Renewable Energy Solar Energy Wind Energy Geothermal Energy Bioenergy Hydropower

Texas Decision Could Double Wind Power Capacity in the U.S.

October 4, 2007 | 22 Comments

Do you like this news?

Bookmark

Feed

Austin, Texas [RenewableEnergyAccess.com] The Public Utility Commission of Texas (PUC) issued an Interim Final Order yesterday that could enable construction of up to 22,806 Megawatts (MW) of new wind power in Texas. A final order, transmission plan, and budget are still pending before the Commission but are expected to be finalized in early 2008.

"While many states are talking about ways to bring more clean energy to customers and improve air quality, Texas is doing it."

--Mike Sloan, Managing Consultant of The Wind Coalition

The order designates five Competitive Renewable Energy Zones (CREZs) in West Texas and the Texas Panhandle and authorizes development of transmission lines needed to deliver electricity produced in those windy CREZ areas to customers throughout Texas.

"While many states are talking about ways to bring more clean energy to customers and improve air quality, Texas is doing it," says Mike Sloan, Managing Consultant of The Wind Coalition, a regional wind advocacy group operating in the south central United States.

Adds Sloan, "Texas' proactive transmission process is drawing a lot of attention; we expect the CREZ process to become a model for the nation."

Texas' CREZ model has already been embraced by California and Colorado, with additional Western states also considering its use.

The Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT) has initiated a Transmission Optimization Study to develop options for delivering wind power from the five CREZ zones to customers throughout the ERCOT power grid, including Dallas, Houston and San Antonio. Total wind capacity served in ERCOT's studies, from both new and existing projects, will range from 10,000 MW to 22,806 MW.

Based on ERCOT's 2006 CREZ analysis, 5,250 MW of new wind installations would reduce customer payments to power generators by $1.2 billion per year (equivalent to $3.47 per month per residential customer).

Spurred by successful renewable energy development policies, Texas surpassed California during 2006 to become the nation's leader in wind capacity. The American Wind Energy Association reports that Texas currently has more than 3,300 MW of installed wind capacity out of the nation's total of 12,634 MW.

During 2007, Texas is expected to add more than half of all new wind installations in the United States.

Additional Information

Wind Power

22 Reader Comments

Comment
1 of 22

jim-pierobon-62233

October 4, 2007

Texas may be the land of black crude but this creation of a zone to foster renewable energy and get more large-scale wind generation electricity to market is a major milestone. Stay tuned, this is a tip-of-the-iceberg development that is proving renewable energy is wanted, it's needed, financiers want to fund and industry can deliver on.

Comment
2 of 22

jim-berry-51310

October 4, 2007

<p>Have you ever noticed that when you discuss renewables Wind is talked about in 10s, 100s and 1,000s of MW while solar is discussed in 1s, 2s, or maybe 5 MWs?  </p><p>Solar gets all the press releases, but Wind is installed at 17 to 1 ratio dealing with US wind versus WORLD WIDE solar installed on an anually (2006 Solar buzz year end report). </p>Did you see the line in the article about how installing more Wind turbines was going to result in a reduction in costs to the rate paying public? Most renewables actually result in an increase to the rate payer/tax paying public, so that the renewable energy investor/homeowner can make back their money.

Comment
3 of 22

jason-fields-60162

October 5, 2007

Paul,

Props on your investment in Wind Energy. The simple nature of wind generated electricity is that it is slightly more expensive than coal. WECS are quickly closing the gap but we are not there yet. So think of your money as an investment in the inertia of wind energy. Part of the costs associated with the sale of green energy is simply the marketing costs. Once sufficient market base and consumer demand is there(we are getting close) they can pull back on the marketing. The increase in turbine orders worldwide, while temporarily hiking turbine prices, will eventually lead to better economies of scale as manufacturers iron out their supply chains. This means that the wind industry will become more competitive and profitable as time goes on. Thank you for your support!

Comment
4 of 22

paul-johnson-34828

October 5, 2007

As a Texan, it is nice to see the leading efforts. Even more promising is that I know these projects are tapping the vast wind resource in West Texas.

What my concern is on the prices I pay. Because we have a relative free market on choosing providers, I am paying $0.148/kw for 100% wind. I can go out and choose a normal coal provider for $0.10/kw.

This seems out of line. I fear that this "green premium" I am being charged will limit the number of people choosing this source of electricity. They really need to charge a competitive price to get more adoption of wind, not screw the few that are willing to pay more for it.

Comment
5 of 22

brian-ballek-52819

October 5, 2007

Hey Jim,

how many kilobytes of memory (remember 1024 KB per MB) does your computer have? Twenty years ago my home computer had 128 KB of memory. Today my home computer has 1.5 GB of RAM - that's 1500 MB or 1,536,000 kilobytes. And just a little over 20 years ago an "expert" named Bill Gates said no one would ever need more than a small amount of RAM (I believe he stated a number even lower than 128 KB).

Now that you've dazzled us yet again with your ignorance, would you please do us all a favor and leave this forum? It's quite clear from your various comments that you have no real interest in these discussions other than to irritate others for the sheer pleasure of it. You offer neiter facts nor reasoned argumentation. Please go vent your venom somewhere else.

Comment
6 of 22

ggoza4

October 5, 2007

All of this is so encouraging to see wind power take off. Did you know you could help change the way power is made in Texas? Are you paying a premium for green energy? We have very competitive rates on wind power. My email is ggoza4@sbcglobal.net if you need more info.

ggg

Comment
7 of 22

ian-page-36034

October 5, 2007

It is very encouraging to see renewables programs that are measured in gigawatts not just megawatts! At last we are getting serious.

Comment
8 of 22

jim-berry-51310

October 6, 2007

Brian Ballek - I didn't see that much venom in my statement far far above.

I true fully stated that Wind is far more important than solar. THIS article is about WIND and how much of it Texas has coming on line. My comment was appropriate and compared the scope of wind versus solar pv in importance to the renewable movement and national economy.

If you read the newspapers and even articles on this site, you would mistakenly believe that solar pv is the leader in renewable energy.

That is a false impression that nearly everyone in the media has. You can hear it on the radio, tv, and read in the papers. Everyone thinks solar is important and will save us.

I didn't say anything particularly negative about Solar pv, except that it get too much favorable press versus Wind which is saving the world. Do you disagree with that?

Comment
9 of 22

jim-berry-51310

October 6, 2007

Paul,

I am now suffering through one of those deadly sins, envy of your power rates. Not that my is bad $.39 per kwh - Thank California.

Comment
10 of 22

keith-ljunghammar-25416

October 6, 2007

Paul

I am cureous. If you are paying a 50% premium then is this for energy used during the daytime when most of the wind power would be generated. Of course the wind can come at any time but it usually comes during the day. Can you switch from green to coal depending on what is not at peak. A very interesting supply/demand model. Can the energy production sources trade off to other locals. Those numbers of near future wind power indicate how naked we as a country still are when it comes to alternative energy power source construction and use. But doubling the capacity in a year sounds aggressive and necessary.

Comment
11 of 22

joe-maurer-37896

October 7, 2007

Next, I am waiting to buy a plug-in hybrid vehicle and figure out how to partially recharge it with solar. The transition has not been very painful. And, I feel to be actually doing something about global warming other than just running my mouth.

Comment
12 of 22

joe-maurer-37896

October 7, 2007

I live in the Dallas, Tx. area and have been using 100% wind plan for almost two years. The house is all electric and a typical suburban design, faces south, and has good cross ventilation . The first year averaged about $.1850 per KWH and included a very hot summer in 2006. My house is approx. 1765 sq.', has a three ton 13 SEER A/C and heat system, R30 plus insulation in ceiling, dble pane windows, solar screens on west side of house, well ventilated attic, large shading trees on property, and we are comfortable with thermostat settings of 78 degrees in summer. The first year cost me about $250. more than TXU's coal produced electricity. I figured that was a small price to pay. The second year I have negotiated $.167 per KWH for a one year contract. I managed to buy a used thermal solar hot water system , and have also purchased 60 watts of photovoltiac cells which I expect to couple with several deep cell batteries and maybe LED lighting.

Comment
13 of 22

paul-johnson-34828

October 7, 2007

Keith, you would have to check with ERCOT (Texas power grid system) to get the details.

My understanding - All generators feed into the same grid. So, if the 100% wind provider has sold 10MW of power to consumers they have to have at least contributed 10MW of power to the grid from wind generators. Excess power would probably be sold at wholesale rates to other providers.

Comment
14 of 22

tom-will-56446

October 10, 2007

I agree with you, Greg. I've been puzzled by some of the acronyms. I'm an editorial judge for an engineering magazine and proper writing etiquette is to spell out what you are saying the first time followed by the acronym in parentheses. Then the acronym can be freely used, e.g. compressed air energy storage (CAES).

Comment
15 of 22

ggoza4

October 10, 2007

I am very interested in what you are talking about. Would you please define some of the acromymes you are using ?CAES ?

Comment
16 of 22

-24125

October 10, 2007

To get the maximum wind energy to the market and consequetnly reduce the costs, wind must be dispatcheable. CAES technology is the answer the stored enery converted to power can now be dispatched under a grid guaranteed capacity agreement. The capacity factor of wind turbines of 30 % can now be 60% or more. The installed number of WTG's make a larger contribution, and green power users can contract for greater capacity at competitive levels.CAES also avoids having to use Gas Turbine or GT Combined Cycles to fill in the voids of wind power generation.
ShellWind and TXU are seriously looking at this possibility for 3000 MW--should they proceed with this concept Texas will certainly be a leader in abundant lower cost renewable energy.

Comment
17 of 22

ggoza4

October 10, 2007

We have a network of poeple in Texas that deal specifically with renewable energy. Our main goal is to let the consumer know we do have a choice to choose renewable energy. If my electricity is generated by wind or solar, that is a few less kilowatts that the coal or gas fired generated companies get to produce. If enough demand gets put on the elect.co's, they will change. As for now we collectively have over 600,000 customers. That's enough to START making a difference. I am not on a sales call here, but most people don't realize they can purchase 100% wind or solar energy in Texas. Most people think it gets shipped out to Florida because Fla. Pwr & light own a portion of the wind generators. That's not true.find out more on our video clip http://greggoza.gmrep.com

Comment
18 of 22

jonheatley

October 10, 2007

hey its great to read about texas and wind power. I'm from the UK and we have always associated Texas with oil Barons holding back renewables and it is actually quite the opposite story. here we don't have the space so are concentrating on offshore wind farms but as far as I can see Texas is leading the world. Long may it continue and solar's time will surely come. then a long way behind that maybe wave power....

Comment
19 of 22

ggoza4

October 12, 2007

Thanks for the clairification Greg
Lets talk some wind energy: prices, availability,How many wind turbines are in Texas? Abilene area? Panhandle of Texas? What is the price of production for one kilowatt?

Comment
20 of 22

lmagic007-lmagic007-58442

November 18, 2007

Talking about costing you would have to factor in;

- Environmental costs to economic productivity
- Climate corrective costs through measures to reduce man made greenhouse gas. We are talking allot of money here.

If global GDP was $66,228,669,000,000 in 2006 and tackling climate change to 2050 is a 5% cost, then as a rough idea, we could be looking at costs to fix of $3,311,433,450,000 Thus we are looking at about 3.3 trillion dollars in corrective costs to 2050. Some estimates show higher figures with reports of a 150 billion dollar per year cost within 10 years. This could push climate correction costs to up around 7 trillion dollars to 2050.

Now some reports suggest a cost of over 70 trillion dollars if we do nothing about Climate Change and mans contribution to it.

Comment
21 of 22

lmagic007-lmagic007-58442

November 18, 2007

The way things currently stand and if Climate Change is a real danger to humanity as the experts are saying, it's the future generations that will pay for our indulgences of man induced delayed environmental impact and the economic costs that will entail for future generations.

Just look around the world and see what's happening with Climate already and its impacts being felt. Whether what's happening now in global climate and the impacts we are seeing on the ground, is related to mans activity, I'm not sure, but if it is, then its a real concern. Either way it's a real concern. Project that trend another 10 to 20 years forward and see where we are heading.

Comment
22 of 22

lmagic007-lmagic007-58442

November 18, 2007

Consider also that we are subsidising fossil with a delayed future cost in Climate Change impacts. Thus in reality fossil fuels are far more costly that we realize and thus should be charged at a price appropriate to that cost. If this was done, renewables would break through the price barrier and become far more competitive with fossil fuels.

I guess if you calculate the cost of mans share of induced Climate Change and factor that into the fossil fuel prices, you could come up with a more reasonable price for fossil fuels.

Add Your Comment

Registered users, please make sure to Sign-In. We and others want to know your ideas and opinions. If you are not yet Registered -- it's quick and easy. Just click below.
Thanks!