Thinking Green, Speaking Green

How Much Will Offshore Wind Really Cost?

Sun, 20 Mar 2011 23:01:00 -0500

How Much Will Offshore Wind Really Cost?

A leading U.S. researcher explains how and why deep ocean offshore wind can be the cost-effective renewable energy answer.

The cost of harvesting offshore wind energy may be a lot lower than the early numbers from controversial projects suggest.

There are “almost 4,000 gigawatts of capacity within 50 nautical miles of U.S. coasts,” said Dr. Habib J. Dagher, Director of both the Composite Center and the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE)-funded DeepC Wind Consortium at the University of Maine, “and the total U.S. electricity capacity is around 1,000 gigawatts.”

It is, Dagher said, “the largest single opportunity we have in renewable energy.” And, he added, “the majority of our population lives in the coastal states and has access to this resource.”

The real question, however, is whether the resource can be harvested competitively. Dagher says his research consortium’s findings suggest it can if it is done right.

“It’s unfortunate,” Dagher said, discussing the small Block Island shallow water offshore wind project off Rhode Island and the controversial Cape Wind offshore project off Massachusetts, “that people say that’s the price of offshore wind.”

The five-to-eight-turbine Block Island’s power purchase agreement (PPA), currently under legal challenge, is priced at 24.4 cents per kilowatt-hour. The 130-turbine Cape Wind’s PPA is priced at 18.7 cents per kilowatt-hour. The average price of electricity in New England vacillates in the 15 to 17 cents per kilowatt-hour range.

The cost of electricity from those emerging offshore projects is, Dagher said, very expensive because they have “large uncertainties and a large learning curve. Those costs do not truly reflect where this industry will be in ten years if we scale up the industry properly.” They are, he added, “pioneering projects.”

“Deep offshore wind and shallow or medium depth offshore wind are completely different technologies,” Dagher explained of the DeepC Consortium’s thrust. “The basic difference is the cost of construction offshore.”

Europe has built more than 20 shallow and medium-depth projects using heavy equipment to put turbines and other infrastructure in place. "The jack-up barges and cranes will cost you $150,000 to $200,000 a day to run. Building offshore is very costly. And there is the cost of capital, as well,” Dagher said. “The more building you do in the water, the more the capital costs go up.”

Dagher and his group want to build floating turbines that can be towed out to sea and anchored, eliminating the costs and risks of construction. “Our approach is to do as much as we can on land, pre-assemble these units, and do very little in the water. That’s how we’re going to save money.”

Funded by DOE after being chosen in open competition, Dagher’s DeepC Consortium has evaluated fourteen proprietary floating turbine proposals and selected six to study in detail. Careful comparisons indicate that five-megawatt floating turbines will require no more “material costs” than fixed turbines, but will eliminate the costs of ocean construction.

According to turbine manufacturers’ rule-of-thumb, Dagher said, “If you’re going to build something on land and it’s going to cost you a dollar, if you’re going to build it at quay-side, it might cost you three or four dollars and if you’re going to go out and build it twenty miles offshore, it might cost you six to ten dollars.”

Instead of “being at the mercy of the elements” in the “two or three months of the year you can do this kind of work” and paying hundreds of thousands of dollars in barge and crane costs, a quay-side-built, five-megawatt floating turbine can be towed twenty miles offshore with a twenty-ton tugboat in ten hours.

Using this strategy, Dagher’s group has concluded, offshore wind-generated electricity can almost match the price of electricity consumers are now paying, exclusive of the costs for delivering it. “Half of the price is transmission and distribution, the other half is generating electrons,” Dagher said. “If I’m paying sixteen cents, eight cents is used to make the electrons.”

The goal of Dagher’s consortium is to get the cost of generation “to ten cents per kilowatt-hour, plugged into the grid, by 2020, if we scale up to a thousand megawatts.”

The crucial assumption, he stipulated, is that the industry matures enough by 2020 to the point where it achieves the capacity to build 1,000-megawatt projects. At that size, economies of scale will make it possible to build floating wind farms at costs that will meet the ten cents goal.

That goal includes the cost of transmitting the electricity generated at sea to the grid, a cost that will be considerable for early and small projects like Block Island and Cape Wind. When projects such as the Google-led Atlantic Wind Development consortium’s Atlantic Wind Connection transmission backbone are in place off the coasts, the costs of getting electricity to the grid will go down.

“Transmission and distribution is a key barrier,” Dagher said. “I think it’s a critical project.” Separating the building of transmission from the building of the wind farm “takes a huge load off the investors, the developers and the capital.”

One other thing is needed, however. “Everything starts with government policy,” Dagher said. "The U.S. needs a goal, a target,” he insisted. “Industry is ready to move but they need a stable policy.” And the policy, he added, must have incentives that ease the burden of taking on the enormous risks of entirely new and unproven technologies -- like floating wind turbines.

Battle-proof Wind Farms Survive Japan's Trial by Fire

Sat, 19 Mar 2011 23:01:00 -0500

Battle-proof Wind Farms Survive Japan's Trial by Fire

As the world collectively holds its breath to see how the Fukushima crisis plays out (the quote of the day has got to be: "The worst-case scenario doesn't bear mentioning and the best-case scenario keeps getting worse...") there's a positive story which is not yet being reported.

Despite assertions by its detractors that wind energy would not survive an earthquake or tsunami the Japanese wind industry is still functioning and helping to keep the lights on during the Fuksuhima crisis.

Wind Farm in Japan by rjzii

Colleagues and I have been directly corresponding with Yoshinori Ueda leader of the International Committee of the Japan Wind Power Association & Japan Wind Energy Association, and according to Ueda there has been no wind facility damage reported by any association members, from either the earthquake or the tsunami. Even the Kamisu semi-offshore wind farm, located about 300km from the epicenter of the quake, survived. Its anti-earthquake "battle proof design" came through with flying colors.

Mr. Ueda confirms that most Japanese wind turbines are fully operational. Indeed, he says that electric companies have asked wind farm owners to step up operations as much as possible in order to make up for shortages in the eastern part of the country:

Eurus Energy Japan says that 174.9MW with eight wind farms (64% of their total capacity with 11 wind farms in eastern part of Japan) are in operation now. The residual three wind farms (Kamaishi 42.9MW, Takinekoshirai 46MW, Satomi 10.02MW) are stopped due to the grid failure caused by the earthquake and Tsunami. Satomi is to re-start operations in a few days. Kamaishi is notorious for tsunami disaster, but this wind farm is safe because it is locate in the mountains about 900m high from sea level.

The largest wind farm operator in Japan, Eurus Energy with about 22% of all wind turbines in Japan, is a subsidiary of Tokyo Electric Company (TEPCO) which operates the Fukushima nuclear facility. Right now, it is likely the company is very happy about its diversified portfolio:

While shares in the Tokyo stock market have fallen during the crisis, the stock price of Japan Wind Development Co. Ltd. has risen from 31,500 yen on 11 March to 47,800 yen on 16 March.

The Little Engine That Could has proven itself once again. What are your thoughts on the Fukushima crisis and do you think it will impact future energy policy around the world?

GMP: Vt. wind power facility had best year in 2010

Fri, 18 Mar 2011 23:01:00 -0500

GMP: Vt. wind power facility had best year in 2010

COLCHESTER, Vt.

Vermont's second largest electric utility says its southern Vermont wind power facility in Searsburg had its best year last year.

Green Mountain Power says above average wind speed helped the facility produce 14.7 million kilowatt hours of electricity, enough to power more than 2,000 Vermont homes.

The figure was well above the 11.8 million kilowatt hour average the wind turbines have produced in their 13-year history.

GMP President Mary Power says the Searsburg wind project has been a cost-effective way to provide customers with renewable energy.

The 6-megawatt facility in Searsburg is Vermont's only utility-operated wind powered electric generation facility.

GMP is owned by Northern New England Energy Corp., a subsidiary of Canada-based Gaz Metro.

Japan's Nuclear Crisis Could Aid Renewable Energy

Thu, 17 Mar 2011 23:01:00 -0500

As Japan reels from explosions and meltdowns at nuclear reactors damaged by last week’s tsunami, there’s talk in Washington about reining in the United States’ nuclear ambitions — discussions that will have an effect in Nevada.

Early cries for a moratorium on nuclear plant construction — some from Washington’s most vocal proponents of nuclear energy — suggest the disaster is going to affect the energy debate at home.

For Nevada, ending or significantly scaling back nuclear development could either bring about the demise of or facilitate renewable energy development. It could also do the same for the proposed Yucca Mountain nuclear waste repository.

Nuclear energy has been enjoying a renaissance in Washington, especially since Republicans scored major gains in the 2010 elections.

In a political climate where the energy debate has been dominated by competing cries of “cap-and-trade” or “drill, baby, drill,” nuclear energy was the one place where Republicans and the Obama administration agreed that investment and development was essential.

Because it provided common ground, nuclear energy has appeared to be the best means to balance competing interests on energy investment. Although too divided to hope for a comprehensive bill, lawmakers hoped that nuclear energy could facilitate compromises on federal loan guarantees — such as those for a planned solar plant in Tonopah — and establishing a national clean energy standard.

“If there was any hope for a clean energy standard, I don’t think you can get there without nuclear in the mix,” said Kenneth Green, an energy analyst with the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative think tank in Washington.

The trade-off between nuclear energy and renewable energy — both considered “clean” — is financial as well as political.

Nuclear power plants aren’t cheap: It costs about $10 billion to build one, meaning government-backed loans are essential to their construction. That’s a far steeper price than most renewable energy projects, but nuclear plants produce far more energy than your average solar or wind farm.

Scuttling funding for nuclear development doesn’t translate into a windfall for renewable energy projects, however — especially as lawmakers are looking to reduce federal spending. Also, nuclear’s backers aren’t going to pull the plug.

“I think it’s important to wait and see ... it’s not a reason for any snap decisions on anything,” said Sen. John McCain of Arizona, a nuclear energy proponent.

“I don’t think right after a major environmental catastrophe is a very good time to be making American domestic policy,” Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell said.

But the political process doesn’t always follow such logic. The United States all but abandoned nuclear energy more than 30 years ago after the meltdown of a reactor at Three Mile Island in Pennsylvania. The events in Japan have exceeded the severity of that catastrophe, and public safety officials are bracing for potentially more fires and explosions that could release more radioactivity into the air.

“You would have to be out of your mind to witness what we are seeing happening in Japan and still be urging this country to move toward nuclear energy with all deliberate haste,” Nevada Rep. Shelley Berkley said. “This should be a wake-up call to us: If we can’t do it better and learn from their mistakes, we’d better seriously look at alternative energy.”

Part of the concern for many lawmakers speaking out against nuclear energy comes from Japan’s reputation for technological advancement, and a nuclear industry with the best safeguards. The nuclear reactors in Japan had multiple backup systems, all of which failed under the tsunami’s sudden and powerful waves.

That’s raising the question for many about how safe U.S. reactors are, and in Nevada, about just how safe the Yucca Mountain site is — a concern that’s been somewhat eclipsed by worries about safe transportation in recent years.

“Some people who’ve long wanted to dump America’s nuclear waste in Nevada will use the Japanese disaster as a reason to tote it to Nevada,” and get it out of their own backyards, said Daniel Weiss, an energy expert at the Center for American Progress. He noted that opinion polls show even Americans who favor the expansion of nuclear power usually don’t want it near them.

In Japan, “the site is failing and could release a lot of radioactivity if it fails completely ... they’re just a tornado, a hurricane and flood away from having a huge environmental disaster,” he said.

According to the U.S. Geological Survey, Nevada ranks fourth in the nation for seismic activity — a factor in the design of the Yucca Mountain repository, as it is in the design and construction of nuclear facilities across the country.

But as the Japanese reactors illustrate, even the best designs can’t withstand every force majeure.

Yucca Mountain hasn’t been officially funded since President Barack Obama took control of federal budget requests, but the site is progressing through a certification process with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. In the past few weeks, House Republicans have also taken steps toward reviving, or at least preserving, the site as a dump, including a prohibition on using federal dollars to scale down site activity in preparation for storage or reprocessing of spent fuel.

Most of Nevada’s lawmakers, in both parties, have opposed efforts to develop the site.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has maintained that Yucca is dead since long before the Japanese nuclear crisis. But when asked whether fears of similar accidents in the United States would change the energy debate enough to remove it from the political dialogue entirely, Reid is tight-lipped. It’s a stance that likely has more to do with not wanting to prognosticate the future of renewable energy than any wavering on Yucca Mountain.

Without nuclear, potential energy deals of all kinds seem less probable. But there’s far less incentive to stop the energy discussion at a time when the country is struggling with rising oil and gas prices, the result of turmoil in the Middle East.

A group of Republican senators, including Nevada’s John Ensign, introduced what they called a budget-neutral compromise to develop both the country’s carbon-fuel resources — including opening up the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to drilling — and use profits to support fledgling renewable energy projects.

“We would pay for renewable energy development with our own money and not with China, Saudi Arabia, and Russia’s, who own our outstanding debt,” Ensign said.

Although a proposal like that could win support on the argument it increases U.S. energy independence and national security, it does so at the expense of the clean-and-green ethos behind the renewable energy movement — making it a trade-off many Democrats probably wouldn’t support.

It’s potentially another setback for a fledgling renewables sector that Nevada’s depending on for an economic boom, but that’s in desperate need of government support.

Turbines could generate revenue for schools

Mon, 14 Mar 2011 23:01:00 -0500

Turbines could generate revenue for schools

BY BRIAN L. HUCHEL Commercial-News The Commercial-News Sun Mar 13, 2011, 04:11 AM CDT

HOOPESTON — Education officials around Vermilion County are looking to the sky and hoping the towering wind turbines expected to be built in several locations will bring a profitable wind of change to their school district.

Schools around Illinois are faced with growing debt as they await state funding that has fallen further behind. But in Vermilion County, school officials have discovered the world of alternate energy as a potential future provider of alternate funding.

In February, International Power filed an application with the county for the Hoopeston Wind Project. The project calls for the construction of 43 wind turbines along a stretch reaching from around 3 miles east of Illinois Route 49 to the Hubbard Trail Country Club north of Rossville.

The county is still going through the permit and approval process for the wind turbine project, so school districts are not in a hurry to start adding the potential funds to their budgets yet. But the anticipation is definitely there for some.

Jamie Dorsey, superintendent at Potomac school district, has received word that her district could see as many as four or five wind turbines erected in the northern part of the county.

She said the state average that a wind turbine earns a school district in the end is around $9,000 per turbine, or the potential for $36,000 or more for the Potomac district.

“That would be a big boost, especially for a small district like ours,” Dorsey said.

A majority of the turbines are expected to be built in the Hoopeston Area School District, which stretches across the northern part of the county, enveloping Hoopeston as well as the smaller towns of Cheneyville to the east and Rankin to the west.

Superintendent Hank Hornbeck said officials there have not had a lot of talk about the wind turbines at this point, saying he is waiting to see what develops.

“We’re cautiously optimistic at this point,” he added, noting that he can’t see where the turbines could hurt a community or school district.

Rossville-Alvin Interim Superintendent Randy Hird said there’s still a lot of work to be done, but estimates the wind turbines could mean as much as $100,000 a year for the district, which is second behind Hoopeston Area in the number of turbines that could be located there.

“That’s the technical term for a windfall,” Hird said. “We’re very hopeful.”

Nearby example

Local educators need only look to the west where the Ridgeview school district in McLean County and Gibson City-Melvin-Sibley school district in Ford County have seen the benefits of the Twin Groves Wind Farm.

The wind farm, a 240-turbine project that was completed in 2008, features 161 turbines in the Ridgeview district. Ridgeview Superintendent Larry Dodds said he has been “pleasantly surprised” by the monetary results of having 161 of the turbines in his district.

According to figures he presented at a wind farms conference in February, the district of almost 600 students is seeing a steadily rising equalized assessed valuation as a result of the fair market value of the turbines. The equalized assessed valuation includes all computed property values upon which a district’s local tax rate is calculated.

According to Dodds, Illinois state law dictates that turbines are valued at a rate of $360,000 per megawatt. In the case of Ridgeview, the turbines operate at 1.65 megawatts each.

The Hoopeston wind farm turbines are expected to operate at 2.3 megawatts.

With the turbines now part of the equation, the Ridgeview district has seen its equalized assessed valuation jump from $61,978,117 in tax year 2006 — prior to the wind farm — to $102,721,092 in the 2009 fiscal year. The result has been wind farm revenue totals for the 2012 fiscal year that reach $1.7 million. That total is well over the $380,816 generated in the 2007 tax year — the first year that Dodds said the wind farm appeared on the tax rolls.

“It has been a Godsend,” Dodds said.

The biggest change, according to Dodds, comes in the form of general state aid that is paid out annually to the school districts. As the equalized assessed valuation goes up, the general state aid goes down.

It’s not a one-for-one loss,” he said. “Last year, we took in $1.85 million (in net wind turbine revenue) and lost $700,000 though general state aid.”

Future plans

In recent years, Horizon, Invenergy Wind Development and Eco-Energy have each initiated preliminary plans for specific wind turbine projects in the western and southern parts of the county.

That is good news, said William Mulvaney, superintendent of Armstrong-Ellis Consolidated District 61 and Armstrong Township High School. The most recent reports he received indicated Invenergy could locate as many as 100 wind turbines in his district.

Everything is still up in the air at this point, as Invenergy has not even filed for a permit to build the turbines in Vermilion County. But Mulvaney said the revenue, if everything happens, could be in the $500,000 to $550,000 range.

That compares, he said, to the $125,000 to $150,000 in general state aid the school district receives.

“That’s a huge jump for us,” he said.

According to Dodds, the wind turbines slowly depreciate at a rate of 4 percent over 25 years. Mulvaney said that’s not a concern because as the depreciation begins, the general state aid will begin to increase.

“Let’s face it, right now where we all are, we’re all hurting for money,” Mulvaney said. “The state is not paying up what they owe, so anything that is a positive revenue stream is good.”

Dodds stressed schools can’t start budgeting for the money now.

“The key is they have to be built,” he said of the turbines. “Until then, nothing happens. Don’t spend it until you get it.”

Study: Wind Power Can Save Money, Create Jobs

Sun, 13 Mar 2011 23:01:00 -0500

Study: Wind Power Can Save Money, Create Jobs

Md. Lawmakers Consider Making Utilities Buy Wind Power

POSTED: 6:38 pm EST March 10, 2011
UPDATED: 7:13 pm EST March 10, 2011

ANNAPOLIS, Md. -- Harnessing off-shore wind power saves consumers money, helps clean up the environment and creates jobs, according to a study released Thursday by Environment Maryland and the United Steel Workers.

The report comes as the General Assembly considers legislation designed to jumpstart the industry.

Industry officials estimate a 500-megawatt wind park off the coast of Ocean City would create 2,000 manufacturing jobs over a five-year period, along with 400 permanent supply and maintenance positions.

"We are all hoping this wind energy industry creates a manufacturing hub for suppliers of off-shore wind farms throughout the Mid-Atlantic," said Brad Heavner of Environment Maryland.

Each wind turbine would contain up to 300 tons of steel. The cables that connect turbines to the grid are another piece of the manufacturing possibility.

Builders and steel workers said they see it as an opportunity to turn their industries around.

"Construction is the first to feel the pressures of an economic downturn, and we are the last to recover," said Rod Easter of the Baltimore Building Construction Trades Council.

"We no longer make things, not only here in Maryland but throughout the country. We no longer make things like we should," said Jim Strong of the United Steel Workers Union.

The O'Malley administration is sponsoring legislation directing the Public Service Commission to require state utilities to sign 20-year contracts to buy electricity from wind farms off Maryland's coast.

"The investors know that if they put in a $1 billion, $1.5 billion, they are going to have a commitment that their energy is going to be purchased for the next 20 to 25 years. Without that, it's hard to go ahead," said Sen. Paul Pinsky, D-Prince George's County.

AC Wind, a wind energy manufacturing and services firm, is partnering with a company called MFG to open a blade manufacturing facility in Salisbury. Company President John Congedo said he believes Maryland is well-positioned to take the lead in off-shore wind projects along the East Coast.

"We stand ready to take the truly skilled labor force that exists in the Salisbury area and to put them back to work and build these epic-sized composites," Congedo said.

The bill is meeting resistance in the Senate and is being referred back to the Finance Committee. A hearing is scheduled for Tuesday.

A House committee heard the bill last week.

Group to build largest wind farm in Canada

Sun, 13 Mar 2011 00:01:00 -0500

Group to build largest wind farm in Canada

Calgary will reap the rewards of Canada’s largest wind farm being built by a local company, says its CEO.

Greengate Power Corp. announced Thursday it has received provincial approval to go ahead with its Blackspring Ridge 1 project in Vulcan County, approximately 165 kilometres southeast of Calgary.

The wind farm is expected to be in-service in 2013 and capable of generating a nation-leading 300 megawatts.

“It will provide a substantial emissions-free source of power for the province,” said Greengate CEO Dan Balaban. “This is something that has a very large-scale and intangible impact economically and environmentally.”

Calgary alderman Brian Pincott, a longtime proponent of green initiatives, said Greengate’s achievement is helping the city set itself up as Canada’s green energy capital.

“I think this bodes really well, because you bring green generation close to where the load is,” he said. “You have got built-in sustainability there.”

Balaban added that he believes creating provincial policy encouraging the growth of renewable energy would allow Alberta to reach its full potential.

“I believe we would see an absolute explosion of growth in this industry,” he said.

Surge In Oil Prices Will Aid Clean Energy

Sat, 12 Mar 2011 09:01:19 -0500

Surge In Oil Prices Will Aid Clean Energy

Surge In OiL Prices Will Aid Clean Energy

The latest surge in oil prices may help the renewable energy industry reach a turning point after years of boom-and-bust cycles long dictated by the rise and fall in gas prices.

Solar, wind and biofuel investors and analysts said the latest run-up in prices caused by unrest in Libya and other oil-producing nations could lead to lasting interest in alternate sources of energy.

They point to several factors converging at the same time that give the industry such hope. Public awareness and worries about climate change, pollution and dwindling resources are at an all-time high. Government funding for alternative energy projects is also on the rise.

"This is a crisis that's creating a teachable moment, showing us that we're going in the wrong direction," said Denise Bode, chief executive of the American Wind Energy Assn. "People have been in this situation too many times, and once they see that the alternatives are the real deal, they'll never go back."

Concerns that the country's addiction to foreign oil could pose national security risks and that the environment is fraying are stronger than ever, said Bode, who is also the former president of the Independent Petroleum Assn. of America.

In California, more than half of the 1.2 billion gallons of gasoline guzzled each month come from foreign sources, according to U.S. government figures. James DiGeorgia, editor of the Gold & Energy Advisor website, said he believes that if countries such as Algeria follow Libya's political upheaval, oil prices could more than double to upward of $200 a barrel.

"We've gone from a relatively secure position to a very insecure one," Jim Boyd, vice chairman of the California Energy Commission, said in a statement. "Our exposure to the vagaries and instability of the world oil market has increased by a factor of 10 since the early 1990s."

Since then, the renewable energy industry has compiled a stable of high-profile supporters. President Obama said he wants 80% of the energy in the U.S. to come from "clean" sources by 2035. Former Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger regularly visited wind and solar energy production sites cropping up throughout California.

"Why should a dried-up little country like Libya with a crazy dictator play havoc with America's economy and security?" he asked at a recent summit for Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy, known as ARPA-E, the young Department of Energy program that helps fund early-stage energy research.

Various guidelines, mandates and subsidies exist to encourage green energy. California intends to have alternative energy make up 33% of the state's portfolio by 2020. The U.S. Navy plans to run half of its fleet on renewable fuel by 2020.

"There's no silver bullet, but there is silver buckshot," Bode said. "Alternative energy is changing the way people look at things."

It worked on Lefteris Padavos, 51, a Los Angeles photographer who put solar panels on his roof about six months ago. And because he installed the system himself, he paid just $3,000 out of pocket after government incentives.

He also modified a Porsche into an electric car and is expecting a battery-powered Nissan Leaf to arrive in April.

"It's not just the price of gas that will go up — the cost of life is going to go up too," he said. "That will force people to come up with new ideas, to learn to live with less and be more creative with the alternatives we have."

But there are also signs that a permanent renewable energy renaissance is not yet at hand.

Fossil fuel-powered generators are still common in rural parts of the country, where the U.S. Department of Agriculture is pushing farms and ranches to use biomass and other clean forms of energy. Oil is still the preferred energy source for heaters during frigid winters on the East Coast.

Alternative power accounts for just 8% of U.S. energy consumption, according to 2009 government data. Petroleum commands 37%.

Wind power accounts for just 3% of the country's electricity, despite a decade of blockbuster growth. Solar represents an even smaller percentage. And aside from a few test runs in airplanes and show vehicles, biofuels derived from algae, jatropha and other plant-based materials are mostly stuck in research and development.

None of the three major investor-owned utilities in California hit the state's goal of getting 20% of electricity from renewable energy sources by last year. Instead, a flexible compliance clause gives the utilities until the end of 2012 to meet the mark.

This month, Southern California Edison said alternative energy sources generated 19.4% of its electricity. PG&E Co. was at 17.7% while San Diego Gas & Electric Co. has reached 11.9%.

A limited supply of renewable energy is one of several roadblocks to widespread use. The renewable energy infrastructure is still shaky. Solar and wind projects are often at remote sites and often aren't connected to modern transmission lines. Public charging stations for electric cars and biofuel stations for other vehicles that run on renewable energy are scarce.

And petroleum isn't the only competition for renewable energy.

"Renewables aren't the only technology option that can broaden the portfolio," said Mark Griffith, a managing director for infrastructure solutions firm Black & Veatch. "The same events in the Middle East are being pointed to by the nuclear energy lobby, the clean-coal lobby and the natural gas lobby."

Longtime gas guzzlers might need much more dire circumstances than Middle East unrest to develop an appetite for green energy, he said.

"Will this one extra push do it? I don't know," Griffith said. "We're desensitized to price shocks. Political debate now is more on the economy and jobs than on the price of gasoline. It's hard to get attention on renewable portfolios."

Euclid to host Ohio's biggest wind turbine

Fri, 11 Mar 2011 15:45:51 -0500

Euclid to host Ohio's biggest wind turbine

Lincoln Electric will lead construction of alternative energy project.

Thursday, March 10, 2011

(Cleveland) - Work has started in Euclid on what will soon be the largest wind turbine in Northeast Ohio, financed, in part, by a $350,000 loan from Cuyahoga County government.

Lincoln Electric, a leading manufacturer of arc welding products, will use the loan to help pay for assembly of a 2.5-megawatt wind turbine on its property in Euclid.

The county loan, requested by County Executive Ed FitzGerald and approved last month by the County Council, represents about 6% of the $5.9 million cost.

The state of Ohio has committed about $1.12 million from the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act The balance of the cost, about 75 percent, will be covered by Lincoln Electric.

FitzGerald told Newsradio WTAM 1100, "Wind energy is an emerging industry, and we want to position Cuyahoga County to capture more of it. This project represents a step forward toward that goal".

Lincoln Electric executives have indicated that the new wind turbine will help it grow its tower-related welding business, reduce its carbon footprint and save the company approximately $500,000 annually in energy costs.

The project is expected to serve as a training tool for Lincoln Electric and its partner companies in this growing industry.

When finished, the turbine will stand about 443 feet tall when measured to the tip of the blade.

This will make it the largest turbine in Northeast Ohio and close to three times as tall as the 147-foot tall turbine at the Great Lakes Science Center in downtown Cleveland.

When operating at full capacity, the turbine's 2.5 megawatts output is comparable to the power needed for 600 or 700 homes, which is close to the number of households in Bratenhahl.

US Security Could Depend On Clean Energy

Thu, 10 Mar 2011 10:50:51 -0500

WASHINGTON — Future U.S. security may depend upon energy innovations that reduce dependence upon foreign oil. But the former Silicon Valley entrepreneur who heads the U.S. government's advanced-energy initiative said clean-energy technologies also will represent the biggest business opportunity in the coming decades.

The future of the United States depends upon three pillars: national security, economic security and environmental security, Arun Majumdar, director of the Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy, told researchers and entrepreneurs here today (March 1). All three of those pillars stand on shaky ground when the nation spends more than $300 billion per year importing more than 50 percent of its oil from foreign countries, he said.

"In my lifetime, I would love to shave off a few zeros from that number,"Majumdar said at the ARPA-E Energy Innovation Summit.

The focus of ARPA-E on funding high-risk, high-reward energy innovations has paid off in six recent projects, with a return rate of $4 in private investment for every $1 of taxpayer money spent. Yet when Majumdar asked several major CEOs, including Bill Gates of Microsoft, to comment about the role of government in funding energy innovations, all of them pushed for even more federal help to help the U.S. forge ahead.

The clean-energy race could lead to new U.S. economic prosperity as well as better national security. Majumdar pointed out that many people around the world had "not yet turned on the lights" but would become new energy consumers as their income rose.

"If we can enable them to turn on the right kind of lights, that's the biggest business opportunity for America," Majumdar said. "But many of the technologies have not yet been invented. The future is up for grabs."

His message boiled down to a basic equation: Invent affordable clean energy technologies, manufacture them locally and sell globally. If the United States does those things, it may just ensure the jobs and economic security that every American craves.