The World's #1 Renewable Energy Network for News & Information
Sign In or Register
Renewable Energy World Logo
Friday, May 24, 2013
  • Sections
    • Home
      • News
      • Opinion & Commentary
      • Featured Blogs
      • Research & Reports
      • Video
      • Press Releases
      • All Blogs
      • Events
      • Products
      • Finance
    • Solar
      • News
      • Opinion & Commentary
      • Featured Blogs
      • Research & Reports
      • Video
      • Press Releases
      • All Blogs
      • Events
      • Products
      • Finance
    • Wind
      • News
      • Opinion & Commentary
      • Featured Blogs
      • Research & Reports
      • Video
      • Press Releases
      • All Blogs
      • Events
      • Products
      • Finance
    • Geothermal
      • News
      • Opinion & Commentary
      • Featured Blogs
      • Research & Reports
      • Video
      • Press Releases
      • All Blogs
      • Events
      • Products
      • Finance
    • Bio
      • News
      • Opinion & Commentary
      • Featured Blogs
      • Research & Reports
      • Video
      • Press Releases
      • All Blogs
      • Events
      • Products
      • Finance
    • Hydro
      • News
      • Opinion & Commentary
      • Featured Blogs
      • Research & Reports
      • Video
      • Press Releases
      • All Blogs
      • Events
      • Products
      • Finance
    • Careers
    • Companies
      • Company Directory
      • Press Releases
      • Products
      • Events Calendar
      • White Papers
    • Webcasts
      • Upcoming Webcasts
      • Featured Webcasts
      • Archived Webcasts
      • Events Calendar
    • White Papers
    • Magazines
      • Renewable Energy World
      • Wind Technology
      • Large Scale Solar
      • Hydro Review
      • HRW - Hydro Review Worldwide
      • Renewable Energy World (North America Edition)
      • Photovoltaics World
    • Awards
  • Account
    • Sign In
    • Register
  • Search
Don't Miss The Great Solar Debate: Where Does the Global Solar Industry Stand? Click Here to Register! ×

Recap: U.S. Wind Energy Layoffs Continue in Colorado, Iowa as Federal Policy Uncertainty Continues

Carl Levesque, American Wind Energy Association
August 27, 2012  |  9 Comments

More jobs in American wind power were lost this week, this time in manufacturing facilities in Colorado and Iowa, in the absence of a policy signal only Congress can provide: extension of the Production Tax Credit, the policy driver behind the rapid growth in U.S. jobs and manufacturing since 2005.

Layoffs announced so far this week include:

  • In Cedar Rapids, IA, Clipper Wind Power downsized its operations in reducing the company’s staff by 32%, from 550 employees to 376.
  • In Brighton, CO, Vestas Wind Systems cut about 30 workers on Monday, leaving about 200 still  employed. These cuts follow more than 90 layoffs at the company's tower plant in Pueblo, announced last week.
  • Walker Component Group, a Denver-based cable supplier for Vestas Wind Systems, has also had to cut a portion of its workforce, reducing its staff by 15 workers to 24.

Confirming that the layoffs at Walker Component Group were directly tied to Congress’ inaction to extend tax relief for wind power, company President Craig Walker told the Denver Post, “[T]he thing that distresses me is that there is so much controversy about it in Washington.

“Not here,” Walker continued, “not at other energy companies.”

Immediately responding to the layoffs at Clipper Wind power, the Cedar Rapids Gazette in Iowa editorialized that “the tax credit is a necessary tool, although it shouldn’t live forever. But Congress keeps playing games with this tax break, and the uncertainty has helped feed a boom-bust cycle in this industry over the past decade.”

This continues the drumbeat of support in Iowa, from opinion articles and recent editorials in the Des Moines Register and Denver Post to repeated statements by Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA), Govs. Terry Branstad (R-IA) and Sam Brownback (R-KS), and other leading Republicans.

“This week, once again, we are seeing the effects of policy uncertainty hit hard,” said Denise Bode, CEO of the American Wind Energy Association. “The people of Colorado and Iowa understand the importance of wind energy to their states and to America, and that’s why they and their representatives in Washington strongly support extending the PTC.  But unfortunately, jobs in Iowa, Colorado, and across the country will continue to be at risk until Congress acts.”

Among recent newspaper editorials supporting the PTC and noting the threat to jobs are:

Denver: “The industry has previously said that wind energy will soon be able to compete on the open market without the tax credit, and we think a short-term extension will help them get to that point. But we're also aware that early on in the next Congress, the nation's entire tax system will need review and overhaul if we are to get a handle on the federal debt…The wind association estimates that failure to extend the tax credit would result in the loss of 5,000 jobs in Colorado and tens of thousands more across the country. Given the state of the economy, we hope to see the Senate and the House rally around this bipartisan issue in short order.” (Denver Post, 8/6/12)

Des Moines: “Mitt Romney, the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, may have tilted at the wrong windmills when he said he would allow wind energy tax credits to expire… Gov. Terry Branstad and the entire congressional delegation heartily support the wind production tax credit and want it extended…there are good reasons why the tax credit should be extended for as long as necessary to get wind energy production to the point where it is competitive with other forms of energy.” (Des Moines Register, 8/5/12)

Bakersfield, Calif.: “[A} level playing field doesn't exist in the energy sector. Almost every form of energy receives subsidies of some sort, in the form of tax breaks, credits or direct investment. And in the case of fossil fuels, those subsidies have been around much longer than renewable energy credits, and many don't have expiration dates…Just the talk of expiring tax credits has some companies that manufacture wind turbines and other parts halting production and laying off workers.”  (Bakersfield Californian, 8/11/12)

This week’s layoffs add to a long list announced so far this year. Those include:

  • The largest wind tower manufacturer in the U.S., DMI Industries, announced 167 workers will be unemployed by November (August 7,Bloomberg News)
  • DMI Industries also announced that 216 jobs stand at risk in their plant in West Fargo, North Dakota (August 7, Bloomberg News)
  • LM Wind Power announced job reductions that will impact 94 full-time employees and 140 temporary workers and contractors (August 6, North American Wind Power)
  • Trinity Structural Towers said it will shift resources away from wind turbine tower manufacturing (August 14, Wind Power Monthly) 
  • Wind turbine manufacturer Gamesa furloughed 165 of its Pennsylvania-based workers (July 5, Bloomberg)
  • Wind measurement technology manufacturer NRG Systems laid off 18 Vermont-based employees in May, and an additional 12 in July– the first time in 30 years the firm has had to make any layoffs (May 22,Windpower Monthly and July 18, Burlington Free Press)
  • Wind turbine manufacturer Vestas plans to lay off 182 employees (January 12, Huffington Post)
  • Wind project developer Iberdrola Renewables laid off 50 U.S. employees, about half of whom were based in Oregon (January 25,North American Windpower)
  • Wind pattern analysis company Windlogics cut 10 of their Minnesota-based employees (July 2, Minnesota Public Radio)

 

These are just the tip of the iceberg of job losses expected throughout the wind energy supply chain. According to Navigant Consulting  37,000 Americans stand to lose their jobs by the end of the first quarter of 2013 if Congress does not extend the PTC. As seen here, Navigant projects that turbine deliveries will peak right now, in the third quarter of 2012, and then begin to steadily decline.

With that decline, employees at these factories will be let go at a rapid pace. According to a study on the historical impact of the PTC expiration on annual wind installation, the job-loss rate was between 73% and 93% when the tax credit was allowed to expire

“I’m deeply distressed that our wind industry colleagues are facing furloughs and layoffs due to lack of stable tax policy,” Bode said. “Unfortunately, the industry has begun letting workers go up and down our American manufacturing supply chain, which the industry has so proudly built up in support of the U.S. economy and made-in-the-USA manufacturing. Congress must act now to give wind energy a stable business environment to keep building this new industry and save 37,000 American jobs by the first quarter of next year.”   

Extending the Production Tax Credit (PTC) enjoys bipartisan support. Examples of Republican endorsements:

Gov. Sam Brownback (R-KS) and Sen. Jerry Moran (R-KS): “If we expect the wind-energy industry to provide for our country’s future energy needs and make long-term investments in their businesses, Congress must reauthorize the wind-production tax credit that expires this year.  By extending the wind PTC, Congress will allow the wind industry to complete its transformation from being a high-tech startup to becoming cost-competitive in the energy marketplace.” (Op-ed in The Wichita Eagle, 3/18/12)

Sen. Charles Grassley (R-IA): “Grassley said extending the Production Tax Credit is a "no-brainer for many of us," and noted he has introduced legislation that would do that. “The stakes for the wind industry and the country in general will only get worse with delay. It's time to act, not politick," he said.” (Wall Street Journal, 5/24/12)

Karl Rove, GOP strategist: “My hope is that after the election people say, look, let’s start making some priorities and find some things that we can agree on, and maybe one of them is the production tax credit.  It is a market mechanism, you don’t get paid unless you produce the power, and we’re not picking winners and losers, we’re simply saying for some period of time we will provide this incentive as we scale up and get improvements in technology.” (Associated Press, 6/5/12)

9 Comments

Register To Comment
Gerry Wootton
Gerry Wootton
August 29, 2012
The Moapa Piute situation provides a wonderful microcosm of the issues of renewable versus conventional. At least, this is the one instance where the Sierra Club expressed concern about the habitat of indigenous primate species living in the area.

Compare the environmental impact statements for the Moapa Piute solar project and the adjacent Reid Gardner coal plant expansion.
https://www.nvenergy.com/company/projects/images/Reid_Gardner_EA.pdf
http://projects2.pirnie.com/MoapaSolar/documents/FEIS%20Vol%20I%20-%20Report.pdf

I just wish that the Reid Gardner guys had to include a lot of doctored pictures depicting the 'viewshed' impact of their project like the solar guys do. On the other hand, I hope cliff won't be overly shocked by depictions of naked solar modules exposed in public.

Solar says "The Proposed Project lies within an area with a moderate to high potential for strong earthquake shaking ... The USGS indicates there is a 40 percent chance of a magnitude 5.0 or greater earthquake near the Proposed Project in the next 50 years."; coal says "The Project Area does not contain mapped earthquake faults, and no faults were identified ..."

Solar provides a means for wildlife to cohabit in their space. Coal evicts endangered species and fences them out. Seems fair.
Cliff Claven
Cliff Claven
August 29, 2012
My message to everyone is 'pay for it yourself.' Stop fleecing the taxpayers and utility customers with opaque subsidy and cost-shifting schemes. If wind and solar are past break-even and are so good, people will buy them. Right now, if you add up all the federal programs, we are subsidizing wind at 1.85 cents per kWh (solar at 3.5 cents per kWh) and the whole industry is facing collapse if the tax credit is not renewed. Let's level the playing field, end the subsidies, and let all energy contenders compete fairly. The whole 'clean and green' argument for solar and wind would only apply if you used solar and wind energy exclusively to make them from end-to-end. Why are conventional energy sources used for mining and manufacturing and transportation? EROI and power density. They do matter--a lot.
Cliff Claven
Cliff Claven
August 29, 2012
The EROI of wind is crippled by the need for backup power generation. If it's used for a customer who can tolerate variable or no power on occasion, it is good. However, the nation's power grid does not fit that description. Anyone who needs guaranteed power must not only pay for the wind turbine (or solar farm), but also for a backup power generation capability (generator, batteries, fuel cells, spinning reserve on the grid, etc.) Paying for twice the capacity and only using part of it for a fraction of the time is poor EROI and poor economics. Wind and solar as niche energy sources for suitable customers is great. Trying to push them into a role they don't fit as baseload grid power generators is asinine. Of course the investment brochures (and Wikipedia), don't factor in backup power into their numbers. Buyer beware.
Cliff Claven
Cliff Claven
August 29, 2012
@Anonymous: Wikipedia? Really?
Cliff Claven
Cliff Claven
August 29, 2012
@GeraldR: Everyone has their favorite tally of "off the record" consequences for whatever form of energy they hate. I agree with you that we should price in the externalities into the price of our energy. Let's price into solar and wind the environmental and health costs of all the fossil fuel burned to manufacturing the panels and turbines. Let's factor in the environmental damage from tearing up the Earth to mine silica and bauxite and the rarer materials needed to dope the semiconductors and make the rare-earth magnets and the steel and concrete of the towers. We also need to reimburse the taxpayers for any public land used for solar and wind farms, and for the pristine natural views and property values ruined by vistas of mirrors and panels and towers. Even more importantly, we need to calculate the cost of the extinction of species and loss of biodiversity from industrializing millions of acres of natural habitat with heavy equipment to install the farms and permanent access roads and cable runs to service these farms. We also need to price in the toxins associated with the storage batteries and capacitors and fuel cells necessary to make this viable, and reimburse the taxpayers for new rights of way for new continent-spanning HVDC transmission lines and the costs of forcing existing fossil fuel and nuclear electrical power plants to operate inefficiently as spinning reserves, idling to make up for unpredictable lapses in variable solar power that otherwise endanger the grid. Of course we can't forget the tragic costs of bird and bat murder. If we're not going to be fair and rational and intellectually honest and recognize that all forms of energy entail costs and risk, then we deserve to be overtaken by the South Koreans and Chinese and Indians who base their decisions on science and reality.
Gerry Wootton
Gerry Wootton
August 29, 2012
cliff -- Most of what you say has nothing to do with the topic of wind power. Wind turbines only occupy a small fraction of the land they occupy -- that's not news to farmers who have been using windmills for centuries. Practically, wind turbines do imply a restriction of land use due to acoustic disturbance but this is limited to domestic occupation. Even if you count this as a total exclusion zone, it is much smaller than what should be applied to the toxic plume area of a coal power plant or the safety zone of a nuclear plant. Of course, this is at variance with current business as usual with millions of people living within these zones. According to senator Harry Reid 'Each year more than 24,000 deaths are attributed to emissions from coal-fired power plants in the United States alone'. Let us know how, according to your calculations, wind turbines and solar farms can achieve the same kill rate. The Moapa Paiute renewable energy projects represent an interesting case (glad you brought that up) - these people are deluged by air pollution and toxic fly ash dusters from a nearby coal plant. What's your message to them: forget renewable energy, just suck it up and suck it in?

Check it out http://indiancountrytodaymedianetwork.com/2012/08/17/moape-paiute-find-solar-solution-amid-coal-ash-plague-129554
ANONYMOUS
August 29, 2012
Use of MW per square mile for wind farms is a red herring of the highest order. This is obviously based on the presumption that the acreage involved is unavailable for other uses. You need to take a tour of wind farms in operation that are in the middle of operating farms and surrounded by grazing lands. Consider also those located on land for which alternate uses are minimal. Please let us know what productive uses we are collectively foregoing in the Altamont Pass area or west of Palm Springs.

A second concern with your analysis is the characterization of wind power as a low EROI energy source. The Wikipedia comparison chart http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_returned_on_energy_invested belies this assertion. Perhaps you have a link to more up-to-date information than in the chart attached to that entry. If so, please share with the world.
John DAngelo
John DAngelo
August 29, 2012
Cliff,

So what is it is "low density" power? It is clean power vs dirty power. It is not a "waste" of anything but a step in the right direction. As to power density I find that interesting fact which gives further argument for solar arrays instead of wind generators. I would rather look at a wind generator on the horizon than a belching smokestack spewing mercury, sulfur , etc all over my space.

You also forgot to mention that wind generators are mechanical devices and do break down from time to time. Solar modules are ultra reliable having NO moving parts.

One answer lies with distributed generation and utilizing all the rooftops we have that sit idle when they could be used for electrical generation.

The centralized "wind farm" is the product of the utility companies wanting to control and OWN the free energy source that mother nature provides us. Then selling under the guise of "green clean energy" getting money for energy that basically costs them nothing to buy as they have no fuel costs with a wind farm. But the average Joe buys into it. Amazing. Distributed energy is all about power to the people.

Wind farms will only continue to proliferate. Why? because the utility companies are catching onto RE. The light goes on in their heads. Hey no fuel costs! WOW! And we can continue to charge what we charge for coal fired or natural gas fired energy to boot PLUS add a premium to the product because it is "green energy". What a sweet deal for utility companies, but a real screw job for the consumer. So sad, to bad.
Cliff Claven
Cliff Claven
August 27, 2012
The $5B a year the feds have been spending on subsidizing wind is a vain attempt to force-feed very low energy-density, low EROI, and highly variable power into a national power grid that demands high energy-density, high EROI, and highly reliable power. According to NREL, the average large U.S. wind farm is delivering just 2.93 MW per square mile of land. This paltry return is not worth the fossil fuel energy used to manufacture and emplace the turbines nor the millions of acres of federal (i.e., taxpayer) land being given to political cronies and industrially reclaimed into sprawling wind farms and service roads. Even weak sister solar returns nearly five times that power density (13.1 MW/mi2).
If someone wants to claim these numbers are out of date, here are the data from six solar and wind projects just fast-tracked by Obama this month:
1. Quartzsite Solar (BLM AZ): 3.10 W/m2 = 8.02 MW/mi2 (100 MW / 1675 acre @ .21 CF)
2. Desert Harvest Solar (Riverside CA): 6.49 W/m2 = 16.8 MW/mi2 (150 MW / 1,200 acres @ .21 CF)
3. McCoy Solar (Riverside CA): 7.95 W/m2 = 20.6 MW/mi2 (750 MW / 4,893 acres @ .21 CF)
4. Moapa Paiute Solar (Clark NV): 5.19 W/m2 = 13.4 MW/mi2 (200 MW (PV+CS)/ 2,000 acres @ .21 CF)
5. Silver State South Solar (BLM NV): 1.39 W/m2 = 3.61 MW/mi2 (350 MW / 13,043 acre @ .21 CF)
6. Mojave Wind (Mojave AZ): 0.87 W/m2 = 2.25 MW/mi2 (425 MW / (38,099+8,960) acre @ .39 CF)
7. Chokecherry/Sierra Madre Wind (Carbon WY): 1.26 w/m2 = 3.26 MW/mi2 (3,000 MW / 230,000 acres @.39 CF)
We are wasting our tax dollars and ruining our land for pennies on the dollar. Trying to force a low energy-density, low EROI, highly variable energy source to supply a grid which demands high power-density, high EROI, and minimal variability energy is the height of folly.

Add Your Comments

To add your comments you must sign-in or create a free account.

  • Create a Free Account!
  • Sign-In
Carl Levesque

Carl Levesque

Carl is Editor & Publications Manager at the American Wind Energy Association, where has worked since 2006. At AWEA he oversees AWEA's online and print publications including the Wind Energy Weekly, Windpower Update, and other products....
  • About
  • Articles
  • Contact
  • FOLLOW
  • CONTACT
Stay Connected
         
To register for our free e-Newsletters, create your free account here:

Editors' Picks

  • EU Debate Over Climate Change Policy Could Dampen Renewable Energy Growth
  • The Future of Solar in Latin America
  • Fighting Blackouts: Japan Residential PV and Energy Storage Market Flourishing
  • The Economic Case for Divesting from Fossil Fuels
  • Are Run-of-River Hydroelectric Systems Ready to Ride US Currents?
  • Moniz Unanimously Confirmed As New DOE Chief

Most Commented

  • 13
    Breakdown: Penetration of Renewable Energy in Selected Markets
  • 10
    No Easy Fix for Broken Wind Turbine at US High School
  • 6
    Renewable Energy Research Initiative Launched in UK
  • 3
    Wind Turbine Lubrication and Maintenance: Protecting Investments in Renewable Energy

Total Access Partners

Growing Your Business? Learn More about Total Access
  • Navigant
  • Johnson Controls, Inc.
  • DNV KEMA Energy & Sustainability
  • Stoel Rives LLP
  • SolarEstimate.org
  • Rotork plc
  • EnergyDreams LLC
  • The Interstate Renewable Energy Council, Inc.
News
  • Renewable Energy
  • Solar Energy
  • Wind Energy
  • Bioenergy
  • Geothermal Energy
  • Hyrdo Power
  • Blogs
  • Video
  • Finance
Resources
  • Companies
  • Products
  • Careers
  • Events
  • Webcasts
  • White Papers
  • Magazines
  • Press Releases
  • e-Newsletters
Company
  • About Us
  • Our Team
  • Contact Us
  • Advertising & Services
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms & Conditions
  • Site Map
Network Partners - Magazines
  • Hydro Review Magazine
  • Hydro Review Worldwide Magazine
  • Renewable Energy World Magazine
Network Partners - Events
  • Power-Gen International
  • Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo North America
  • Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Europe
  • Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Asia
  • Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Africa
  • Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo India
  • HydroVision International
  • HydroVision Brazil
  • HydroVision India
  • HydroVision Russia
© Copyright 1999-2013 RenewableEnergyWorld.com - All rights reserved.
RenewableEnergyWorld.com - World's #1 Renewable Energy Network for news & Information