Transcript Slide 1

Technical
Advancements and
Public Policies
Affecting Wind
Power’s Role in a
Low Carbon Future
Costa Samaras
December 1, 2005
Climate Decision Making Center
NSF SES-034578
1
Photo Source: GE Energy
Problem Statement
Wind power is poised to be serious player in the
electricity generation portfolio and play a role in a
low carbon future.
• What was the relative role played by
governmental R&D, incremental innovations, and
advances in and transfers from industries outside
of wind energy in bringing wind to its current
status?
• How have different approaches in wind energy
public policy affected the cost and adoption of
wind generated electricity?
2
Agenda
•
•
•
•
Introduction and research relevance
Data and methods
Capital costs and competition
Wind energy R&D and public
policies affecting wind power
• Technological transfers
• Summary and policy implications
Photo Source: GE Energy
3
Research Relevance
Climate
policy and
decision
makers
Future
Climate
System
Technology
Development
(Supply &
Demand)
This work is the first
step in a broader
effort to try to
understand which
strategies work best
for different
technologies
Electricity
Industry
4
Wind energy worldwide growth
Installed Capacity (MW)
50000
45000
40000
35000
30000
25000
2004 Cumulative MW ≅ 46,000
• Europe - 34,600 MW
• U.S. - 6,700 MW
• Rest of World – 5,100 MW
• 28% avg. annual growth since 1995
20000
Europe
15000
10000
U.S.
5000
Other
0
1986
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
96
97
98
99
2000 01
02
03
04
Year
Sources:
NREL, BTM Consult Aps, March
2003, Windpower Monthly,
January 2005, AWEA, IEA
95
Rest of the World
North America
Europe
5
Changes in Regional Share of Installed Wind Capacity
Europe
80%
60%
40%
20%
U.S.
04
99
20
00
01
98
97
96
Europe
95
94
93
92
91
90
89
88
87
19
86
North America
03
Other
0%
02
Regional Share
(% of Installed MW)
100%
Year
Sources: NREL, BTM Consult Aps, March 2003
Windpower Monthly, January 2005, AWEA
Rest of the World
6
Levelized Cost of Electricity, $/MWh
Comparative Costs of Generating Options
100
90
IGCC w/o CSS
Wind@29% Capacity Factor,
$1200/kW Capital Cost
80
70
NGCC@$13
60
50
40
Coal w/o CSS
30
0
10
20
30
40
50
Cost of CO2, $/metric ton
Source: Original chart prepared by EPRI, Generation Options in a Carbon
Constrained World 2005, NYMEX NG Futures Jan 2006, Assumes $850/kW
for NGCC, wind cost is net of any transmission and/or intermittency charges
7
Levelized Cost of Electricity, $/MWh
Comparative Costs of Generating Options
with Production Tax Credits (PTC)
100
IGCC w/o CSS
90
NGCC@$13
80
PTC
70
60
50
40
Wind@29%
Capacity Factor,
$1200/kW
Coal w/o CSS
30
0
10
20
30
40
50
Cost of CO2, $/metric ton
Source: Original chart prepared by EPRI, Generation Options in a Carbon
Constrained World 2005, NYMEX NG Futures Jan 2006, Assumes $850/kW
for NGCC, wind cost is net of any transmission and/or intermittency charges
8
Levelized Cost of Electricity, $/MWh
Sensitivity of wind power costs to capital cost
100
$1600/kW
90
$1200/kW
80
IGCC w/o CSS
NGCC@$13
70
60
$800/kW
50
40
Coal w/o CSS
30
0
10
20
30
40
50
Cost of CO2, $/metric ton
Source: Original chart prepared by EPRI, Generation Options in a Carbon
Constrained World 2005, NYMEX NG Futures Jan 2006, Assumes $850/kW
for NGCC, wind cost is net of any transmission and/or intermittency charges
9
Levelized Cost of Electricity, $/MWh
Sensitivity of wind power costs to capacity factor
100
20% CF
90
IGCC w/o CSS
NGCC@$13
29% CF
80
70
60
40% CF
50
40
Coal w/o CSS
30
0
10
20
30
40
50
Cost of CO2, $/metric ton
Source: Original chart prepared by EPRI, Generation Options in a Carbon
Constrained World 2005, NYMEX NG Futures Jan 2006, Assumes $850/kW
for NGCC, wind cost is net of any transmission and/or intermittency charges
10
Data and Methods
• Data
–
–
–
–
–
–
Installed capacity, generation and capital cost data
Capital cost breakdown by components over time
Federal Wind R&D expenditures by country
Patent data, US and abroad
Policy timeline in U.S. and E.U.
Academic, government, and trade literature,
government and industry interviews
• Methods
– Quantitative and qualitative cost and policy analyses
• Comparing governmental expenditures to expected outcomes
– Technology tracing case studies
11
Cost of Wind Energy Declining
6,000
40.0
Installed Capacity
Cost of Wind Power
35.0
5,000
30.0
4,000
25.0
3,000
20.0
15.0
15.00
2,000
10.0
10.00
Cost of Electricity
($2002 cents/kWh)
U.S. Installed Capacity (MW)
38.00
8.00
1,000
6.00
4.00
5.0
5.0
4.00
0
0.0
1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002
Source: American Wind Energy Association, 2002 and
NREL Renewable Electric Plant Information System (REPiS)
Year
12
Rotor Diameter (m)
Growth of Commercial Wind Turbines
Sources: European Wind Energy Association (EWEA), Technology Factsheet, NREL
Images: wikipedia.com, WQED
13
Public Wind Energy R&D 1974-2003
150
135
Wind Energy R&D
(2003 $Million)
120
105
90
DOE / NASA MOD Program
75
NREL
NWTC
formed
60
45
United States
Germany
30
Netherlands
15
Denmark
0
1974
Spain
1980
1986
1992
1998
2004
2010
Year
Denmark
Source: IEA R&D Database
Germany
Netherlands
Spain
United States
14
Public Wind Energy R&D 1974-2003
Wind Energy Cumulative R&D By Country 1974-2003
Wind Energy Cumulative R&D
(2003 $Million)
1300
1200
United States $1200M
1100
1000
900
800
Germany
$550M
700
600
500
Netherlands
$310M
400
300
200
Denmark $170M
100
Spain $85M
0
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
Year
Source: IEA R&D Database
15
Installed MW per $Million Wind R&D 1974-2003
Cumulative Installed Capacity per Cumulative $M Wind
R&D
Spain $75MW/$M
Cumulative MW /
Cumulative 2003 $Million Wind
R&D
30
25
20
15
2003 Installed Capacity
• Germany – 14,609 MW
• U.S. - 6,700 MW
• Spain – 6,203 MW
• Denmark -3115 MW
• Netherlands - 910 MW
Germany
Denmark
10
United States
5
Netherlands
0
1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
2005
Year
Sources: IEA R&D Database, IEA - Electricity Information - 2004
European Wind Energy Association
American Wind Energy Association
NREL (REPiS)
16
Carbon Abatement Efficiency of R&D Expenditures
Total Wind Energy
Generated
1982-2003 (GWh)
120,000
100,000
2003 Major Wind
Manufacturers
• Germany – 4
• U.S. - 1
• Spain – 2
• Denmark -3
• Netherlands - 0
Germany
U.S.
80,000
60,000
Denmark
40,000
Spain
20,000
Netherlands
0
$0
$20
$40
$60
$80
$100
$2003 Wind R&D per ton CO2 Avoided
Data Source: IEA, EuroStat, EIA, California Energy Commission, Danish Wind Energy Association, Lewis
and Wiser (2005)
17
U.S. Demand Pull Public Policies
6,000
40.0
Installed Capacity
Cost of Wind Power
35.0
RPS
5,000
30.0
4,000
3,000
25.0
PTC set
to expire
Accelerated
depreciation
20.0
PTC
15.0
15.00
2,000
1,000
Investment
tax credit
10.0
10.00
Cost of Electricity
($2002 cents/kWh)
U.S. Installed Capacity (MW)
38.00
8.00
6.00
4.00
5.0
5.0
4.00
0
0.0
1978 1980 1982 1984 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002
Source: American Wind Energy Association, 2002 and
NREL Renewable Electric Plant Information System (REPiS)
Year
18
Renewable Portfolio Standards
Nevada: 20% by 2015,
solar 5% of annual
New York:
24% by 2013
Minnesota: 19% by 2015*
Iowa: 2% by 1999
Wisconsin:
2.2% by 2011
Illinois: 8%
by 2013**
Montana:
15% by 2015
Maine: 30%
by 2000
MA: 4%
by 2009
RI: 16%
by 2019
CT: 10% by 2010
NJ: 6.5% by 2008
DE: 10% by 2019
Maryland:
7.5% by 2019
Washington D.C:
11% by 2022
California: 20%
by 2017
Pennsylvania:
8% by 2020
Arizona: 1.1% by
2007, 60% solar
New Mexico:
10% by 2011
Colorado: 10%
by 2015
Hawaii: 20% by 2020
Texas: 5,880 MW
(~4.2%) by 2015
21 States +
D.C.
*Includes requirements adopted in 1994 and 2003 for one utility, Xcel Energy.
**No specific enforcement measures, but utility regulatory intent and authority appears sufficient.
Source: Original slide prepared by Union of Concerned Scientists, www.ucsusa.org/clean_energy/clean_energy_policies
19
Distribution of Capital Costs
Balance of Station
(BOS)
30%
Rotor
19%
Rotor
Nacelle
Tower
Tower
8%
Control and safety
system
1%
Photo Source: GE Energy
Drive train and
nacelle
42%
BOS
20
Wind power cost of energy ($/kWh)
• Decreased capital and BOS costs
• Longer lived capital in place
• Favorable financing and ownership
• Decreased O&M costs
COE  FCR  (TCC  BOS)  ( LRC  O&M)
AEP
• Larger rotors
• Improved capacity factor
• Improved specific yield (kWh/m2)
• Improved reliability
Source: NREL, EPRI
21
Power from the wind:
Increasing annual energy production
Larger rotors
Power  ½ ΑV Cp
3
Higher towers
Advanced airfoils
and blade sections
Better turbine siting
Variable speed
operation
22
Innovations and impacts
Innovation
Increases Reduces Decreases Reduces
AEP
O&M
loads and
capital
failures
cost
Composite blades
●
Variable speed
drive
●
Direct drive
gearboxes
Fiberglass
manufacturing
techniques
●
●
●
SCADA/sensors
Power electronics
●
●
●
●
●
●
●
23
Transfers from Other Industries
• Boatbuilding
• Pipe
manufacturing
• Steel and
materials for
high mast utility
& light poles
• Pipe
manufacturing
Photo Source: GE Energy
• Fiberglass
application
• Carbon
fiber
• Tubular
steel, high
strength
alloys
• “Soft”
towers
• Variable
speed
operation
• Permanent
magnet
generators
• Direct Drive
gearboxes
• AC motor
control
• Hard disk
industry
• Utilities
• IT
• Traction power
• Power
electronics
• Foundations
• Logistics
24
Larger Rotors – increased area
Composite Industry, Robotics, Power
Electronics, Boatbuilding, pipe manufacturing
•Tapered and twisted blades
• Composite materials
• Pitch control
• Dynamic braking
• Advanced airfoils
• Advanced manufacturing
• Structural integrity
• Load Shedding
• Lighter
Larger Rotors &
Rotor Swept
Area
Higher rated capacity
/ greater kWhs
Photo Sources: NREL
25
Higher capacity factors
AC motor control, Traction power industry
Utility industries, Telemetry and oil and gas
• Variable speed drives
• Advanced power electronics
• Direct drive
• SCADA
• Greater efficiencies
• Greater energy capture
in low speed areas
• Turbine health monitoring
• Greater availability
• Lower O&M Costs
• Higher capacity
Factors
More kWhs per project,
Lower COE,
Photo Sources: NREL
26
Borrowed Technology
Boatbuilding
Composites
Material Science
Aerodynamics
Computer science,
Data collection and
testing
Steel industry
High strength alloys
Aviation and
helicopter design
CFD and advanced
Design models
Oil and gas industry
SCADA and
Remote sensors
IT and hard disk
Permanent
magnets
Power Electronics
Utilities
Variable speed
power conversion
AC Motor control
Power
semiconductors
Dynamic braking
Fans and motors
Soft-starting
Source: Manwell, McGowan,
Rogers (2002), Loiter and
Norberg-Bohm (1999)
27
Capital Cost Influence Diagram
Transfers
from
other industries
Intra-industry
advances
Manufacturing
Learning by
Doing and
Economies
of scale
Components
Logistics
and
Installation
Demand pull
Public policies
Federal R&D
Capital
Cost
28
Initial Findings
• Only 30% of wind turbine components
were traditionally manufactured solely for
the wind industry1; blades are the primary
component in this value
• Wind power has evolved into commercial
viability largely independent of
governmental R&D
• Previous literature2 and industry interviews
offer similar conclusion
1
Neij (1999), NREL (1995), WindForce10 (1999)
2 Loiter and Norberg-Bohm (1999 &1997)
Gipe (1995), Heymann (1998), Van Est (1999)
29
Policy Implications
• Why is it that this technology has evolved
and did it largely independently of
governmental R&D?
• Which technology policies caused either
direct or indirect advances in wind power?
• When does it make sense to offer
demand-pull polices versus supply push
policies in low carbon energy
technologies?
30
Research Goals and Summary
• We are attempting to gain insights about
attributes of successful low carbon
technologies
– What can lead to path dependencies?
– How do current climate models account for
this?
• In the long run we intend to compare other
technologies
• What portfolio of R&D, subsidies, taxes, or
regulations are most appropriate for
different technologies?
31
Questions and Comments
Photo Sources: GE Energy
32