Wind Energy: Winds of Change by Chris Trayhorn, Publisher of mThink Blue Book, April 1, 2003 A look at the U.S. wind energy industry’s growth chart shows an upward curve that takes off at the close of the 1990s after a decade of dormancy. Even now, a good year may be followed by a lull, which is then followed by a great year. Consider this: 1999 was a record year for the wind energy industry, with 732 megawatts of new capacity installed. Growth slowed during 2000, but soared again in 2001, when newly installed capacity reached nearly 1,700 megawatts. After another drop-off in 2002, the American Wind Energy Association (AWEA) is forecasting a new record for 2003 with some 2,000 megawatts of generating capacity coming online. The years of rapid growth are easily explained. The efficiency of wind generating systems continues to rise. A federal wind-energy production tax credit spurred investment. And wind is a non-polluting energy source. Some 3 million tons of carbon dioxide and 27,000 tons of noxious pollutants would be emitted into the air every year if the electricity generated from the new wind farms installed in 2001 were produced from the average U.S. electricity fuel mix. While still only about 0.3 percent of the nation’s electricity supply comes from wind today, the AWEA estimates that 6 percent of U.S. electricity will come from wind by 2020. But why are there lulls in the growth pattern? In this paper, we’ll review significant developments in the wind energy industry over the past few years. As you’ll see, the industry’s variable pace of growth is also easy to understand when looking at these factors. On-Again, Off-Again Signals A federal incentive, the wind energy production tax credit, helps bring down wind energy’s already declining cost and is spurring development. Unfortunately, the incentive has repeatedly been allowed to expire before being extended for short periods, first in 1999 and again in 2001, causing the market to grow in an on-again, off-again pattern. After its record year in 2001, the industry lurched to a near-stop when Congress, immersed in a partisan battle over larger economic issues, failed to extend the wind energy production tax credit before it expired in December 2001. An extension was signed into law in March 2002. In the interim, however, the costs of the boom-and-bust cycles caused by the credit’s expiration were dramatically highlighted, as some $3 billion worth of proposed projects were put on hold, and hundreds of workers were laid off pending extension of the incentive. This sequence of events illustrates how detrimental inconsistent policy can be. Future policy decisions at the state, regional, and federal levels will go a long way toward determining how quickly and to what extent the United States begins to reap its enormous wind energy potential, even though the wind industry is continuing to drive down the cost of wind-generated electricity, enhancing the competitiveness and attractiveness of its product to electricity providers. State Policies Can Make a Difference More than half of 2001’s new capacity came in a single state, Texas, where 915 megawatts of capacity were installed. That’s more than had ever been installed in the entire country in any prior year. The remarkable total resulted from the successful combination of that state’s renewables portfolio standard (RPS) with the federal tax credit. The Texas RPS was passed in 1999 after “deliberative polling” by utilities revealed widespread support for renewable energy throughout the state and from all consumer types (including commercial and industrial customers). It requires the state’s utilities to acquire 2,000 megawatts of new renewable generating capacity by Jan. 1, 2009. The first stage of the law required 400 megawatts of renewable capacity by Jan. 1, 2003. Instead, 915 megawatts of wind alone — more than double the required amount for all renewable energy technologies — was in place a year early. Bids received in response to utility procurement auctions required by the RPS proved to be cost-competitive with other utility resource options, and voluntary “overcompliance” resulted. In 2001, Texas showed us what an effective RPS can do when it is combined with a production tax credit. The result of those two policies was explosive growth in wind, far surpassing anything this country has previously seen in the more than 20 years since wind energy got its start. Clearly, we have found a policy combination that works incredibly well and should be expanded to the national level with a federal RPS. What Happened in California? Institutional challenges remain. One is in California, scene of a crisis that saw rolling blackouts and stunningly high power prices. What first appeared to be a favorable scenario for wind, an abundant resource in California and neighboring states, quickly turned into a nightmare as electricity prices soared and state agencies frantically began signing high-cost, long-term contracts for new natural gas generation, while refusing to buy electricity from lower-cost “non-firm” (variable) generators like wind plants. The California Energy Commission has been proceeding for some time on a track of inviting proposals and awarding cash incentives for new wind and other renewable projects, using funds collected from a charge on ratepayers. But because of California utilities’ financial problems and the gridlock in new state procurements while California swallows the long-term contracts bought at the peak of the crisis, the vast majority of proposed wind projects — now totaling over 1,500 megawatts in capacity — have never been built, and there is no indication when they will be. Only a few wind projects are moving forward in the state. An RPS adopted this year by the state calling for 20 percent of electricity to come from renewable sources may provide the market with a new impetus. But, in contrast to the simple, market-friendly, and effective regulations put in place in Texas to implement that state’s RPS, concerns cloud the implementation of California’s convoluted RPS legislation. As Arthur O’Donnell, editor of “California Energy Markets,” observed: “The many changes in the [California] RPS bills nearly all served to defer utility commitments and reduce the likelihood of a vibrant green market, as cost-causing provisions collide against cost-limiting proscriptions. For the program to succeed will take a commitment to working together that has been sorely lacking of late.” Figure 1: The wind energy market is taking off in the United States. Source AWEA Transmission Is Major Challenge In order to deliver large amounts of wind power from wind-rich regions such as the Great Plains to electricity-hungry markets in other parts of the country, additional transmission lines and upgrades will be needed. Lack of transmission capacity is already impeding the development of significant amounts of wind power in the Dakotas. By contrast, Texas, anticipating continued investments in wind energy, is preparing to expand transmission capacity from western areas of the state where the best wind resource lies, to load centers further east. As regional transmission organizations and other relevant entities assess infrastructure needs across the country, they must realize that expansion plans should include “high wind” scenarios that could benefit electricity consumers, rural landowners looking for economic development, and the environmental public interest. Failure to take wind’s potential contribution into account in the planning process could shut out development prospects in the windiest parts of the country. The wind industry also faces a serious hurdle in gaining access to the utility transmission system for wind-generated electricity at a reasonable price so that it can be profitably sold in the wholesale electricity market. In the past, most wind projects sold their output directly to the local utility. But as restructuring “unbundles” the vertically integrated electric utility industry monopoly, utilities are required to make their transmission facilities available to all generators under “open access” fee structures, or “tariffs,” that presume generators will precisely schedule their transmission usage in advance and precisely control their output to match those schedules. These open-access tariffs impose penalties of as much as 2.5 to 3.5 cents per kilowatt-hour on wind generators for use of the transmission system in addition to normal transmission access fees. Such a penalty can double the wholesale cost of wind-generated electricity. The high penalties are exacted because of wind’s variable operation and the fact that a wind plant cannot guarantee delivery of a certain amount of electricity at a given scheduled time and date. The penalties are not based on actual costs that a failure to deliver may impose on the system, but are self-described punitive penalties to enforce “good behavior” on large generators who can precisely control their output and have been known to do so in ways designed to raise their own profits at the expense of others. As control of the interstate transmission grid evolves toward transmission-specific entities — independent system operators — and as the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission works to update its early version of an industry standard tariff, the impacts of these penalties is being reassessed. The New York ISO and ERCOT in Texas have special rules for “as available” resources like wind that exempt them from these penalties. The PJM ISO in the mid-Atlantic region has a different market design that can accommodate the variable output of wind projects without penalties. Table 1: Leading States in Wind Capacity (Through 2001) Table 2: Largest Wind Farms Operating in the United States An agreement has also been reached that will reduce penalties for wind plants on the California ISO system. However, penalties are still a problem in important and windy areas of the country such as the Pacific Northwest and the Midwest. In the Northwest, for example, development of some 830 megawatts of projects ($800 million worth) sought by the Bonneville Power Administration has been stalled by the penalty issue. Some of the most discriminatory penalties have recently been removed in that region, and continued, if slow, progress is expected on this issue. Attracting Large Players The wind energy market’s performance is catching the interest of some large corporations. In February 2002, GE Power Systems acquired Enron Wind Corporation, the largest remaining domestic manufacturer of commercial utility-scale wind turbines. “The acquisition of Enron Wind represents GE Power Systems’ initial investment into renewable wind power, one of the fastest-growing energy sectors,” said John Rice, president and CEO of GE Power Systems. The wind energy industry, the firm said, is expected to grow at an annual rate of about 20 percent, with principal markets in Europe, the United States, and Latin America. For the parent company, General Electric, the move was a return to the wind business after an absence of nearly 20 years. GE’s aerospace division was a major contractor of research-oriented wind turbines for the U.S. Department of Energy in the early 1980s. Houston-based TXU, already one of the largest purchasers of wind power in the United States, unveiled in October plans to purchase the power from a large new wind farm to be built in western Texas. American Electric Power is positioning itself as a major player in the market through AEP Energy Services, which has developed a 150-megawatt wind farm and purchased another, both in Texas. FPL Energy, a subsidiary of FPL Group and the largest wind energy developer and operator in the United States, has emphasized the growth of wind energy. Vibrant Market for Small Systems Consumer interest in small wind systems for homes and small businesses surged following concerns about high rates and brownouts during the California crisis and resulted in healthy sales even as the crisis abated later in the year. The market for small wind systems (less than 100-kilowatt capacity) is also expanding as a result of policies adopted in a growing number of states. California and Illinois run well-established rebate programs that help reduce the high upfront cost of a wind system, and New York, New Jersey, Delaware, and Rhode Island have followed suit. Also in California, the small wind turbine industry welcomed a law enacted in 2001 providing relief from overly restrictive local zoning ordinances on tower height and installations. Net metering, a policy under which the owner of a small wind or other renewable energy system is allowed to spin his or her electricity meter backwards if the system is generating more power than is being consumed, has been adopted in more than 30 states. Such policies, along with simplified, standard-ized interconnection rules, reduce the expense and time required to install a small wind or photovoltaic system for a home or business. The industry recommends a federal tax incentive for small wind systems to help reduce their high upfront cost, increase sales, help manufacturers to increase volume, and thus lower costs even further. Exports of small wind turbines — used in village power, off grid, water-pumping, and other applications — have declined in recent years due to fluctuations in the U.S. dollar, reductions in support from the U.S. Agency for International Development for renewable energy project activity, and increased bilateral aid by competing export countries. Optimistic Long-Term Outlook On balance, although the institutional issues noted above remain of concern, there is strong optimism about the wind industry’s long-term future. Some 10 billion kwh of electricity were generated from wind in 2002 in the United States, enough to power about 1 million households without emissions of carbon dioxide and other pollutants. The average electricity fuel mix would produce about 7.5 million tons of carbon dioxide while producing that much power. It would take a forest of 4,000 square miles to absorb that much carbon dioxide. Federal estimates place the nation’s wind energy potential at 10.7 trillion kwh annually — more than twice the electricity generated in the United States today. A single megawatt-scale wind turbine provides $2,000 a year or more for landowners who lease their wind rights. Farmers can grow crops right up to the base of the turbines. Wind energy’s stable and increasingly competitive cost is an attractive factor for utilities seeking to diversify their energy portfolio. Even while the level of new construction slowed during 2002, the AWEA remains confident that wind power’s future prospects are strong. Our forecast for total wind energy production by 2020 is 6 percent of U.S. electricity supply — about 20 times the current level. Filed under: White Papers Tagged under: Utilities About the Author Chris Trayhorn, Publisher of mThink Blue Book Chris Trayhorn is the Chairman of the Performance Marketing Industry Blue Ribbon Panel and the CEO of mThink.com, a leading online and content marketing agency. He has founded four successful marketing companies in London and San Francisco in the last 15 years, and is currently the founder and publisher of Revenue+Performance magazine, the magazine of the performance marketing industry since 2002.