Wind Energy Update

Larry Flowers
National Renewable Energy Laboratory
January 2009
 Capacity & Cost Trends
Cost of Energy and Cumulative Domestic Capacity
100 18000
90 16000
Cost of Energy (cents/kWh*)

80 14000
70

Capacity (MW)
12000
60
10000
50
8000
40
6000
30
4000
20
10 2000

0 0
1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005
*Year 2000 dollars

Increased Turbine Size - R&D Advances - Manufacturing Improvements

 U.S. Wind Power Capacity Up 46% in 2007

6,000 18,000

Annual US Capacity (left scale)

Cumulative Capacity (MW)

5,000 15,000
Annual Capacity (MW)

Cumulative US Capacity (right scale)

4,000 12,000

3,000 9,000

2,000 6,000

1,000 3,000

0 0
1987

1991
1992

1994
1995

2003

2007
1982

1986

1990

2002

2006
1983
1984
1985

1988
1989

1993

1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001

2004
2005
Source: AWEA

Record year for new U.S. wind capacity:

• 5,329 MW of wind added (more than double previous record)
• Roughly $9 billion in investment
 People Want Renewable Energy!
Total Installed Wind Capacity
120000

110000

100000 1. United States: 25,408 MW

90000 2. Germany: 23,600 MW
80000
3. Spain: 16,000 MW
Capacity (MW)

70000
4. India: 9,522 MW
60000
5. China: 9,500 MW
50000

40000

30000
World total 2008: 115,254 MW
20000

10000

0
82

83

84

85

86

87

88

89

90

91

92

93

94

95

96

97

98

99

00

01

02

03

04

05

06

07

08
19

19

19

19

19

19

19

19

19

19

19

19

19

19

19

19

19

19

20

20

20

20

20

20

20

20

20
United States Europe Rest of World
Source: WindPower Monthly
U.S. Led the World in 2007 Wind Capacity
Additions; Second in Cumulative Capacity
 U.S Lagging Other Countries in Wind
As a Percentage of Electricity Consumption

22%
as % of Electricity Consumption

20%
Projected Wind Generation

18% Approximate Wind Penetration, end of 2007

16%
14% Approximate Wind Penetration, end of 2006
12%
10%
8%
6%
4%
2%
0%

Italy
Germany

Greece

India

UK

France

Norway
Denmark

Austria

Australia
Ireland

Netherlands

U.S.

Canada
Spain

Brazil

TOTAL
Portugal

Japan
Sweden

China
Source: Berkeley Lab estimates based on data
from BTM Consult and elsewhere

Note: Figure only includes the 20 countries with the most installed
wind capacity at the end of 2007
 Wind Power Contributed 35% of
All New Generating Capacity in the US in 2007

100% 100

Total Annual Capacity Additions (GW)

Percent of Annual Capacity Additions

• Wind was the 2nd-

80% 80 largest resource
added for the 3rd-
60% 60
straight year

40% 40
• Up from 19% in
2006, 12% in 2005,
and <4% in 2000-
20% 20 2004

0% 0
2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
Wind Other Renewable
Gas (CCGT) Gas (non-CCGT)
Coal Other non-Renewable
Total Capacity Additions (right axis)
Source: EIA, Ventyx, AWEA, IREC, Berkeley Lab
 Installed Project Costs Are On the
Rise, After a Long Period of Decline

$4,500
Individual Project Cost (253 projects totaling 15.8 GW)
Installed Project Cost (2007 $/kW)

$4,000
Average Project Cost
$3,500 Polynomial Trend Line
$3,000

$2,500

$2,000

$1,500

$1,000

$500 Increase of ~$700/kW

$0
1983

1988

1990

1994
1995

1997

2001
1985

1992

1999

2003
2004

2006
1982

1984

1986
1987

1989

1991

1996

1998

2002

2005

2008
1993

2000

2007
Source: Berk eley Lab database (some data points suppressed to protect confidentiality)

Note: Includes 227 projects built from 1983-2007, totaling ~13 GW (77% of capacity at
end of 2007); additional ~2.8 GW of projects proposed for installation in 2008
 Wind Has Been Competitive with
Wholesale Power Prices in Recent Years

90
80 Wind project sample includes
70 projects built from 1998-2007
2007 $/MWh

60
50
40
30
20 Nationwide Wholesale Power Price Range (for a flat block of power)
10 Cumulative Capacity-Weighted Average Wind Power Price
0
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
53 projects 66 projects 87 projects 107 projects 128 projects
2,466 MW 3,267 MW 4,396 MW 5,801 MW 8,303 MW
Source: FERC 2006 and 2004 "State of the Market" reports, Berkeley Lab database, Ventyx

• Wholesale price range reflects flat block of power across 23 pricing nodes (see previous map)
• Wind prices are capacity-weighted averages from cumulative project sample
 Regardless of these pricing trends, more than
225 GW of wind has applied for interconnection

250
Note: Figure
Entered Queue in 2007 includes data
Nameplate Capacity (GW)

200
Total in Queue at end of 2007 from 11 wind-
relevant
150
interconnection
queues, so
100
does not
50
represent a
truly national
0
picture
Wind Natural Gas Coal Nuclear Solar Other
Source: Exeter Associates review of interconnection queues

• MISO (66 GW), ERCOT (41 GW), and PJM (35 GW) make up 2/3 of total
• Twice as much wind as next largest resource (natural gas) in these queues
• Not all of the capacity will be built, but demonstrates enormous
 Wind Built After 1997 Was Competitive
with Wholesale Prices in Most Regions in 2007

80
Wind project sample includes projects built from 1998-2007
70

60
2007 $/MWh

50

40

30

20 2007 Average Wholesale Power Price Range By Region

10 2007 Capacity-Weighted Average Wind Power Price By Region
Individual Project 2007 Wind Power Price By Region
0
Texas Heartland Mountain Northwest California Great Lakes East New England Total US
4 projects 65 projects 15 projects 13 projects 12 projects 6 projects 12 projects 1 project 128 projects
476 MW 2,857 MW 1,757 MW 1,219 MW 691 MW 547 MW 714 MW 42 MW 8,303 MW
Source: Berkeley Lab database, Ventyx

Note: Even within a region there are a range of wholesale power prices
because multiple wholesale price hubs exist in each area (see earlier map)
Installed Wind Capacities
(‘99 – ‘08)

*Preliminary data
 Drivers for Wind Power

• Declining Wind Costs

• Fuel Price Uncertainty
• Federal and State
Policies
• Economic Development
• Public Support
• Green Power
• Energy Security
• Carbon Risk
Comparative Generation Costs
 Nominal $/MMBtu (Henry Hub)

10
12
14
16

0
2
4
6
8

Source: LBNL
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
Daily price history of 1st-nearby

2004
NYMEX natural gas futures contract

2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
NYMEX
Natural Gas – Historic Prices

2018
natural gas
futures strip

2019
from 12/09/2008

2020
2021
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16

Nominal $/MMBtu (Henry Hub)

 Historic Steel Prices - Cold Rolled

1200

1000

800
$/mt

600

400

200

0
Jan-00 Jan-01 Jan-02 Jan-03 Jan-04 Jan-05 Jan-06 Jan-07 Jan-08
Historic Copper Prices

10000

9000

8000

7000

Wind Cost 6000

$/mt

5000

Drivers 4000

3000

2000

1000

0
Copper & Steel Price Source: World Bank, Commodity Price Data Jan-00 Jan-01 Jan-02 Jan-03 Jan-04 Jan-05 Jan-06 Jan-07 Jan-08
Historical Coal Prices

Source: EIA
 CO2 prices significantly
increase the cost of coal

(Coal)

(Natural Gas)
 Renewables Portfolio Standards

VT: (1) RE meets any increase ME: 30% by 2000

MN: 25% by 2025 10% by 2017 - new RE
in retail sales by 2012;
(Xcel: 30% by 2020)
*WA: 15% by 2020 (2) 20% RE & CHP by 2017
☼ NH: 23.8% in 2025
ND: 10% by 2015 WI: requirement varies by ☼ MA: 15% by 2020
utility; 10% by 2015 goal
MT: 15% by 2015 + 1% annual increase
OR: 25% by 2025 (large utilities)
(Class I Renewables)
5% - 10% by 2025 (smaller utilities) *MI: 10% + 1,100 MW
RI: 16% by 2020
SD: 10% by 2015 by 2015
☼ *NV: 20% by 2015 CT: 23% by 2020
*UT: 20% by 2025 IA: 105 MW ☼ NY: 24% by 2013
☼ OH: 25%** by 2025
☼ NJ: 22.5% by 2021
☼ CO: 20% by 2020 (IOUs) IL: 25% by 2025
CA: 20% by 2010 ☼ PA: 18%** by 2020
*10% by 2020 (co-ops & large munis) ☼ MO: 15% by 2021
☼ MD: 20% by 2022
☼ NC: 12.5% by 2021 (IOUs)
☼ AZ: 15% by 2025 10% by 2018 (co-ops & munis) ☼ *DE: 20% by 2019
☼ DC: 20% by 2020
☼ NM: 20% by 2020 (IOUs)
10% by 2020 (co-ops) *VA: 12% by 2022

HI: 20% by 2020 TX: 5,880 MW by 2015

Sta te RPS
28 st ates ha ve
Solar hot water eligible
☼ Minimum solar or customer-sited RE requirement Sta te Goal an R PS;
* Increased credit for solar or customer-sited RE 5 st at es hav e
** Includes separate tier of non-renewable “alternative” energy resources
an RE g oal

DSIRE: www.dsireusa.org January 2009

 States with Green Power Programs

19 2
2
12 19

22 112
8
57 18
4 30 6
4
6
5 2
137
4 12 4
3 1
11 14
5 1
26 1 4
10 14 23
3
47 DC
71
27 17
5 14

12 29 39 19
1
1 14

2
Green Power Products Available
Restructured Electricity Market
No Green Power Activity

# Indicates Number of Utilities/Companies Offering

Green Power Products
Source: National Renewable Energy Laboratory (September 2008)
Wind Energy Investors
Windy Rural Areas Need
Economic Development
 Economic Development Impacts

• Land Lease Payments: 2-3% of gross

revenue $2500-4000/MW/year
• Local property tax revenue: ranges widely -
$300K-1700K/yr per 100MW
• 100-200 jobs/100MW during construction
• 6-10 permanent O&M jobs per 100 MW
• Local construction and service industry:
concrete, towers usually done locally
 Direct jobs and parts during construction

Truck drivers,
crane operators Earth moving, cement pouring

Wind Turbine Components

Construction
Management and support
 Direct wind project jobs during operations

Operations and maintenance, management

Landowner royalties

Parts and materials purchased

Utility services and subcontractors 11

 Indirect jobs, services, materials

Property taxes

Steel mill jobs, parts, services

Photos: E.C.Levy, Inc, Detroit, MI

Financing, banking, accounting

Wind subcomponent
manufacturing and sales
 Induced jobs, services, materials

Child care, grocery store, clothing, other retail, public

transit, new cars, restaurants, medical services
 Wind Energy’s Economic impacts
On-site direct, off-site direct, Indirect, Induced

Wind energy’s economic “ripple effect”

Direct Impacts Indirect Impacts Induced Impacts

On-site Off-site
These are jobs in and
These jobs and
Construction Boom truck & payments made to
workers management, gas and earnings result from
gas station workers, supporting businesses,
Management the spending by
Administrative blades and towers & such as bankers
workers people directly and
support financing the
indirectly supported
construction,
by the project,
contractor,
Cement truck Hardware store including benefits to
drivers, road purchases and workers, manufacturers and
grocery store clerks,
crews, spare parts and their equipment suppliers of
maintenance suppliers retail salespeople and
workers subcomponents.
child care providers.
 Case Study: Iowa

240-MW Iowa wind

project
• $640,000/yr in lease
payments to farmers
($2,000/turbine/yr)
• $2M/yr in property taxes
• $5.5M/yr in O&M income
• 40 long-term O&M jobs
• 200 short-term
construction jobs
• Doesn’t include multiplier
effect
 South Dakota Wind Energy Center
• 40.5 MW (1.5-MW turbines)
• Landowner payments:
$3,500-$4,000/year
• 100 – 125 workers during
peak construction
• 3 fulltime O&M positions
• Property taxes:
$220,000/year
• Sales and use tax: $1.2
million payable in 2003
• Located near Highmore, SD
(population 808)
• Owned by FPL Energy
• Constructed in 2003
 Peetz Table Wind Energy Center, CO
• 400.5 MW (1.5-MW turbines)
• Landowner payments: $2
million/year, $65 million over
30-year period
• 300 – 350 workers during
peak construction (80% local)
• 16 – 18 O&M positions
• Total annual tax payments:
$2.3 million/year (10% of total
county budget); $70 million
over 30 years
• Located near Peetz, CO
• Owned by FPL Energy
• Constructed in 2007
 Weatherford Wind Energy Center, OK

• 147 MW (1.5-MW
turbines)
• Landowner payments:
$300,000 in annual
lease payments
• 150 workers during peak
construction
• 6 fulltime O&M positions
• Property taxes: $17
million over 20 years
• Sawartzky Construction
received $300,000 in
revenue from the project
• Owned by FPL Energy
• Constructed in 2005
 Wyoming Wind Energy Center
• 144 MW (1800-kW turbines)
• Landowner payments: $18
million over the life of the
project
• 175 workers during peak
construction (25% local)
• 8 fulltime O&M positions
• Property taxes: $1 million
(2006/7)
• 50 Wyoming companies
subcontracted during the
construction period
• Located in Uinta County,
WY (population 20,213)
• Owned by FPL Energy
• Constructed in 2003
Soaring Demand Spurs Expansion
of U.S. Wind Turbine Manufacturing

Note:  Map is not 
intended to be exhaustive
 Manufacturing and Economic Development

Total economic development impacts in Iowa

(2,400 MW of developm ent)

Landowner Payments
$5,000
Property tax payments
$4,500
$4,000 Operations Period
Millions of Dollars

$3,500 Construction Period

$3,000
$2,500
$2,000
$1,500
$1,000
$500
$0
0% IA manfacturing 13% IA manufacturing 35% IA manufacturing
(current proposed projects) (increased utilization of current
manufacturing capacity)
 Local Ownership Models
• Minnesota farmer cooperative
(Minwind)
• FLIP structure
• Farmer-owned small wind
• Farmer-owned commercial-scale

© L. Kennedy
 Comparing wind and coal in Indiana

Total Econom ic Im pacts

$1,600
Landowner revenue
$1,400 Property taxes
Coal
Dollars in millions

$1,200 Operations
Construction
$1,000
$800
$600
$400
$200
$0
Wind (1177 MW) Coal (500 MW, 28% in-
state)

Constant 2007 dollars

 Comparing wind and coal in Michigan

Total Econom ic Im pacts

$1,800
Landowner revenue
$1,600
P roperty taxes
$1,400 Operations
$1,200 Construction

$1,000

$800

$600

$400

$200

$0
Wind (1278 MW) Coal (500 MW, 0%in-state)

Constant 2007 dollars

 Colorado – Economic Impacts
from 1000 MW of new wind development

Wind energy’s economic “ripple effect”

Direct Impacts Indirect & Totals

Induced Impacts (construction + 20yrs)
Payments to Landowners:
• $2.5 Million/yr Construction Phase: Total economic benefit =
• 807 new jobs $924.3 million
Local Property Tax Revenue:
• $92.7 M to local New local jobs during
• $4.6 Million/yr
economies construction = 1,719
Construction Phase:
Operational Phase: New local long-term
• 912 new jobs
• 129 local jobs jobs = 310
• $133.6 M to local economies
• $15.6 M/yr to local
Operational Phase:
• 181 new long-term jobs economies
• $19.3 M/yr to local economies

All jobs rounded to the nearest 50 jobs; All values greater than $10 Construction Phase = 1-2 years
million are rounded to the nearest million Operational Phase = 20+ years
 Environmental Benefits

• No SOx or NOx
• No particulates
• No mercury
• No CO2
• No water
Source: NOAA
Source: NOAA
Energy-Water Nexus
 Key Issues for Wind Power

• Policy Uncertainty • Operational impacts:

• Siting and Permitting: avian,
noise, visual, federal land
• Transmission: FERC rules,
access, new lines
intermittency, ancillary
services, allocation of costs
• Accounting for non-monetary
value: green power, no fuel
price risk, reduced
emissions
“The future ain’t what it used to be.”
- Yogi Berra
 The 20% Technical Report

• Explores one scenario for reaching 20% wind electricity

by 2030 and contrasts it to a scenario in which no new
U.S. wind power capacity is installed
• Is not a prediction, but an analysis based on one
scenario
• Does not assume specific policy support for wind
• Is the work of more than 100 individuals involved from
2006 - 2008 (government, industry, utilities, NGOs)
• Critically examines wind’s roles in energy security,
economic prosperity and environmental sustainability
 Supply Curve for Wind Energy:
Energy and Transmission Costs
160
Onshore
Class 7
Offshore
Class 7
10% of existing
140 Class 6 Class 6 transmission capacity
Levelized Cost of Energy, $/MWh

Class 5 Class 5
available to wind
120 Class 4 Class 4

Class 3 Class 3

100

80

60

40

20

0
- 200 400 600 800 1,000
2010 Costs w/o PTC, $1,600/MW-mile, Quantity Available, GW
w/o Integration costs
 20% Wind Scenario
305 GW

Installed Capacity as of
January 2008 = 16,904 MW
What does 20% Wind look like?

Source: DOE 20% Report

 Annual Installed Capacity
vs. Current Installed Capacity
18

16

Annual Installed Capacity (GW)

Capacity additions in 20% Scenario 14

12

10

Actual installations 4
2007: 5,329 MW Projected installations
2008: 7,500 MW* 2

0
06 08 10 12 14 16 18 20 22
20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20 20
Source*: AWEA, 2008
Annual GW Installed
 46 States Would Have
Substantial Wind Development by 2030

W in d C a p a c ity
T o ta l In s ta lle d (2 0 3 0 )
(G W )
0 .0 - 0 .1 I n c lu d e s o ff s h o r e w in d .
0 .1 - 1
1 - 5 T h e b la c k o p e n s q u a r e in th e c e n te r o f a s ta te r e p r e s e n ts
t h e la n d a r e a n e e d e d f o r a s in g le w in d f a r m t o p r o d u c e t h e
5 - 10
p r o je c t e d in s t a lle d c a p a c it y in th a t s t a t e . T h e b r o w n s q u a r e
> 10 r e p r e s e n t s t h e a c tu a l la n d a r e a t h a t w o u ld b e d e d ic a te d
t o th e w in d t u r b in e s ( 2 % o f t h e b la c k o p e n s q u a r e ) .
Need for New Transmission:
Existing and New in 2030
 Economic Costs of 20% Wind Scenario
Incremental investment cost of 20%
Wind Scenario
$3000
2% investment
$2500
difference between
Billions of 2006 Dollars

$2000 20% Wind and

$1500 No New Wind
$1000

$500

$0
No New Wind 20% Wind

Wind O&M Costs Fuel Costs

Wind Capital Costs Conventional O&M Costs
Transmission Costs Conventional Capital Costs
 20% Wind Scenario Impact
on Generation Mix in 2030
U.S. electrical energy mix
• Reduces electric utility 100%
natural gas consumption by
50% 80%
• Reduces total natural gas
consumption by 11% 60%

• Natural gas consumer

40%
benefits: $86-214 billion*
• Reduces electric utility coal 20%
consumption by 18%
• Avoids construction of 80 GW 0%
of new coal power plants No New Wind 20% Wind
Natural Gas Hydro
Coal Wind
Source *: Hand et al., 2008 Nuclear
 Fuel Savings from Wind
4.5E+10

4.0E+10
Electricity Sector
3.5E+10
Fuel Usage
Gas Fuel Savings
3.0E+10
Coal Fuel Savings
2.5E+10
MMBtu

Gas Fuel Usage

2.0E+10 (20%wind)
Coal Fuel Usage
(20%wind)
1.5E+10

1.0E+10

5.0E+09

0.0E+00
06

10

14

18

22

26

30
00
02
04

08

12

16

20

24

28
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
Reduction in National
Natural Gas Price Present Value Levelized
Gas
Reduction Benefits Benefit of
Consumption in 2030
in 2030 (2006$/MMBtu) (billion 2006$) Wind ($/MWh)
(%)
16.6 - 29 -
11% 0.6 -1.1- 1.5 86 - 150 - 214
41.6
 Cumulative Carbon Savings

Cumulative
Present Value Benefits Levelized Benefit of Wind
Carbon Savings
(billion 2006$) ($/MWh-wind)
(2007-2050, MMTCE)

4,182 MMTCE $ 50 - $145 $ 9.7/MWh - $ 28.2/MWh

Source: DOE 20% Vision Report

 CO2 Emissions from the Electricity Sector
4,500

4,000
CO2 Emissions in the Electric Sector

3,500
(million metric tons)

3,000

2,500

2,000

1,500

1,000 No New Wind Scenario CO2 emissions

20% Wind Scenario CO2 emissions
500 USCAP path to 80% below today’s levels by 2050

0
2006 2010 2014 2018 2022 2026 2030
 National (U.S.) – Economic Impacts
Cumulative impacts from 2007-2030
From the 20% Scenario- 300 GW new Onshore and Offshore development

Wind energy’s economic “ripple effect”

Indirect & Totals

Direct Impacts
Induced Impacts (construction + 20yrs)
Payments to Landowners: Construction Phase: • Total economic benefit
• $782 M • 4.46 M FTE jobs = $1,359 B
Local Property Tax Revenue: • $651 B to the US • New jobs during
• $1,877 M economy construction = 6.2 M
Construction Phase: Operations: FTE jobs
• 1.75 M FTE jobs • 2.15 M FTE jobs • New operations jobs
• $ 293 B to the US economy • $293 B to the US = 3.3 M FTE jobs
Operations: economy
• 1.16 M FTE jobs
• $122 B to the US economy

All monetary values are in 2006 dollars.

Construction Phase = 1-2 years
 Manufacturing Jobs Supported by State

J o b s (in p e r s o n -y e a r s )
3 0 0 - 1 ,0 0 0
1 ,0 0 0 - 5 ,0 0 0
5 ,0 0 0 - 1 0 ,0 0 0
1 0 ,0 0 0 - 2 0 ,0 0 0
2 0 ,0 0 0 - 3 0 , 0 0 0
M a n u fa c t u r in g lo c a t io n in f o r m a t io n f ro m R E P P R e p o r t b y S te r z in g e r & S v r c e k ( 2 0 0 4 )
> 3 0 ,0 0 0
M a jo r c o m p o n e n t a s s u m p tio n s : 5 0 % o f b la d e s a r e m a n u f a c t u r e d in U . S . in 2 0 0 7 in c r e a s in g t o 8 0 % b y 2 0 3 0 ,
2 6 % o f to w e r s a r e f r o m t h e U .S . in 2 0 0 7 in c r e a s in g t o 5 0 % b y 2 0 3 0 a n d 2 0 % o f t u r b in e s a r e m a d e in t h e U .S .
in c r e a s in g t o 4 2 % b y 2 0 3 0 .
Jobs Supported by the 20% Scenario

}
Over 500,000 jobs would be supported
between 2007 and 2030

Over 500,000
jobs supported
by the industry

}
in 2030

Approx.
180,000
directly
employed by
wind
Cumulative Water Savings from 20% Scenario

Reduces water consumption of 4 trillion gallons through 2030

(represents a reduction in electric sector water consumption by
17% in 2030)
 Wind Power Avoids Other Negative Impacts

• Wind power avoids the

negative impacts of
fossil fuel-based
electricity generation:
– Air emissions of mercury
or other heavy metals
– Emissions from
extracting and
transporting fuels
– Lake and streambed Photo courtesy: NREL
acidification
– Production of toxic solid
wastes, ash, or slurry
 Other Benefits of 20% Wind Energy
• Improves energy security by diversifying electricity
portfolio with an indigenous energy source
• Reduces fossil fuel demand and fuel prices, helping
to stabilize electricity rates

16 16
Daily price history of 1st-nearby
14 14
Nominal $/MMBtu (Henry Hub)

Nominal $/MMBtu (Henry Hub)

NYMEX natural gas futures contract

12 12

10 10

8 8

6 6
NYMEX
4 natural gas 4
futures strip
2 from 12/09/2008 2

0 0
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019

2021
2020

Source: LBNL
 Results: Costs & Benefits

Incremental direct cost to society $43 billion

Reductions in emissions of greenhouse 825 M tons (2030)
gasses and other atmospheric pollutants $98 billion
Reductions in water consumption 8% total electric
17% in 2030
Jobs created and other economic 150,000 direct
benefits $450 billion total
Reductions in natural gas use and price 11%
pressure $150 billion
Net Benefits: $205B + Water savings
 Conclusions
• 20% wind energy penetration is possible
• 20% penetration is not going to happen under business
as usual scenario
• Policy choices will have a large impact on assessing the
timing and rate of achieving a 20% goal
• Key Issues: market transformation, transmission, project
diversity, technology development, policy, public
acceptance
• 20% Vision report: May 2008 (www.20percentwind.org)

Source: AWEA 20% Vision

Carpe Ventem

www.windpoweringamerica.gov