Massachusetts Wind Energy Predevelopment Support Program & Feasibility Study for Marblehead, Massachusetts

Mia Devine
miadevine@hotmail.com

Brendan OConnor
oconnorbrendan@hotmail.com

Tony Ellis, Tony Rogers, Sally Wright, and James Manwell Renewable Energy Research Lab Center for Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy Department of Mechanical Engineering University of Massachusetts Amherst, MA 01003 USA www.ceere.org

Wind Energy Predevelopment Support Program

ABSTRACT The Renewable Energy Research Lab (RERL) at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst has launched a new program to aid individuals and community groups in performing the preliminary steps leading toward the implementation of a wind energy project. RERL has provided community wind energy support for 20 years and has recently consolidated these services into a program called Wind Energy Predevelopment Support (WEPS). This program is a model for encouraging community-based wind development that has received enthusiastic support throughout the state. A description of the WEPS program is presented in this paper, along with the summary of a wind energy feasibility study for a community in Massachusetts. WIND ENERGY PREDEVELOPMENT SUPPORT

NEED FOR PREDEVELOPMENT SUPPORT

As with any energy facility, the integration of wind energy into the electrical power grid requires a great deal of planning, coordination, and engineering and involves stakeholders from many public arenas. A wind energy project timeline can be divided into two phases: development and predevelopment. The predevelopment phase of a wind project includes monitoring and evaluating the local wind resource, determining possible turbine locations, and estimating the economic feasibility of a wind project. It may also include gathering local support, public education and outreach, securing legal rights to land and access to power lines. The predevelopment phase may last 1 to 2 years and requires a considerable amount of time and resources. The beginning of the development phase is the point where a decision has been made to purchase and install a wind energy system and sufficient financing has been obtained to proceed. Often, a private developer is hired at this time if they have not already been involved in the predevelopment process. The developer or subcontractor will perform the detailed design and engineering of tower foundations, road access, electrical grid connections, and will oversee the installation and commissioning of the project. For large wind farms, one wind development company may perform both the predevelopment and development functions. However, for the installation of a single or small cluster of turbines, a wind developer may find the overhead cost of predevelopment too risky for the potential return. In these cases, the burden of predevelopment can be taken on by a community entity, such as the local utility, non-profit organization, or landowner. While these groups are often interested in developing wind power, they may lack the capital and the expertise to perform these predevelopment tasks.

RENEWABLE ENERGY RESEARCH LAB - MEETING COMMUNITY NEEDS

The Renewable Energy Research Laboratory (RERL) at the University of Massachusetts serves New England as a source of wind energy expertise. Along with the Massachusetts state energy office, the Department of Energy Resources (DOER), RERL has been

AWEA 2003

Devine, OConnor, Ellis, Manwell, Rogers, Wright

Page 2

Wind Energy Predevelopment Support Program promoting wind power for over twenty years, with anemometry around Massachusetts and beyond, including a wide range of coastal, island and inland locations. Wind monitoring serves purposes other than gathering data and allowing for realistic economic estimates. The permitting and installation of an anemometry tower is often a dry run for towns considering wind power, and it can uncover obstacles early in the process. Resource assessment, however, is not enough to realize wind power. In some cases, RERL was able to provide communities with more than a technical analysis of their wind resource. For example, recent efforts have resulted in the installation of Massachusetts' first modern wind plant, a 660-kW turbine in the town of Hull. RERL worked closely with Hull citizens for two years prior to installation. Not only did RERL evaluate the wind resource, but also participated in numerous town meetings and facilitated forums to address community concerns [Manwell et al., 2003]. Since the installation of Hulls turbine, RERL has received dozens of requests from representatives of towns, municipal utilities, landowners, farms, and non-profit organizations, all looking for predevelopment assistance like that provided to Hull. To help fill this gap, DOER and RERL created a formal program to provide both technical assistance and community outreach, with the aim of increasing community-based wind energy development throughout the state. At the same time, the US Department of Energys Wind Powering America was forming a state-based anemometer loan program, which provided RERL with a number of monitoring towers to lend. As the Wind Energy Predevelopment Support (WEPS) program evolved, the Massachusetts Technology Collaborative (trustee of the Massachusetts systems benefit charge, the Renewable Energy Trust Fund) expressed interest in furthering the goals of this program. Discussions are underway to incorporate aspects into the community wind energy support program that they are in the process of developing.

GOALS OF THE WIND ENERGY PREDEVELOPMENT SUPPORT PROGRAM

The goal of the WEPS program is to facilitate the introduction of more wind energy in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, on the community, farm, and small-business scale. The effort is aimed at encouraging community wind energy development in Massachusetts by helping potential wind power site owners to evaluate their wind resource and determine how to proceed. The program is directed towards persons and groups who want to make use of wind energy, but who are unable to do so on their own because of the initial costs of predevelopment and/or lack of expertise. Through the WEPS program, RERL provides assistance at all stages of project predevelopment, including: Outreach to communities and other groups o Attending meetings o Informal as well as in-depth consultation Wind resource assessment o Field visits, site evaluation o Assistance with permitting of wind monitoring tower o Installation & removal of wind monitoring tower Devine, OConnor, Ellis, Manwell, Rogers, Wright Page 3

AWEA 2003

Wind Energy Predevelopment Support Program o Analysis of data, energy production projections o Use of SODAR where appropriate and possible Other technical follow-up support o Economic & feasibility estimates o Electromagnetic Interference (EMI), noise o Conceptual layouts, visualizations o Development of technical bid specification and request for proposals; bid evaluation

TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE
WEPS support is provided by staff engineers and graduate students at RERL. Technical assistance can include wind data gathering and analysis, visualizations, and sound measurements. Wind Data Analysis Prospective sites will typically be monitored for one year, depending on the results and magnitude of the project. The raw wind data that is collected at the monitoring site is sent to RERL for processing. At RERL, the data is validated for completeness and accuracy, and erroneous data is removed. For example, the screening process will find errors due to damaged sensors, data logger malfunctions, broken wires, or icing conditions. All of the 10-minute wind resource data that is collected and verified will be available to the public on the RERL website (www.ceere.org/rerl) after it has been checked for quality control. Using the validated data, a basic analysis is performed and a report is presented to the participant, which includes a summary of the following items: Wind characteristics: The wind is characterized by average speed, primary direction, and turbulence intensity. These parameters are used in further evaluations. Long term wind-speed estimates: In order to determine if the measured year was a typical year or if it was unusually windy or calm, the data must be compared to longterm measurements taken at a nearby location. In eastern Massachusetts, RERL uses measurements from Bostons Logan International Airport and RERLs monitoring tower at Thompson Island in the Boston Harbor. In western and central Massachusetts, long-term data is available from RERLs wind turbine on Mt. Tom in Holyoke. Locations such as weather stations or other local data sites are used as appropriate. Estimated Power Production: Using power curve specifications from wind turbine manufacturers, the 10-minute wind speed data can be used to estimate power production and annual energy production. With this information, the community will have an estimate of the amount of electricity they can expect from selected wind turbines. Other data analysis can be performed if needed, such as estimating the wind speeds at a location other than where the measurements were taken.

AWEA 2003

Devine, OConnor, Ellis, Manwell, Rogers, Wright

Page 4

Wind Energy Predevelopment Support Program Economic Analysis General price guidelines and information from turbine manufacturers are used to estimate the cost of installation and maintenance of the wind turbine project. Local electricity rates, interest rates, and discount rates are used to estimate the cost of energy and payback of the system. Visualizations One of the most common barriers to community acceptance is the visual impact of the wind turbine(s) on the landscape. To address this concern, RERL creates computer simulations of what the actual wind project will look like. These visualizations are created with the use of topographical maps and the WindFarm software package [ReSoft Ltd.] to give the most realistic view possible. Noise Measurements Another common cause for community concern is noise created by the wind generator and rotating blades. When appropriate, RERL arranges for measurement of background sound levels in the area around the potential turbine site. Using sound data supplied by the turbine manufacturer, RERL estimates the extent to which an increase in noise levels will affect those in the area of the proposed site. Equipment Used The WEPS program uses standard wind-monitoring equipment, including 40 or 50-meter towers, anemometers, wind vanes, and data loggers. Fifty-meter towers are required in wooded areas and complex terrain. Other equipment may be used where appropriate. For instance, additional monitoring of sites may be undertaken using RERLs SODAR (Sonic Detection and Ranging), which permits wind speeds to be measured at heights greater than 40 meters without the use of a tower (Figure 1). In remote sites a cell phone logger may be used and back-up sensors will be installed on the towers. RERL will provide assistance in permitting the installation of the monitoring tower and equipment. RERL will install, maintain, and dismantle the tower at the end of the monitoring phase.

Figure 1. Sonic Detection and Ranging (SODAR) Equipment

AWEA 2003

Devine, OConnor, Ellis, Manwell, Rogers, Wright

Page 5

Wind Energy Predevelopment Support Program

COMMUNITY ASSISTANCE
The success of a wind energy project depends on community involvement and support as well as legitimate technical data. During the wind-monitoring period, RERL staff will work with community participants to determine the level of local interest and to identify any potential barriers to wind power development. This includes participation in town meetings, educational workshops, and communicating with utility representatives or local officials. A wind energy project must comply with federal, state, and local regulations. In Massachusetts, this may include permits and approvals from the Energy Facilities Siting Board, Department of Environmental Protection, Coastal Zone Management Office, Natural Heritage Program, Army Corps of Engineers, and the Federal Aviation Administration [National Wind Coordinating Committee, 1998]. Other potential barriers that may adversely affect a community wind project include land ownership or zoning issues, public acceptance issues, safety issues if the turbine is to be located in populated areas, and interconnection to the power lines. If a community decides to proceed, the final stages of predevelopment include soliciting bids from wind turbine manufacturers. The prospective turbine owner must specify their needs and prepare a detailed request for proposals (RFP). To the extent possible, RERL will assist the community in navigating each of these procedures and guide the community in dealing with regulators and developers from predevelopment through project installation.

APPLICATION PROCESS
Applicants are solicited through public outreach channels, including the media, the Internet, and brochures distributed at energy conferences and events. Participation in the program is free for selected applicants. Participants will typically contribute their time by taking an active role in the installation and maintenance of the equipment to the extent possible. Selection Criteria The WEPS program is directed towards towns, landowners, small businesses, municipalities, farms, non-profit organizations, and public agencies. Participants will be chosen based on several criteria: Size: The focus of the program is to encourage the development of sites that could support a small number of utility-scale wind turbines. Location: An attempt has been made to encourage wind power in diverse regions of Massachusetts. Likely wind resource: Identification of the potential wind resource will initially be based on the wind maps prepared under the Southern New England wind resource study funded by a consortium of Northeast Utilities, Massachusetts Renewable Energy Trust Fund and the Connecticut Clean Energy Fund (Figure 2). Areas that are shown to have a poor wind resource based on the initial evaluation will likely not be accepted. AWEA 2003 Devine, OConnor, Ellis, Manwell, Rogers, Wright Page 6

Wind Energy Predevelopment Support Program

Source: True Wind Solutions

Figure 2. Wind Resource Map of Massachusetts Participant: Preference will be given to municipalities, non-profits, landowners, public agencies and farms. RERL will attempt to involve participants of varying types and categories, within the constraints of the other criteria. Preparation: Preference will be based on the extent of the applicants preparatory work, as demonstrated by the completeness of the application. Other criteria include: proximity to transmission lines, land ownership, and community support. After applicants pass an initial screening based on the criteria discussed above, RERL conducts phone interviews and/or site visits to make the final selection. The initial round of monitoring sites has been selected for 2003, which include two municipal utilities, one water treatment plant, one town, two private landowners, and a non-profit organization. Applications will be taken on a rolling basis for future consideration. WEPS Conclusions The grass-roots nature of community-scale wind projects requires the collaboration of many parties. The existence of unbiased technical and practical information, like that provided by RERL, will help to facilitate the decision-making process. The Wind Energy Predevelopment Support program is an innovative and replicable model that connects cutting-edge technology and educational opportunities with community participation and development.

AWEA 2003

Devine, OConnor, Ellis, Manwell, Rogers, Wright

Page 7

Wind Energy Predevelopment Support Program FEASIBILITY STUDY: MARBLEHEAD, MASSACHUSETTS As an example of the scope of assistance that the Renewable Energy Research Lab (RERL) provides to communities, a summary of a feasibility study for Marblehead, Massachusetts is presented below.

BACKGROUND
Town of Marblehead Marblehead is located on the north shore of Massachusetts. It covers 4.5 square miles with a population of 20,000. Marblehead has a peak electric demand of 25,500 kW and consumes approximately 105 GWh per year. Distribution lines are rated at 4,160 volts, with 13kV transmission lines. Most circuits are designed at 1 to 1.5 MW. Several diesel generators distributed around the town provide 6 MW of peak generating capacity. The Salem Harbor Power Station is the primary supplier of electricity to the area. Interest in Wind Power Recently, the Salem Harbor Power Station, a coal-fueled power plant located about 2 miles to the northwest of Marblehead, was declared one of the five dirtiest power plants in Massachusetts and the dirtiest plant operated by Pacific Gas & Electric [Greenpeace, 2003]. Marblehead was highlighted in the April 2003 issue of Boston Magazine as ranking low on the list of healthiest towns in Massachusetts. It states, "What's unexpected are the sky-high rates of asthma and some types of cancer, which researchers at the Harvard School of Public Health attribute to pollution from the Salem Harbor Station power plant [Blanding, 2003]. In response to pollution-related heath concerns such as this, the citizens group HealthLink was formed in Marblehead. In actively seeking solutions to energy-related pollution, HealthLink is investigating renewable energy options. In addition, the Marblehead Municipal Light Department (MMLD), a town-owned municipal utility, became interested in the potential economic benefits of wind energy and the ability of wind to diversify their energy portfolio after the successful wind turbine installation in Hull, MA [McGowan, 2003]. Role of the Renewable Energy Research Lab In 2001, HealthLink requested the services of the Renewable Energy Research Lab (RERL). After discussing the potential benefits and challenges of wind energy with Marblehead representatives, the decision was made to analyze the feasibility of a wind project. With the assistance of MMLD, permits were obtained to mount wind-monitoring equipment on top of an existing cellular tower located at the town landfill. RERL has collected over a year of data from this site. Based on the year of wind data collected at Marblehead, the results of the feasibility study are presented below.

DESCRIPTION OF POTENTIAL WIND TURBINE SITES

As Marblehead is densely populated, siting of a wind turbine is a critical issue. Two possible wind turbine locations are investigated in this paper: the town landfill and the public beach parking lot, as described below. Due to the land constraints of both sites,

AWEA 2003

Devine, OConnor, Ellis, Manwell, Rogers, Wright

Page 8

Wind Energy Predevelopment Support Program only one machine is considered for either location. A computer generated wind energy resource map of Southern New England has been made by TrueWind Solutions. The section of the map around Marblehead is shown in Figure 3.

6.5 - 7 m/s

7 - 7.5 m/s
Source: TrueWind Solutions

Figure 3. Wind Resource Map of Marblehead, MA Town Landfill: The anemometry equipment is currently located on a cell tower at the edge of the landfill. The wind map suggests that the average wind speed at a height of 65 meters (213 feet) above ground ranges from 6.5 to 7 meters per second. Soil instability may make a turbine foundation more expensive than a typical installation at this site.

Possible turbine location

Figure 4. Landfill Site as Viewed from Top of Cell Tower Public Beach: The public beach is located on the southeast part of town along the waterfront. The exact wind potential at this site is unknown, but the wind map in Figure 3 suggests that the beach site could have a wind resource from 6.5 to 7.5 m/s winds at a 65-meter height. A turbine could be located in the southwest corner of the parking lot.

AWEA 2003

Devine, OConnor, Ellis, Manwell, Rogers, Wright

Page 9

Wind Energy Predevelopment Support Program

MEASURED WIND RESOURCE

On March 1st, 2002, wind resource monitoring equipment was installed atop the 55-meter (180-ft) cell tower at Marbleheads landfill. It consisted of a primary and secondary pair of anemometers and wind vanes, along with a data acquisition unit. A specially designed pole and base was needed to mount the equipment on the tower as shown in Figure 5. The data loggers are programmed to sample the wind speed every second and record the average 10-minute wind speed, standard deviation, maximum and minimum values. These ten-minute averages are periodically sent to RERL to be inspected for completeness and accuracy. For this report, the 10-minute averages were converted to hourly averages, which are more manageable for energy calculations.

Figure 5. Wind Monitoring Equipment at Top of Cell Tower Quality Control and Data Verification Two sets of anemometers and wind vanes were used to measure wind speed and direction at the Marblehead site. Redundant equipment is used to ensure that measurements are accurate and to serve as a back-up. Figure 6 lists the percent of missing data for each month. The total data recovery rate was 97%. Throughout the summer, frequent dropouts of data occurred, possibly as the result of electro-static discharge (ESD). In late July, a lightning strike damaged the logger. The data card and two SIM (analog to digital converter) cards were replaced on August 2, 2002. In addition, surge absorbers were wired into the anemometers to increase resistance to future ESD damage. These adjustments have minimized data dropouts.
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.3% 8.3% 1.1% 12.2% 8.7% 4.8% 0.1% 0.0% 0.0%

Figure 6. Percent of Data Missing for Each Month In order to make hourly predictions of energy production throughout the year, any missing data in hourly wind speeds, due to either sensor failure or the removal of erroneous data, was approximated. Gaps were filled using a statistical technique

AWEA 2003

Devine, OConnor, Ellis, Manwell, Rogers, Wright

Page 10

Wind Energy Predevelopment Support Program developed by the University of Massachusetts based on the short-term fluctuations in the wind and diurnal trends. Wind speeds were generated that would closely match expected values without changing the average wind speed or standard deviation of the data set. Calculations performed in this report use the complete hourly data set, including synthesized gap-filled data, from March 1, 2002 through March 1, 2003. Wind Characteristics The winds are relatively steady throughout the day. They are strongest during the daylight hours, peaking in the afternoon at approximately 6.8 m/s. As indicated in Figure 8, the primary wind direction is from the Northwest.
Average Wind Speed Max Hourly Wind Speed Max Gust Standard Deviation Turbulence Intensity 5.84 m/s 17.1 m/s 29.4 m/s 2.54 m/s 0.22 13.1 mph 38.3 mph 65.8 mph 5.68 mph

Figure 7. Measured Wind Speed Characteristics for Marblehead

Figure 8. Seasonal and Annual Wind Rose (Percent of Time)

WIND RESOURCE PREDICTIONS

In order to make useful predictions about the feasibility of a wind project in the area, some modifications to the wind data file must be made. To determine the energy production of the various candidate turbines, the wind speed distribution at each turbine hub height, was calculated. The data collected at Marblehead did not include a measure of the wind shear; therefore, the log law mathematical model was used to estimate changes in wind speed with height assuming a surface roughness length of 0.30.

AWEA 2003

Devine, OConnor, Ellis, Manwell, Rogers, Wright

Page 11

Wind Energy Predevelopment Support Program In addition to the height adjustment, a modification is made to account for variations in annual wind speed trends. A Measure-Correlate-Predict (MCP) method is used to predict long-term wind speeds based on short-term measurements. Short-term measurements are taken at the proposed turbine location and compared to long-term measurements available at a nearby location. In this report, five years of wind speed data from Logan International Airport in Boston were compared to the one year of Marblehead data. It was determined that the average annual wind speed at the landfill location is 5.70 m/s, which is slightly slower than the measured 5.84 m/s. Therefore, all of the hourly wind speeds were adjusted downward by a factor of 0.976 to reflect a lower long-term average wind speed. The results of both the height and long-term adjustments are shown in Figure 9. The adjusted average of 5.70 m/s at a 55-meter height is a fair to moderate wind speed for power production. Wind speeds are expected to increase with increased wind turbine hub heights. Therefore, taller turbines will likely produce more electricity.
Tower Height (m) Wind speed (m/s) 55 5.70 60 5.81 65 5.90 70 5.98 75 6.04 80 6.13 90 6.26

Figure 9. Long-Term Average Annual Hourly Wind Speed at Hub Height

CANDIDATE TURBINE CHOICES

Candidate turbines were selected based on a number of criteria, including proven design concepts, established business presence in the U.S., operational reliability, and safety.
Manufacturer (Model) GE (GE1.5sl, 80) GE (GE1.5sl, 65) Vestas (V47) Vestas (V80) Nordex (N62) NEG-Micon (NM72c) MADE (46/660) Bonus (62/1300) Power Rating 1.5 MW 1.5 MW 660 kW 1.8 MW 1.3 MW 1.5 MW 660 kW 1.3 MW Rotor Diameter 77 m 77 m 47 m 80 m 62 m 72 m 46 m 62 m Tower Height 80 m 65 m 65 m 80 m 70 m 80 m 70 m 60 m Power Regulation Pitch Pitch Pitch/OptiSlip Pitch/OptiSlip Stall Active-Stall Stall CombiStall Generator Operation Variable speed Variable speed 2 speed 2 speed 2 speed Constant speed 2 speed 2 speed

Figure 10. Characteristics of Candidate Wind Turbines Eight turbines from six companies made the initial screening with capacity factors greater than 16%. The selected turbines differ in power rating, dimensions, power regulation (pitch or stall), and generator operation (fixed or variable).

ESTIMATED POWER PRODUCTION

The long-term hourly hub height wind speeds are used with the power curves of each wind turbine to estimate the annual electricity they would produce. The power curve information, which is usually supplied by the turbine manufacturer, shows the predicted AWEA 2003 Devine, OConnor, Ellis, Manwell, Rogers, Wright Page 12

Wind Energy Predevelopment Support Program performance of the turbine at each wind speed. Summing the power production for every hour of the year will give the total possible power production. These results are then decreased by 3% to assume 97% turbine availability as shown in Figure 11.
GE1.5sl, 80m 2,981,476 kWh 23.2% GE1.5sl, 65m 2,703,066 kWh 21% Vestas V47 1,042,029 kWh 18.4% Vestas V80 3,082,276 kWh 19.9% Nordex N62 1,786,492 kWh 16% NEGM72c 2,557,735 kWh 19.9% MADE (46/660) 910,868 kWh 16.1% Bonus (62/1300) 1,809,495 kWh 16.2%

Figure 11. Estimated Annual Power Production and Capacity Factors The Vestas V80, the machine with the largest rated power (1.8 MW), would produce the most electricity, followed by the GE 1.5 MW machine. Both are on 80-meter towers and are optimized for moderate wind speeds with large rotor diameters. Of the smaller machines (less than 1 MW), the Vestas V47 out-performs the MADE 46/660.

ECONOMIC EVALUATION
The economics of the candidate turbines are compared against each other based on the value of the electricity produced, estimated turbine cost, installation cost, O&M costs, electricity cost inflation rate, general inflation rate, and the discount rate. Capital and Installation Costs Turbine capital costs were either taken from published manufacturer's list prices or information supplied directly by the manufacturer. In cases where quoted prices were not available, general benchmark guidelines were used. The numbers assume a typical installation, which includes a foundation, transformer, grid hookup, installation, transportation, roadwork, and remote monitoring equipment. The Marblehead installation costs may be more or less expensive depending on the exact details of the foundation, road design, grid hookup, etc. The prices are summarized in Figure 12.
Turbine Costs Capital: Installation: Total: Turbine Costs Capital: Installation: Total: GE1.5sl (80m tower) $1,245000 $315,000 $1,560,000 Nordex (N62) $950,000 $250,000 $1,200,000 GE1.5sl (65m tower) $1,155,000 $290,000 $1,445,000 NEG-Micon (NEGM72) $1,125,000 $375,000 $1,500,000 Vestas (V47) $487,500 $162,500 $650,000 MADE (46/660) $581,625 $193,875 $775,500 Vestas (V80) $1,350,000 $450,000 $1,350,000 Bonus (62/1.3MW) $1,145,625 $381,875 $1,527,500

Figure 12. Project Costs Value of Electricity Produced The value of electricity produced by the wind turbine depends on the market in which it can be sold and various production-based incentives. Renewable energy credits (REC), which are based on the Massachusetts renewable portfolio standard, allow the AWEA 2003 Devine, OConnor, Ellis, Manwell, Rogers, Wright Page 13

Wind Energy Predevelopment Support Program environmental aspects of renewable energy to be sold in the competitive market. The Renewable Energy Production Incentive (REPI) is a federal incentive that is currently part of legislation but is subject to change over the 20 years of the project [MA DOER, 2001]. In this paper, it is assumed that the price of electricity for the municipal utility is $0.05/kWh, the renewable energy credits can be sold at $0.025/kWh, and the REPI is available at $0.018/kWh. Therefore, the total revenue is taken as the sum of the market price of electricity and production incentives, or $0.093/kWh. Baseline Turbine Life Cycle Ranking A lifecycle cost analysis, using software developed at the University of Massachusetts [UMass Wind Energy Engineering Minicodes], has been performed for each of the machines. Based on previous experience, Figure 13 lists the assumptions that are used in the baseline life cycle analysis [Manwell et al, 2003]. The non-financed portion of the first cost is assumed to be made at the beginning of the first year. All annual expenses and receipts are assumed to occur at the end of each year.
Economic Life Down Payment Loan Interest Rate Discount Rate Electrical Inflation Rate General Inflation Rate Price of Electricity Loan Period Annual Cost 20 years 15% 7% 4.25% 2.7% 2.7% $0.093 /kWh 10 years 1.8% of installed cost

Figure 13. Baseline Values for Economic Analysis Using these baseline values as input to the life cycle costing program, the candidate turbines were evaluated, and results are summarized in Figure 14.
Turbine Model Installed Cost Present Value of Total Costs Levelized Cost of Energy ($/kWh) Net Present Value of Savings Simple payback (years) GE1.5sl GE1.5sl (80m tower) (65m tower) $1,560,000 $2,228,052 $0.056 $2,528,083 6.3 $1,445,000 $2,063,805 $0.057 $2,248,203 6.4 Vestas V47 Vestas V80 Nordex N62 $1,200,000 $1,713,886 $0.072 $1,135,976 8.3 NEG-Micon M72 $1,500,000 $2,142,358 $0.063 $1,937,813 7.1 MADE46 $775,500 $1,107,599 $0.091 $345,444 11.0 Bonus1.3 $1,527,500 $2,181,634 $0.091 $704,924 10.8

$650,000 $1,800,000 $928,355 $2,570,829 $0.067 $0.063

$733,920 $2,346,105 7.6 7.1

Figure 14. Baseline Economic Evaluation The GE1.5sl (80-meter tower) wind turbine has the shortest simple payback of 6.3 years and lowest levelized cost of energy ($0.056), followed by the NEG-Micon and Vestas V80, each with a simple payback of 7.1 years and levelized cost of energy of $0.063.

AWEA 2003

Devine, OConnor, Ellis, Manwell, Rogers, Wright

Page 14

Wind Energy Predevelopment Support Program Sensitivity Analysis To determine the relative sensitivity of the outputs to the initial assumptions, the life cycle costing program was re-run with one of the turbines, the Vestas V47, which was evaluated to be in the middle of the pack. The range of input values was varied by one parameter at a time such that the lifecycle analysis produces a net savings approximately equal to zero. This will indicate at what point the turbine becomes uneconomical to operate. The zero savings values, along with the baseline values, are listed in Figure 15.
Zero Savings Value Price of Electricity Discount Rate General Inflation Rate Electricity Inflation Rate Initial Cost $0.052 26% 17% -4% 179% Baseline Assumption Value $0.093 4.3% 2.7% 2.7% 100% Percent Change in Baseline Assumptions 44% 609% 618% 240% 79%

Figure 15. Values that Produce No Net Savings (Vestas V47) The economic analysis is most sensitive to the price of electricity. The price that would bring the project to zero savings is $0.052. This price could occur if the REPI or REC were not available. It should be noted that the Vestas V47 is the third lowest ranked turbine in the baseline case, with a net savings of $733,920. All other higher-ranking machines would each have a larger range before they would produce a net savings of zero.

PUBLIC ACCEPTANCE HURDLES

The installation of a new wind turbine involves a number of environmental, regulatory, grid interconnection, and public acceptance issues. Issues related to permitting are beyond the scope of this report. Major public acceptance hurdles include visual impact, noise, and avian interaction. Visual Impact Photo simulations are used to present accurate representations of a proposed wind turbine in a particular location to help facilitate discussions on a wind projects impact on the landscape. Photographs were taken at various vantage points throughout Marblehead, and locations of each were documented using a Global Positioning System. Using dimensions of each wind turbine and digital elevation maps (DEM) from MassGIS [Massachusetts Geographic Information System], the software program WindFarm [ReSoft Ltd] was used to superimpose a turbine in the proper location and scale on each photo. Examples of the visualizations for the landfill and beach are shown in Figure 16 and Figure 17, respectively.

AWEA 2003

Devine, OConnor, Ellis, Manwell, Rogers, Wright

Page 15

Wind Energy Predevelopment Support Program

GE1.5sl 80m tower Figure 16. Visualization of Landfill Site from the North

Figure 17. Visualization of the Beach Site Any wind turbine model at any tower height will be visible on the landscape as viewed from across the Marblehead Harbor and in the immediate vicinity of the machine. However, foliage and the hilly landscape will obscure the view of a wind turbine from most vantage points throughout Marblehead.

AWEA 2003

Devine, OConnor, Ellis, Manwell, Rogers, Wright

Page 16

Wind Energy Predevelopment Support Program Noise Sound generated from the proposed wind turbine is an important issue because of the densely populated area and central location of the potential wind turbine sites. The Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) regulates noise emissions as a form of air pollution [Mass DEP, 1999]. Any new broadband sound source is limited to raising overall noise levels no more than 10 dB(A) over the ambient baseline sound level. The ambient baseline is defined as the sound level that is exceeded 90% of the time. A noise study performed previously in Marblehead at a residential location resulted in a background noise level measurement of 32 dB(A), which is unusually low. Based on non-linear effects of adding sound levels, sounds generated by a wind turbine cannot be more than 9.5 dB(A) over baseline levels to meet the overall noise standard. Therefore, according to state regulations, the installed wind turbine cannot generate sound levels, as heard by the closest resident, exceeding 41.5 dB(A). These readings are measured at the property line or at any inhabited buildings located within the property. For the landfill and beach locations the distance to the nearest residence is 108 meters (354 feet) and 78 meters (256 feet), respectively. With the short distance to the closest residence a wind turbine could pose a problem with state noise regulations. Additional acoustic measurements are needed at the specific locations of concern to accurately assess the sound levels. Avian Issues Unless the turbine is sited along an avian flyway or a nesting area, this is typically not a major concern. The tubular towers that are recommended will have less impact on bird populations than a lattice tower as the former lacks perching sites that might otherwise attract birds.

RECOMMENDATIONS/ AREAS OF FURTHER INVESTIGATION

The wind turbine that produces the most electricity at the lowest cost is the GE 1.5 MW machine on an 80-meter tower. If a smaller turbine is desired, the Vestas V47 660 kW machine on a 65-meter tower is recommended. The landfill site would have less of a visual impact and may be preferable to the beach site. If there were interest in locating a turbine at the public beach site, additional wind and noise measurements would be needed. If the community decides to move forward with a wind project based on the findings in the report, a number of predevelopment tasks remain to be completed. A more detailed analysis of the sound levels at turbine operating conditions would be needed to verify that any sound generated by a wind turbine would be within legal limits. A comprehensive environmental impact report, which includes the impacts on the air, water, land, and wildlife in the area, would be required. A geotechnical study should also be performed. Depending on the scope of the project, RERL would assist in developing a request for bids from turbine manufacturers or direct the participant to a commercial developer. The Marblehead Municipal Light Department would be leading the siting and permitting process. Since they are a municipal utility, a power purchase agreement would not need to be negotiated.

AWEA 2003

Devine, OConnor, Ellis, Manwell, Rogers, Wright

Page 17

REFERENCES Blanding, Michael. The Healthiest Towns, Boston Magazine, April 2003. Devine, Mia and Brendan OConnor. Feasibility Study for Marblehead, MA, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, 2003. Ellis, A.F., Rogers, A.L., Manwell, J.F., Thompson Island Power Plant Options Study, report to DOER, 1998-1999. Greenpeace. Media Briefing Coal: A Dirty, Deadly Power Source for New England Manwell, J., McGowan, J., and Rogers, A. Wind Energy Explained: Theory, Design and Application, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., 2002. Manwell, J.F., McGowan, J., Ellis, A., Rogers, A. Wright, S. Wind Turbine Siting in an Urban Environment: The Hull, MA, 660 kW Turbine, presented for the American Wind Energy Association at WindPower 2003. Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection, section 310 CMR 7.00 Air Pollution Control, Commonwealth of Massachusetts Regulations, 1999. Massachusetts Division of Energy Resources, Renewable Energy & Distributed Generation Guidebook, April 2001. Massachusetts Geographic Information System. Interactive Mapping Tools for Massachusetts, www.massgis.com, 2001. National Wind Coordinating Committee, Permitting of Wind Energy Facilities: A Handbook, March 1998. http://www.nationalwind.org/pubs/permit/permitting.htm ReSoft, Ltd. WindFarm, Wind farm analysis, design and optimization software. http://www.resoft.co.uk TrueWind Solutions. Wind Resource Map of Southern New England, www.truewind.com University of Massachusetts Wind Energy Engineering Minicodes, version 1.0. http://www.ceere.org/rerl/rerl_availsoftware.html Websites - Wind Turbine Manufacturers Bonus www.bonus.dk GE Wind Energy www.gepower.com/dhtml/wind/en_us/index.jsp MADE www.made.es NEG Micon http://www.neg-micon.dk Nordex http://www.nordex-online.com Vestas http://www.vestas.dk

AWEA 2003

Devine, OConnor, Ellis, Rogers, Wright

Page 18