Wind Power News Highlights

Wind energy generation is increasing, particularly in the United States, at a rapid pace. This pace is so rapid that, “The American Wind Energy Association (AWEA) reported today in its third quarter (Q3) market report that the U.S. wind energy industry installed 1,649 megawatts (MW) of new power generating capacity in the third quarter…bringing the total capacity added this year to date to over 5,800 MW” (Source: AmericanWindEnergyAssociation.com, October 20, 2009). In fact, as of February 2009, the United States surpassed every country in the world in wind energy generation (Source: NREL.gov, February 2009).

A Different Kind of Ownership

Though a large number of wind farm projects are funded by utilities, economic-stimulus funding, and private companies, a new type of group is taking on wind energy in the state of Montana. A community-owned wind farm projected to generate 500 megawatts will undergo on-site testing for the next year before the first phase of the turbine installation will begin. The project, a joint venture between National Wind and area ranchers and Montana Wind Resources LLC, will phase in several stages of 100+ megawatt turbine clusters over the next five to eight years (Source: RenewableEnergyWorld.com, December 1).

Combating the Wind Energy Storage Problem

Calmac recently developed a different approach to wind power storage that involves an interesting component; ice. Given that roughly 75% of the energy used in the United States is used by buildings and that a significant percentage of that goes towards air conditioning, excess energy storage in the form of ice has a lot of potential (Source: AlernativeEnergyNews.info, December 1). The thought process is that excess wind energy can be converted into ice during non-peak use hours, such as at night (when the wind is typically strongest), thus lessening the overall demand during peak times. Though there are similar devices available on the market, Calmac’s tank allows for the uniform building of ice throughout, charges in 6-12 hours, and can cut energy demand costs from 20-40%.

Re-framing the Storage Question

What if wind power could be reliably used by utilities without needing battery storage? The National Renewable Energy Laboratory recently announced a project that may bring researchers a step closer to this reality. NREL and Second Wind Inc., will test the Triton Sonic Wind Profiler, a device aimed at better predicting when and where wind will blow (Source: RenewableEnergyWorld.com, December 9). This testing, which will take place over the course of the next year, will eventually lead to the incorporation of the Triton Sonic Wind Profiler in a Wind Instrument Characterization System at the National Wind Technology Center. In the long run, the hope is for this collective set of tools to reliably predict future wind power output for use in the real-time power grid and to aid in development of new wind generation plants for optimal gathering capabilities.

Existing Technology, New Approach

In its own response to the wind power battery dilemma, Duke Energy is pursuing a more traditional battery storage project. The project, which will use an economic-stimulus grant of $22 million, involves the installation of batteries at its 151-megawatt Notrees wind farm in Texas. Duke Energy intends to prove that current batteries can store sufficient amounts wind-generated energy for reliable use by utilities, even when the wind is not blowing (Source: Charlotte.BizJournals.com, December 2).

Wind Energy Cost Hurdles and Drawbacks

Besides the obvious issues that wind farms create (noise, unsightliness, hazards to birds or bats, energy storage issues), there are a few other items worthy of consideration. As noted in an article by Daniel Price in Hutchnews.com, there is a tendency for wind farms to be built away from population centers and a fairly substantial up-front investment cost. In his article, he explains that transmission from these more remote locations poses a challenge for utility providers. A recent study by the found that the presence of wind turbines does not negatively impact housing prices (Source: NYTimes.com, December 9). If these wind farms truly do not negatively impact property values in their immediate vicinity, a compelling case exists for more of these facilities to be built closer to population centers, thus reducing transmission costs.

Another barrier to lowering the cost-per-kilowatt-hour of energy generated by wind turbines is the large amount of land necessary for industrial-use wind farms. “…it takes 60 acres per megawatt of installed capacity but only about 5 percent to 8 percent (three to six acres) are actually occupied by turbines, access roads and other equipment.” If the scale of these wind turbines is a clear barrier to more widespread use, what are some viable smaller-scale wind turbine options? The National Renewable Energy Laboratory is currently exploring this market by testing a handful of small turbine systems for certification; for more information, please click here.

Environmental Effects

At the request of congress, The National Academy of the Sciences recently produced a study about the hidden costs and effects associated with different types of energy generation. This study found that damages to the environment in terms of hidden pollutants, toxins and general effects were very small compared with traditional fossil fuel sources (Source: AmericanWindEnergyAssociation.com, December 2009). To read the full report, please click here.

Energy Efficiency Outreach Programs

Boulder County, Colorado, recently launched an interesting energy efficiency outreach program funded partially by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. The program involves door-to-door energy efficiency outreach every Saturday from November through April, during which time homes in the targeted area will get a free two-hour energy audit. The outreach workers, dubbed the “Energy Corps,” will install small efficiency upgrades such as compact fluorescent light bulbs, low-flow showerheads, programmable thermostats, weather stripping and clotheslines. They will also check household appliances and make adjustments to those items as necessary to improve efficiency (Source: DailyCamera.com, 10/18/09).

Homeowners associations within the county can apply on behalf of their tenants and will work with county officials to sign up the willing households for the upgrades. If the program is deemed successful, the county will actively seek new sources of funding to continue it past the current deadline of April. In addition to county efforts, the City of Boulder is implementing its own door-to-door program that assesses larger-scale energy upgrade needs, arranges for financing, and schedules the projects for home owners.

On October 19, the US Department of Energy released a Recovery Through Retrofit report stating that energy efficiency retrofitting on existing homes could reduce energy waste by 40%, and that these changes alone could “…cut energy bills by $21 billion and reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 160 million metric tons every year” (Source EnergyEfficiencyNews.com, October 21). With this in mind, proactive programs like the one Boulder County is piloting could be a tremendously positive force in the United States’ drive to reduce energy consumption and carbon emissions levels as rapidly as possible. For more information about the Recovery Through Retrofit report and its full list of recommendations, please click here.

Similar programs to those seen in Boulder are rolling out nationwide as a part of the Energy Efficiency and Conservation Block Grant Program, which has earmarked more than $2.7 billion in grants available to cities, counties, tribes and SEOs and has granted more than $1.4 billion in funding already (Source: EECBG.energy.gov). To see a full listing of recipients, please click here.

In a separate finding, a recent study by the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy surveyed state-implemented energy efficiency programs (using data from 2007) and found that, “… it costs an average of 2.5 cents to save a kilowatt hour of electricity through the programs” (Source: WSJ.com, October 22). In contrast, according to the same study, building new energy plants results in a cost-per-kilowatt-hour of nearly three-times that rate.

Beyond the government-driven initiatives are growing efforts by utilities to reduce energy consumption. These customer initiatives range from free high-efficiency light bulbs to tiered pricing based on total energy consumption. In many states, comprehensive partnerships are forming to align the efforts of both government and utility programs toward a shared set of overall goals. One example of this type of partnership can be found in the Colorado Public Utilities Commission's recent Energy Efficiency Status Report. For a state scorecard on Utility-based energy efficiency programs provided by the ACEEE, please click here.


Last, on the local effort level and though it’s hardly news, each state continues to offer energy efficiency upgrades and weatherization efforts for low-income residents as a part of a series of US Department of Energy weatherization and low-income energy programs (Source: EERE.energy.gov).

Energy Efficient Buildings – Revamping Existing Spaces

Improving Energy Efficiency in Large Buildings

A recent British study found that 70% of the carbon reductions sought by 2020 can be achieved by investing in energy efficiency measures (Source: TheClimateGroup.org, July 6). As a hot topic at the G8 Summit this week in Italy, many of the tested methods that may help to achieve this goal will be discussed at length. The focal areas of this study include buildings, lighting, vehicles, motors and a reduction in deforestation, all of which the study claims bear reasonably low investment costs for the high rate of return in efficiency gain.

At a time when stimulus dollars in the United States are being allocated precisely to such “green” infrastructure projects, one must wonder how much of that money will or should be allocated for use in existing structures. With such a variance in structural composition, scale, and location, the challenges that exist are very broad in scope and make for a difficult blueprint or set of standards across all projects.

So, how do we tackle this issue? Considering that buildings account for about half of the CO2 emissions in the United States, this is an important question. Is it possible to compile lists of suggested improvements based on studies of several buildings, some fraction of which may ultimately apply to individual projects down the road? The good news is that we may be getting closer to an answer for that question. As I write this blog, there’s a large-scale energy efficiency retrofitting evaluation of the Empire State Building in Manhattan. The project, announced in April, is the product if a collaboration between four groups: the Clinton Climate Initiative, the Rocky Mountain Institute, Johnson Controls Inc. and Jones Lang LaSalle (Source: Envirovaluation.org, April 11). The program has a budget of $500 million dollars and is truly the first of its’ kind, utilizing experts from a range of specialties to formulate a comprehensive energy efficiency overhaul of one of the largest, oldest buildings in the middle of one of the busiest cities on earth.


The goal of this group is to reduce the emissions waste of the Empire State Building by up to 38%. Another goal of this project is to maintain performance of the building’s systems while getting the best possible “bang for your buck” in improvements, while providing a basic formula for other office building structures to follow. So, what were some of the winning ideas? The analysis revealed eight areas that would mark prudent efficiency upgrades, including:

• Changes to window lighting and window insulation.
• Radiator insulation to prevent the escape of generated heat.
• Better tenant-controlled lighting in each work area.
• More efficient building climate controls.
• More advanced ventilation controls.
• Building-wide HVAC upgrades.
• More (for a full list, please click here).

In addition to office buildings, we stand to gain a great deal of benefit from retrofitting existing homes and residential buildings as well. The challenges on this front are similar to those in the commercial sector, except for the depth of credit access that may be available to make these improvements. For a corporation or corporations, taking on an energy efficiency improvement project is more likely to be financially feasible and is likely to pay dividends more quickly than a similar project for a residential structure. One step in the right direction on this front is the Thousand Home Challenge. This challenge is the brainchild of a non-profit called ACI, which strives to bring together sponsors, architects, engineers, and designers to make real, measurable improvements to a thousand homes in an effort to lay a blueprint for energy efficiency improvements in the residential sector. According to their materials, residential energy consumption accounts for 21% of greenhouse gas emissions in the United States (Source: AffordableComfort.org).



When it comes to the topic of improving energy efficiency in existing buildings, it’s clear that we have a long way to go. I can think of no better place to start than at a meeting of some of the most powerful forces in the world during this week’s G8 summit.