > 2.0 MW, up from 28% in 2010, 24% in 2009, 20% in 2008, 16% in 2006 & 2007, and just 0.1% in previous years
0.72 MW0.89 MW
1.23 MW
1.46 MW1.60 MW 1.65 MW 1.67 MW
1.74 MW 1.80 MW1.97 MW
0.00
0.25
0.50
0.75
1.00
1.25
1.50
1.75
2.00
2.25
1998-99 2000-01 2002-03 2004-05 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
1,431 1,974 1,687 1,900 1,530 3,190 5,014 5,736 2,902 3,464
1,029 1,751 2,080 2,769 2,453 5,249 8,360 9,997 5,210 6,816
COD:
Turbines:
MW:
Ave
rage
Tur
bine
Siz
e (M
W)
Sizes and Applications
Small (100 kW)• Homes (Grid connected)• Farms• Remote Applications (e.g. battery charging,
water pumping, telecom sites, grid-tie)
Intermediate (100 kW – 1MW)
• Village / Farm Power
• Community Wind
Large (1MW-5MW)• Wind Farms• Offshore Wind Generation
Average Hub Heights and Rotor Diameters Have Increased Over Time
• On average, since 1998-99, hub heights are 25 meters (45%) higher and rotor diameters are 41 meters (86%) larger
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
1998-991,4031,001
2000-011,9741,751
2002-031,6832,074
2004-051,9182,734
20061,4772,402
20073,1905,249
20085,0048,349
20095,7339,993
20102,9015,208
20113,4646,816
Rotor Diameter
Hub Height
COD:Turbines:
MW:
Ave
rage
Rot
or D
iam
eter
and
Hub
Hei
ght (
m)
Utility Project Ownership Increased in 2011, but IPP Ownership Remained Dominant
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 20110%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
Other
Publicly Owned Utility (POU)
Investor-Owned Utility (IOU)
Independent Power Producer (IPP)
% o
f C
umul
ativ
e In
stal
led
Cap
acity
Other:155 MW (2%)
IPP: 4,965 MW (73%)
IOU:1,492 MW
(22%)
POU:204 MW (3%)
2011 Capacity byOwner Type
Utility ownership jumped to 25% in 2011 (up from 15% in 2009 and 2010) on the back of nearly 600 MW of new capacity built/owned by MidAmerican
Cost Trends
Lazard COE Analysis 2009
0200400600800
1,0001,2001,4001,6001,8002,0002,200
Jan-
97
Jan-
98
Jan-
99
Jan-
00
Jan-
01
Jan-
02
Jan-
03
Jan-
04
Jan-
05
Jan-
06
Jan-
07
Jan-
08
Jan-
09
Jan-
10
Jan-
11
Jan-
12
Announcement Date
Orders <5 MW
Orders from 5 - 100 MW
Orders >100 MW
Tur
bine
Tra
nsac
tion
Pric
e (2
011
$/kW
)
Recentreportedturbineprice
quotes
Wind Turbine Prices Continued to Decline in 2011, After Rising from 2002-2008
• Recent turbine price quotes reportedly in the range of $900-1,270/kW, with more-favorable terms for buyers and improved technology
Though Slow to Reflect Declining Wind Turbine Prices, Reported Installed Project Costs Finally Turned the Corner in 2011
Note: 2012 sample of 20 projects totaling ~2.6 GW is preliminary, but suggests lower costs for 2012 projects
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
4,000
4,500
5,000
198
21
98
31
98
41
98
51
98
61
98
71
98
81
98
91
99
01
99
11
99
21
99
31
99
41
99
51
99
61
99
71
99
81
99
92
00
02
00
12
00
22
00
32
00
42
00
52
00
62
00
72
00
82
00
92
01
02
01
12
01
2
Inst
alle
d P
roje
ct C
ost
(2
01
1 $
/kW
)
Individual Project Cost (584 projects totaling 42,614 MW)
Capacity-Weighted Average Project Cost
Economies of Scale Evident At Least At Low End of Project Size Range
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
3,500
4,000
4,500
5,000
≤5 MW 5-20 MW 20-50 MW 50-100 MW 100-200 MW >200 MW
100 MW 430 MW 1,404 MW 4,372 MW 9,605 MW 5,284 MW
52 projects 34 projects 39 projects 56 projects 72 projects 22 projects
Inst
alle
d P
roje
ct C
ost (
2011
$/k
W)
Capacity-Weighted Average Project Cost
Individual Project Cost
Sample includes projects built from 2009-2011
Newer Projects Appear to Show Improvements in Operations and Maintenance Costs
Capacity-weighted average 2000-11 O&M costs for projects built in the 1980s equal $33/MWh, dropping to $23/MWh for projects built in 1990s, and to $10/MWh for projects built since 2000Note: Sample is limited, and consists of 133 wind power projects totaling 7,965 MW; few projects in sample have complete records of O&M costs from 2000-11; O&M costs reported here DO NOT include all operating costs
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
701
98
2
19
83
19
84
19
85
19
86
19
87
19
88
19
89
19
90
19
91
19
92
19
93
19
94
19
95
19
96
19
97
19
98
19
99
20
00
20
01
20
02
20
03
20
04
20
05
20
06
20
07
20
08
20
09
20
10
Commercial Operation Date
Projects with no 2011 O&M data
Projects with 2011 O&M data
Polynomial Trend Line (all projects)
Ave
rag
e A
nn
ua
l O&
M C
ost
20
00
-20
11
(2
01
1 $
/MW
h)
Average Capacity Factors Have Improved Over Time, But Leveled Off in Recent Years
• General improvement reflects increase in hub height and rotor diameter• Drop in 2009 and 2010, and rebound in 2011, driven in part by: (1) inter-
annual wind resource variation, and (2) wind power curtailment
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
5 12 41 84 97 119 143 168 210 254 354 466 397
544 1,000 1,531 3,271 3,811 5,211 5,880 8,712 10,695 15,670 24,368 34,213 37,606
Capacity F
acto
r
Based on Estimated Generation (if no curtailment in subset of regions)
Based on Actual Generation (with curtailment)
4-Year Moving Average (based on estimated generation)
Year:
Projects:
MW:
Cumulative, Sample-Wide Wind Power Prices Continued to Move Higher in 2011
General trend of falling and then rising prices consistent with the project cost trends shown earlier, but cumulative nature of figure results in a smoother, less-responsive curve that lags the directional changes in cost trends
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
11 12 22 33 47 64 80 97 120 150 184 233 271
588 600 741 1,444 2,294 3,103 4,056 4,987 7,980 10,535 13,701 17,190 20,189
Cumulative Capacity-Weighted Average Wind Power Price (with 25% and 75% quartiles)
Win
d P
ower
Pric
e (2
011
$/M
Wh)
Year:
Projects:
MW:
Sample includes projects built from 1998-2011
Low Wholesale Electricity Prices Continued to Challenge the Relative Economics of Wind Power
• Wholesale price range reflects flat block of power across 23 pricing nodes across the U.S.
• Recent wholesale prices reflect low natural gas prices, driven by weak economy and shale gas
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
47 projects 64 projects 80 projects 97 projects 120 projects 150 projects 184 projects 233 projects 271 projects
2,294 MW 3,103 MW 4,056 MW 4,987 MW 7,980 MW 10,535 MW 13,701 MW 17,190 MW 20,189 MW
2011
$/M
Wh
Nationwide Wholesale Power Price Range (for a flat block of power)
Cumulative Capacity-Weighted Average Wind Power Price (with 25% and 75% quartiles)
Wind project sample includes projects built from 1998-2011
State Policies Help Direct Location and Amount of Wind Development, but Current Policies Cannot Support
Continued Growth at Levels Seen in the Recent Past
• 29 states and D.C. have mandatory RPS
Non-Binding Goal
Source: Berkeley Lab
WI: 10% by 2015
NV: 25% by 2025
TX: 5,880 MW by 2015
PA: 8.5% by 2020
NJ: 22.5% by 2020CT: 23% by 2020
MA: 11.1% by 2009 +1%/yr
ME: 40% by 2017
NM: 20% by 2020 (IOUs)10% by 2020 (co-ops)
CA: 33% by 2020
MN: 25% by 2025Xcel: 30% by 2020
IA: 105 MW by 1999
MD: 20% by 2022
RI: 16% by 2019
HI: 40% by 2030
AZ: 15% by 2025
NY: 30% by 2015
CO: 30% by 2020 (IOUs)10% by 2020 (co-ops and munis)
MT: 15% by 2015
DE: 25% by 2025
DC: 20% by 2020
WA: 15% by 2020
NH: 23.8% by 2025
OR: 25% by 2025 (large utilities)5-10% by 2025 (smaller utilities)
NC: 12.5% by 2021 (IOUs)10% by 2018 (co-ops and munis)
IL: 25% by 2025
Mandatory RPS
VT: 20% by 2017ND: 10% by 2015
VA: 15% by 2025MO: 15% by 2021
OH: 12.5% by 2024
SD: 10% by 2015
UT: 20% by 2025
MI: 10% by 2015
KS: 20% of peak demand by 2020
OK: 15% by 2015
AK: 50% by 2025
US Small Wind Capacity
Small Wind CapacityTurbines up to 100 kW Cumulative Installations
Sources include EFO, AWEA & DWEA; estimated capacity scaled from actual data and sales reports collected from numerous manufacturers, NREL, USDA, U.S. Treasury and 30+ state agencies
< 1 MW1 - 2.5 MW2.5 - 5 MW5 - 10 MW10 - 20 MW
200 MWTotal US Installed Capacity
Year
> 20 MW
Puerto Rico and USVI
2011
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700
CaliforniaArizona
OhioWisconsin
IowaNew YorkWyomingVermont
WashingtonNevada
MassachusettsMinnesota
MontanaMaryland
IllinoisAlaska
OregonNew Jersey
ColoradoKansas
NebraskaMichigan
IdahoTexas
VirginiaPennsylvania
OklahomaMaine
South DakotaTennessee
UtahNorth Carolina
ArkansasMissouri
North DakotaConnecticut
GeorgiaNew MexicoRhode Island
DCDelawareKentucky
FloridaMississippi
Units Installed pre-2010
Units Installed 2010
Units Installed 2011
Small Wind Turbines Installed with Federal, State, Utility & Local Funding Assistance
Number of Units Installed
www.windpolicytool.org
2011 U.S. Small Wind Market Highlights• The 27 small wind turbine manufacturers from North America and
Europe responding to AWEA’s survey reported total 2011 worldwide sales of $397 million USD, totaling more than 21,000 units and 64 megawatts (MW)
• U.S. manufacturers’ combined domestic sales and exports were 33 MW, up 13.4% over 2010
• Total U.S. cumulative sales (including imports) reached 198 MW, representing 151,300 total units installed in the U.S. in 2011 (annually displacing 178,000 metric tons of CO2)
• As a result of the poor economy and inconsistent incentives in 2011, the U.S. small wind market declined by 26%, with 19 MW of new sales, representing 7,303 turbines, and $115 million in installed system revenue; sales revenues declined by 17%, with units sold down by 6.5%
• 54% of U.S. manufacturers’ sales capacity went to overseas markets, reflecting a dramatic increase (from 7.8 MW in 2010 to 17.7 MW in 2011)
2011 US Small Wind Market Highlights
• 11 international manufacturers (including 4 from U.S.) reported total sales exceeding 1 MW
• Domestic sales by U.S. manufacturers accounted for an 80% share of the 2011 U.S. market
• Sales of turbines in the U.S. for on-grid installations remained dominant, with a 91% market share of sales capacity, continuing the 2010 trend
• 27 manufacturers with a U.S. sales presence, including those from Europe and Canada, reported sales of 57 wind turbine models
• The average installed cost of small wind turbines in the U.S. in 2011 was $6,040/kW, an 11% increase from 2010
2011 Small Wind Industry/Market Developments
• U.S. economy remained sluggish, residential market especially affected; ag and commercial markets for >10 kW turbines remained good
• U.S. state incentive markets in turmoil (e.g., CA, NJ, WI, OH, NV)• Innovative state policies in several eastern states showed promise• First two turbine models certified to the AWEA standard by Small
Wind Certification Council (SWCC); an additional 26 were in testing• Interstate Turbine Advisory Council (ITAC) formed to address state
incentive qualification guidelines and turbine performance requirements
• U.S. small wind industry represents 1,600 full-time equivalent jobs• U.S. manufacturers maintained 80-85% domestic content
U.S. Small Wind Industry Challenges
• Inconsistent, erratic state incentive programs• Non-certified turbine entrants• Planning & Zoning ordinances (height, setbacks, sound) • State RPS solar set-asides & solar RECs• Competitive economics (PV, rural tariffs) • Financing • Utility resistance• Site performance prediction• USDA REAP program dramatically reduced• USFWS guidelines*• Public loss of energy/environment focus
No Offshore Turbines Commissioned in the U.S., But 10 Projects Totaling 3.8 GW Are Somewhat More Advanced in Development
• Two projects have power purchase agreements (PPAs):
• Cape Wind (MA)
• Deepwater (RI)
• Nation’s first offshore wind power PPA cancelled in 2011: NRG Bluewater (DE)
http://www.windpoweringamerica.gov/pdfs/economic_development/2009/nc_wind_benefits_factsheet.pdf
Public Attitudes Towards Wind Energy
• 6 NC Wind Surveys since 1982• Mod-1 Survey in 1982• 2002 Survey by Dennis Grady of the Appalachian State University
Energy Center• 2003 Survey by Dennis Grady of the Appalachian State University
Energy Center• March 2010 Survey by Elon University Survey• April 2010 Survey by PPP, Taylor, Scanlin & Kersey of Appalachian State
University • May 2010 Survey of Watuaga County by Marcus Taylor of Appalachian
State University
• In every survey the majority of respondents indicate support for wind energy
1982 Mod -1 Survey• 73% felt turbine had
a positive impact on surrounding area
• 81% felt wind energy had potential in western NC
• 90% indicated that the wind turbine never adversely affected them in any way
2002 Survey in Western NC
• 75.3 % wanted to see more wind energy used• 63.5% felt turbines should be permitted on ridge
tops in western NC• 79% indicated that single turbines would be
permitted in western NC on privately owned land• 57.3 indicated that clusters of wind turbines on
ridge tops should be permitted• 50.5% supported the installation of wind turbines
in National Forests
Elon March 2010 NC State Survey
• 79.5% supported the construction of wind turbines in the mountains of North Carolina
Spring 2010 PPP Wind Survey
75.3% indicated “more” in 2002 survey
Spring 2010 PPP Wind Survey
Turbines on Mountain Ridges
Comparison of 2002 & 2010 Results
2010 Watauga County Survey
2010 Watauga County Survey
2010 Watauga Survey
2010 Watauga Survey
2010 Watauga Survey
2010 Watauga Survey
Policy & Wind in NC
• Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Portfolio Standard (REPS), 2007
• 35% State Tax Credit • 30% Federal Tax Credit• Accelerated depreciation
deduction for commercial projects
• NC Green Power Program• Netmetering• Mountain Ridge Protection Act• Wind Permitting Bill• Model Wind Ordinance
Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Portfolio Standard (REPS)
• August 2007• First state in the Southeast • 12.5%by 2021 from
renewable energy resources or energy efficiency measures.
• Rural electric cooperatives and municipal electric suppliers are subject to a 10% REPS requirement
• Approx 20,000 Million KWH/year
Model Ordinance for NC
• 3 size classifications– Under 20 kW– 20 kW to 100 kW– Over 100 kW
• Setbacks from 1.1 to 2.5 times height of turbine• Includes standard definitions, permit application recommendations, noise
& shadow flicker maximums & decommissioning
Mountain Ridge Protection Act of 1983
“No building, structure or unit shall protrude at its uppermost point above the crest of the ridge by more than 35’ “
Exemptions to Ridge Law
Water, radio, telephone or television towers or any equipment for the transmission of electricity or communications or both.
Structures of a relatively slender nature and minor vertical projections of a parent building, including chimneys, flagpoles, flues, spires, steeples, belfries, cupolas, antennas, poles, wires, or windmills
“The Legislature in 1983 had in mind, the traditional, solitary farm windmill which has long been in use in rural communities, not windfarm turbines
of the size, type, or certainly number proposed here…”
NC Attorney General’s 2/4/2002 letter to TVA
Permitting of Wind Energy FacilitiesHouse Bill 809; Senate Bill 1068
• > 2 MW• Permitting requirements
defined• $2,000 fee• Public hearing(s) required• Proposes a modification of
ridge law exemption for windmills
• Exclusion Zones being discussed
Original SB 1068
• Windmills, including wind turbines for the generation of electricity having less than 100 KW rated capacity and wind turbines of 100 KW capacity and above to the extent allowed by a city or county ordinance regulating the siting of wind turbines
Substitute Bills #1 & #3
• Windmills, when the windmill is a solitary structure and is not used to generate electricity for the public consumption
• Windmills, if the windmill is associated with a residence, the primary purpose of the windmill is to generate electricity for use within the residence, and the windmill is no more than 100 feet from the base to the turbine hub
Top Related