Wind & energy

1. Wind & energy Iowa State University WESEP REU June 11, 2012 James McCalley (jdm@iastate.edu)

2. Homework DOE20by2030 report: • Full report: http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy08osti/41869.pdf • Summary www.nrel.gov/docs/fy11osti/49975.pdf 2

3. Overview (focus mainly on US) • Preliminary energy concepts • Background on wind power growth • Policy issues for wind energy • Wind energy in context • Grand challenge questions 3

4. A lawnmower engine is 3HP (2.2kW or 0.0022 MW). Typical car engine is 200 HP (150kw or 0.15MW). Typical home demands 1.2kW at any given moment, on avg. 1MW=106watts106w/1200w=833 homes powered by a MW. Ames peak demand is about 126MW. The US has 1,121,000MW of power plant capacity. Some preliminaries • Power: MW=1341HP. • Energy: MWhr=3.413MMbtu (106btu); 1btu=1055joules • E=P×T • Run 1.5 MW turbine at 1.5 MW for 2 hrs: 3 MWhrs. • Run 1.5 MW turbine at 0.5 MW for 2 hrs: 1MWhrs Power, P(t) 1 gallon gasoline=0.0334MWhr; Typical home uses 11000kWhrs=11MWhrs in 1 year (about 1.2kW×8760hrs). 1 ton coal=6MWhrs. 1.5 MW Time, t  • If P varies with t: Power, P Time, T Energy, E Capacity, Prated • Capacity factor: Actual annual energy production as a percentage of annual energy production at Prated 4

5. Worldwide Source: RenewableS 2011, Global Status Report 5

6. Worldwide Source: BTM Consultants, www.btm.dk/reports/world+market+update+2010 6

7. Background on Wind Energy in US US Generation mix Wind & renewables are 3.6% by energy. Source: AWEA 2010 Annual Wind Report 7

8. Background on Wind Energy in US U.S. Annual & Cumulative Wind Power Capacity Growth But what happened in 2010, 2011? Source: AWEA 2010 Annual Wind Report 8

9. Background on Wind Energy in US 2010 is different! And 2011 is not much better. Why? Source: AWEA 2011 Fourth Quarter Market Report 9

10. Why was wind growth in 2010/2011 less than in previous years? • Poor 2008-2009 economy: • Less willingness to load, to build projects • Less power demand! Declining natural gas prices 10

11. Background on Wind Energy in US Percentage of New Capacity Additions. N. GAS WIND Source: AWEA 2010 Annual Wind Report 11

12. Cur US/Can nat gas production= 26Tcf/yr Proven reserves=260Tcf: R/P=10yrs Prove+unprove reserves=2372Tcf: R/P=91 12

13. Risks of a very high gas-electric future: • Lifetime: Infrastructure investments live for 40-60 years and are not easy to “turn” once developed. • Diversification: • Today’s national energy system portfolio consists primarily of electric (coal, nuclear, gas, renewables), heating/industrial (gas), & transportation (petroleum). A high gas-electric future, with transportation electrification, will decrease portfolio diversification, creating a national vulnerability. • Cost: Is heavy gas-electric investment the lowest cost option in terms of long-term {investment+production}? • Depletability: R/P ratios 10-90 yrs - what will be price effects as gas depletes? • Fracking: How much will public resistance grow? • CO2 emissions: Will coal-to-gas shift reduce it enough? • Alternative future: • Reduce coal in electric sector while growing gas & pipelines equally with wind+electric transmission. Co-optimize gas pipeline & electric transmission. • Replace significant petroleum for light-duty vehicles with CNG vehicles & PHEVs. • Conjecture: This approach will reduce CO2 more than a high gas-electric approach and will result in greater diversification of energy resources. 13

14. Source: AWEA 2011 Third Quarter Market Report Top 20 states 14 of top 20 are in the interior of the nation. Top 3 coastal states are West. East coast is light on wind but heavy on load. Implication? 3 options for East coast use of wind: Build high cost inland wind, go offshore, or use transmission to move it from Midwest 14

15. Source: AWEA 2012 First Quarter Market Report U.S. Wind Power Capacity By State 15

16. Background on Wind Energy in US Source: AWEA Wind Power Outlook 2010 Source: AWEA 2010 Third Quarter Market Report 16

17. Background on Wind Energy in US Market share of total 2008 wind installations Source: AWEA 2009 Annual Wind Report 17

18. Background on Wind Energy in US Ownership by company and by regulated utility Source: AWEA 2009 Annual Wind Report 18

19. Background on Wind Energy in US Wind plant size Source: AWEA 2009 Annual Wind Report 19

20. 29 states, differing in % (10-40), timing (latest is 2030), eligible technologies/resources (all include wind) Background on Wind Energy in US

21. Background on Wind Energy in US Tax incentives • Federal Incentives: • Renewed incentives Feb 2009 through 12/31/12, via ARRA • 2.2 cents per kw-hr PTC for 10 yrs or 30% investment tax credit (ITC) • State incentives: • IA: 1.5¢/kWhr for small wind, 1¢/kWhr for large wind • Various other including sales & property tax reductions 21

22. In congress, “Energy bill” means Federal RPS, and “Climate bill” means CO2 emissions control. • Waxman-Markey Energy/Climate bill passed house 6/09. Climate part was “Cap and Trade.” • Related Kerry-Graham Climate bill did not pass Senate. • 2010 Carbon Limits & Energy For America’s Renewal, CLEAR Act (Sen Collins/Cantwell), “Cap & Refund” • Cap CO2 “upstream” via sales of coal, gas, petroleum • Producers/importers buys CO2 permits in monthly auction • 3/4 of auction revenues refunded to US citizens • Congressional attention died; Climate/energy bill non-issue in pres. campaigns • 7/11 EPA rules “Cross-State Air Pollution Rule” (CSAPR, for SO2, NOx), “Mercury/Air Toxics Standards” (MATS) have more effect, causing near-term power plant shut-down, but CSAPR stayed on 12/30/11 by US Court of Appeals, DC Circuit. Federal energy policy (don’t have one) 22

23. Background on Wind Energy in US 23

24. Grand Challenge Question For Energy: What investments should be made, how much, when, and where, at the national level, over the next 40 years, to achieve a sustainable, low cost, and resilient energy & transportation system? 24

25. GEOTHERMAL SOLAR CLEAN-FOSSIL Where, when, how much of each, & how to interconnect? NUCLEAR BIOMASS Wind

26. Grand Challenges For Wind: • Move wind energy from where it is harvested to where it can be used • Develop economically-attractive methods to accommodate increased variability and uncertainty introduced by large wind penetrations in operating the grid. • Improve wind turbine/farm economics (decrease investment and maintenance costs, increase operating revenues). • Address potential concerns about local siting, including wildlife, aesthetics, and impact on agriculture. 26

27. Wind vs. people 27

28. How to address grand challenges • #1. Move wind energy from where it is harvested to where it can be used. • Transmission • Eastern interconnection Midwest to East coast • National Superhighways at 765 kV AC and/or 600/800 kV DC • Right of way (rail, interstate highwys, existing transmission) • Cost allocation • Organizational nightmare • Conductor technologies: overhead/underground, materials • Offshore, lower CF turbines, higher turbines, but all of these result in higher cost of energy 28

29. How to address grand challenges 29

30. NETPLAN: multiperiod, multiobjective, multisector CPLEX LP inside evolutionary program; co-optimizes generation, transmission, gas pipelines to minimize 40 year investment+production costs, network flow. Investments mainly in renewables with some nuclear. • Flow is west to east. • Highest trans cap investment is MAIN (4) to ECAR (1) because: • CF (0.5 in MAIN, 0.3 in ECAR) • Load is very high in ECAR • High trans cap investment from SPP (10) to STV (9) because: • CF (0.4 in SPP, 0.1 in STV) • Load is very high in STV

31. How to address grand challenges • #2. Develop economically-attractive methods to accom-modate increased variability and uncertainty introduced by large wind penetrations in operating the grid. • Variability: • Increase gas turbines • Wind turbine control • Load control • Storage (pumped hydro, compressed air, flywheels, batteries, others) • Increase geodiversity • Uncertainty: • Decrease it: improve forecasting uncertainty • Handle it better: Develop UC decisions robust to wind pwr uncertainty 31

32. How to address grand challenges • #3. Improve wind turbine/farm economics (decrease investment/maint costs, increase operating revenues). • Investment: Improve manufacturing/supply chain processes, construction, collection circuit layout, interconnection cost, land lease, and financing • Operating & maintenance: • Improve monitoring/evaluation for health assessment/prediction/life-ext • Decrease maintenance costs (gearbox vs. direct-drive) • Enhance energy extraction from wind per unit land area • Improved turbine siting • Inter-turbine and inter-farm control • Increased efficiency of drive-train/generator/converters • Lighter, stronger materials and improved control of rotor blades • Taller turbines 32

33. Wind turbine down-time distribution Reference: McMillan and Ault, “Quantification of Condition Monitoring Benefit for Offshore Wind Turbines,” 2007. 33

34. How to address grand challenges • #4. Address potential concerns about local siting, including wildlife, visual/audible, impact on agriculture. • Migratory birds and bats: mainly a siting issue for birds. Bat-kill is more frequent. • Agriculture: Agronomists indicate wind turbines may help! • Visual: a sociological issue These issues have not been significant yet. Today, in Iowa, there are ~2600 turbines, with capacity 4200 MW. At 2 MW/turbine, a growth to 60 GW would require 30000 turbines, and assuming turbines are located only on cropland having class 3 or better winds (about 1/6 of the state), this means these regions would see, on average, one turbine every 144 acres. 34