Feasibility Study
Feasibility Study
Feasibility Study
Technical Report
NREL/TP-5000-58900
November 2013
This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States government.
Neither the United States government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty,
express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of
any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately
owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name,
trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation,
or favoring by the United States government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors
expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States government or any agency thereof.
This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL)
at www.nrel.gov/publications.
Cover Photos: (left to right) photo by Pat Corkery, NREL 16416, photo from SunEdison, NREL 17423, photo by Pat Corkery, NREL
16560, photo by Dennis Schroeder, NREL 17613, photo by Dean Armstrong, NREL 17436, photo by Pat Corkery, NREL 17721.
Printed on paper containing at least 50% wastepaper, including 10% post consumer waste.
Acknowledgments
The National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) thanks the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) for its interest in securing NREL’s technical expertise. In
particular, NREL and the assessment team for this project are grateful to the Newport
Indiana Chemical Depot facility managers, engineers, and operators for their generous
assistance and cooperation.
Special thanks go to Steve Aker from the Newport Chemical Depot Reuse Authority and
to Katie Brown, AAAS Science & Technology Policy fellow hosted by EPA, for hosting
the site visit. Thanks also go to Lura Matthews, Jessica Trice, and Shea Jones of EPA.
The authors would also like to thank everyone who participated in the site visit for
sharing the rich history of the Newport Chemical Depot and allowing NREL and EPA to
assist in the potential reuse of the land.
The feasibility of wind systems installed at this site is highly impacted by the available
area for a project, wind resource, operating status, ground conditions and restrictions,
distance to electrical infrastructure, future uses, and distance to major roads. The
Newport Indiana Chemical Depot is suitable in area to have a large-scale wind farm, and
the wind resource is also appropriate.
The site is approximately 22,000 acres with approximately 7,200 acres appropriate for
installation of a wind farm. While this entire area does not need to be developed at one
time due to the feasibility of staging installation as land or funding becomes available,
calculations for this analysis reflect the wind potential if the restricted area only is used.
The economic feasibility of a potential wind farm on the site depends greatly on the
purchase price of the electricity produced. The economics of the potential systems were
analyzed using the current Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator (MISO)
wholesale electric rate of $69/MWh and incentives available to the site. It is also assumed
that the production tax credit incentive would be captured for the system.
List of Tables
Table 1. Turbine Production Estimates With Increased Cut in Speeds ....................................................... 14
Table 2. Newport Chemical Depot Wind Farm Financial Assumptions ..................................................... 23
Under the RE-Powering America’s Land Initiative, the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) provided funding to the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL)
to support a feasibility study of wind renewable energy generation at the site. The site
was used for heavy water production, chemical weapons manufacturing, storage, and
decommissioning as well as explosives manufacturing and was in operation from 1942
to 2010.
The site concluded all remediation and weapons decommissioning verification in 2010.
Currently, there are no large areas of contamination that pose any risk to earth movement
as appropriate for wind farm construction. The site has a large network of paved access
roads and the topography is flat to rolling hills, which should facilitate typical
construction practices.
Feasibility assessment team members from NREL, the Newport Chemical Depot Reuse
Authority, and EPA conducted a site assessment visit to gather information integral to
this economic feasibility study. Information, including wind resource, transmission
availability, community acceptance, and ground conditions, were considered.
1
Vermillion Rise Mega Park. Accessed November 20, 2013: http://vermillionrise.com/.
2
Aker, S., phone conversation, executive deputy director of Vermilion Rise Mega Park, April 9, 2012.
Wind is air with kinetic energy that can be transformed into useful work via wind turbine
blades and a generator. Overall, wind is a diffuse resource that can generate electricity
cost effectively and competitively in regions with a good wind resource, high cost of
electricity, or both.
The wind speed at any given time determines the amount of power available in the wind.
The power available in the wind is given by:
P = (A ρV3)/2
where
As shown, wind power is proportional to velocity cubed (V3). This matters because, if
wind velocity is doubled, wind power increases by a factor of eight (23 = 8).
Consequently, a small difference (e.g., increase) in average speed causes significant
differences (e.g., increases) in energy production. Examining ways to increase the wind
velocity at a particular turbine location should be considered through modeling the terrain
and micro-siting the turbines. Normally, the easiest way to accomplish this is to increase
the height of the tower. The wind industry has been moving toward higher towers, and
the industry norm has increased from 30 m to 80 m over the last 15–20 years.
The map of the national wind resource can be seen in Figure 1. Wind maps can give a
visual approximation of the wind resource in an area but do not provide enough data for
3
Figure 1. U.S. national wind resource map
Figure 2 shows the Indiana state wind resource at 80 m above ground level. The Newport
Chemical Depot is shown on the western edge of the state.
3
DOE. “Utility-Scale Land-Based 80-Meter Wind Maps. Accessed November 20, 2013:
http://www.windpoweringamerica.gov/wind_maps.asp.
4
Figure 2. Indiana 80-m annual average wind speed map
4
DOE. “Indiana 80-Meter Wind Map and Wind Resource Potential.” Accessed November 20, 2013:
http://www.windpoweringamerica.gov/wind_resource_maps.asp?stateab=in.
In the United States, about 60,000 MW of wind power have been installed. 5 Turbines are
available from as small as 250 W to as large as 5 MW. For the size of the wind plants
considered here, large turbines in the range of 1,000 kW to 3,000 kW per turbine would
be appropriate.
Wind power became a commercial-scale industry more than 30 years ago. Over that time,
wind power has moved from the fringes of the electric power sector to a mainstream
resource responsible for 35% of U.S. new power capacity from 2007 through 2011; it is
second in new capacity additions only to new natural gas power. 6 In the best resource
areas or localities with exceptionally high electricity costs, wind power can be cost
effective even in the absence of direct financial incentives or subsidies. Recent
5
Wiser, R.; Bollinger, M. 2012 Wind Technologies Market Report. Washington, D.C.: Department of
Energy, 2012. http://www1.eere.energy.gov/wind/pdfs/2012_wind_technologies_market_report.pdf
6
Williams, E.; Hensley, J. AWEA U.S. Wind Industry Annual Market Report 2012. 2013.
7
Wiser, R.; Lantz, E.; Bolinger, M.; Hand, M. (February 2012). Recent Developments in the Levelized Cost
of Energy from U.S. Wind Power Projects. http://eetd.lbl.gov/ea/ems/reports/wind-energy-costs-2-
2012.pdf.
8
U.S. EIA. Updated Capital Cost Estimates for Utility Scale Electricity Generation Plants. April 2013.
Accessed November 20, 2013: http://www.eia.gov/forecasts/capitalcost/pdf/updated_capcost.pdf.
Local ordinances might also apply to a potential turbine at the site and should be
investigated further, as some local governments have regulations that constrain the
overall height of structures for viewshed reasons.
Long-range radar can also be affected by the movement of the turbines’ blades and can
cause interference for air traffic control if not mitigated. Figure 5 shows that there is
some likelihood of interference with long-range radar at the site and contacting the FAA
should be one of the first steps. The red area in the image below represents a severe
impact on local radar and the yellow area represents a potentially tolerable impact on the
local radar. Many turbines have been installed in both potential impact zones, and
mitigation measures can vary from ignoring the interference to upgrading the software of
the radar to filter this interference.
9
Figure 5. Long-range radar impact potential
Figure 6 shows that the site has a very low probability of interfering with local weather
radar as if the centrally located black figure does not coincide with any of the semi-
circular areas which represent local weather radar.
9
FAA. “DoD Preliminary Screening Tool.” Accessed November 20, 2013:
https://oeaaa.faa.gov/oeaaa/external/gisTools/gisAction.jsp?action=showLongRangeRadarToolForm.
10
FAA. “Notice Criteria Tool.” Accessed November 20, 2013:
https://oeaaa.faa.gov/oeaaa/external/gisTools/gisAction.jsp?action=showNoNoticeRequiredToolForm.
The Vermilion Rise Mega Park has over 7,200 acres of land potentially suitable for
placement of wind turbines. Some of these areas which are not excluded due to bat
habitat may be excluded for potential bat migration paths as well as business
development and infrastructure and further work with the development of the industrial
park planners is recommended. Figure 7 shows the suitable bat habitat is shown shaded in
red as designated by the Forrest Service. The green place marks represent potential
turbine locations considering a 1,000-foot setback for the bat habitat. If a mitigation
strategy is approved by the Forrest Service, such as curtailing the turbines to a higher cut
in wind speed, place marks shown in red represent turbine locations where turbines may
be deployed.
The guidelines describe a tiered approach, where each tier can provide a developer with
information that can then be used to make decisions on how to move forward with a wind
project at a particular site. As stated previously, the USFWS only provides
recommendations, and it is up to the developer to choose to follow the recommendation.
Tier 1 is a preliminary site evaluation typically conducted as a desktop study. The
developer should utilize all available information for this initial screening, but no site
visit is needed. Tier 2 is frequently referred to as “boots on the ground,” where a site visit
is needed and a site characterization can be done. Tier 3 is typically where pre-
construction site assessments are conducted and are focused on species or habitat
considerations that were identified during Tier 2. Tier 4 focuses on post-construction
monitoring to coincide with whatever species of importance were identified and assessed
during Tier 3. Finally, if the site has a major species issue but the developer is still
interested in going forward with the project, more complex studies or research would be
conducted under Tier 5. The need for Tier 5 research is likely to be determined during
Tier 3, so these two activities should align.
It is assumed that at least Tier 1 and Tier 2 studies will be recommended for the Newport
Chemical Depot, with those findings determining if further study will be recommended.
11
USFWS. “Wind Energy Development Information.” Accessed November 20, 2013:
http://www.fws.gov/windenergy/.
12
USFWS. “Fact Sheet: Final Voluntary Land-Based Wind Energy Guidelines.” Accessed November 20,
2013: http://www.fws.gov/windenergy/docs/DOI_FWS_Final_Wind_Guidelines_FactSheet_final.pdf.
13
National Wind Coordinating Collaborative. “Comprehensive Guide to Studying Wind Energy/Wildlife
Interactions.” Accessed November 20, 2013:
http://www.nationalwind.org/assets/publications/Comprehensive_Guide_to_Studying_Wind_Energy_Wildl
ife_Interactions_2011_Updated.pdf.
The BWEC has focused on mitigation for reducing bat fatalities at wind facilities. NREL
has learned that bats are more active when winds are lower—and during this time, the
wind facility may generate little if any kilowatt energy. By changing the cut in speed (i.e.,
raising the speed at which the turbine will produce power for the grid), the opportunity
for bat/turbine interaction is significantly reduced; thus, the fatalities are reduced. Results
of these research trials (which can be found on the BWEC website) have proved
promising. The economic impacts to the project appear to be minimal and certainly, if
considered during the risk assessment phase of the project development, could be better
understood. Bat-use patterns (time of year, time of day) should be understood to
optimally design this operational curtailment strategy.
Research on land-based wind/wildlife interactions has been conducted beginning with the
first wind facilities in California. As wind development has moved across the country,
various species- and habitat-specific issues have been raised. Research is now being
conducted or supported by a wide range of sectors and stakeholders including the federal
government (e.g., DOE, DOI), states (including AFWA), trade industry, academia, non-
governmental organizations (e.g., The Nature Conservancy, Union of Concerned
Scientists, Audubon Society, Defenders of Wildlife), individual wind developers, and
virtually all other sectors and stakeholders.
Those species currently of most interest include eagles, greater sage grouse, greater and
lesser prairie chickens, bats, whooping cranes, condors, and marbled murrelet. Habitat
fragmentation and disturbance is also an issue—it is not just about collision with a wind
turbine but how the species could be affected by the presence of the wind turbines and the
effects on the landscape due to the building of the facility. Other species, such as
federally threatened and endangered bird and bat species, candidate species, state species
of concern, and various other raptor species, including several hawk and owl species, for
example, should also to be considered. Our understanding (or lack thereof) of cumulative
impacts, species-specific populations, and uncertainties with how climate change will
affect species complicates all of this.
There are a number of species-specific research activities that are currently supported by
DOE/NREL through collaborative agreements. Research to determine what, if any,
impacts wind development has on greater sage grouse is being conducted through the
Sage Grouse Collaborative. 14 Under the Grassland Community Collaborative, a
6-year research project to assess what, if any, impacts wind development has on greater
prairie chickens is concluding. 15 Reports and manuscripts are in various stages of
completion, but it is anticipated that much will be published over the next year. The
Wildlife Workgroup of the National Wind Coordinating Collaborative (NWCC) has been
14
NWCC. “Sage-Grouse Research Collaborative.” Accessed November 20, 2013:
http://www.nationalwind.org/sagegrouse.aspx.
15
NWCC. “Grassland Community Collaborative.” Accessed November 20, 2013:
http://www.nationalwind.org//issues/wildlife/oversightcommittee.aspx.
The NWCC 17 has hosted nine research workshops between 1994 and 2012, and the
proceedings of all (except the November 2012 meeting) can be found on the NWCC
website. These proceedings contain a wealth of information on research conducted on
this topic.
Although the USFWS guidelines are voluntary, there is a discussion of adherence in the
guidelines, which says “Adherence to the Guidelines is voluntary and does not relieve
any individual, company or agency of the responsibility to comply with laws and
regulations. However, if a violation occurs the Service will consider a developer’s
documented efforts to communicate with the Service and adhere to the Guidelines”
(p. vii).
Work has also been done on developing an acoustic deterrent. A reduction in fatalities
has been shown; however, more work is needed to develop a commercially
viable product.
Table 1 shows the impact on annual energy production for several Class 3 turbines that
are applicable to this site. These reductions in energy production may seem small, but
they are certainly significant.
Hub
Reduction in
Height
Net Electricity
Average
Turbine Capacity Production With
Wind
Factor (%) 5.75 m/s Cut in
Speed
Speed
(m/s)
Alstom ECO 122/2700 Class III Curtailed
(89m) 7.0 37.3 4.5%
Alstom ECO 122/2700 Class III (89m) 7.0 39.0
GE 1.6-100 curtailed (80m) 6.9 36.7 4.1%
GE 1.6-100 (80m) 6.9 38.3
Vestas V100 - 1.8 MW 60Hz Curtailed (80m) 6.9 33.7 6.8%
Vestas V100 - 1.8 MW 60Hz (80m) 6.9 36.2
16
BWEC. Accessed November 20, 2013: http://www.batsandwind.org/.
17
NWCC. Accessed November 20, 2013:http://www.nationalwind.org/default.aspx.
As no on-site observations were performed for this study, typical meteorological year
data from AWS Truepower was used to estimate various turbine outputs at the site. This
data is created from numerical weather models and is adjusted using surface observations
such as airport weather stations. The data is then compiled to create a typical year of
hourly data that should be representative of an average year at the site.
18
DOE. “Wind Resource Maps and Anemometer Loan Program Data.” Accessed November 20, 2013:
http://www.windpoweringamerica.gov/windmaps/.
19
Wiser, R.; Lantz, E.; Bolinger, M.; Hand, M. (February 2012). Recent Developments in the Levelized
Cost of Energy from U.S. Wind Power Projects. http://eetd.lbl.gov/ea/ems/reports/wind-energy-costs-2-
2012.pdf.
$120
No Incentives
$80 7 m/s
$60 8 m/s
17% Cost Reduction
$40
$20
$0
2002-03 Current, 2012-13
Standard Technology Technology Choice
These data show that for turbines currently being produced and installed in North
America, the cost of energy, especially for lower wind speed sites such as the Newport
Chemical Depot site, now have a much better chance at producing cost-effective
electricity, depending on incentives and project and turbine costs, for example. It appears
that the industry is continuing in this direction, and the next generation of turbines
already being tested and installed may have a similar impact on the cost of energy as their
rotors are even larger. It is yet to be seen where turbine pricing for these new machines
will fall, but recent industry trends indicate that prices will continue to decrease. 22 It is
also worth noting that modern IEC Class III turbines with larger rotor to nameplate
electrical capacity typically reduce the volatility of annual variations in the wind
resource. As the datasets used are focused on temporally longer periods, turbulence
intensity is not included as part of either dataset. As such, standard industry practice or
discussions with a financier or turbine manufacturer who has confidence in the wind
regime in the area are recommended to any developer.
20
Wiser, R.; Lantz, E.; Bolinger, M.; Hand, M. (February 2012). Recent Developments in the Levelized
Cost of Energy from U.S. Wind Power Projects. http://eetd.lbl.gov/ea/ems/reports/wind-energy-costs-2-
2012.pdf.
21
This model assumes current turbine and installation pricing, reduced operation and maintenance (O&M)
costs, production tax credits (PTC) and modified accelerated cost-recovery system (MACRS) tax
incentives, increased turbine availability, and the comparative capacity factors for the current and previous
generation turbine technologies.
22
Wiser, R.; Lantz, E.; Bolinger, M.; Hand, M. (February 2012). Recent Developments in the Levelized
Cost of Energy from U.S. Wind Power Projects. http://eetd.lbl.gov/ea/ems/reports/wind-energy-costs-2-
2012.pdf.
315° 45°
292.5° 67.5°
270° 90°
0%
112.5°
247.5°
12%
225° 135°
24%
202.5° 157.5°
180°
Figure 10 shows the frequency of occurrence on the y-axis and the wind speed on the x-
axis. This histogram illustrates the frequency of different wind speeds at the site, which is
critical to turbine selection and energy production.
4
Frequency (%)
0
0 5 10 15 20 25
WS80 BIN 0.360 (m/s)
Actual data Best-fit Weibull distribution (k=2.32, c=7.74 m/s)
Figure 12 shows how the average wind speed varies over an average day. The x-axis is
measured in hours with the beginning of the day starting at 0 Coordinated Universal
Time, not local time.
Figure 13 shows the average wind shear, or how the average wind speed as height above
the ground increases, at the site. The shear is of a high enough value to consider taller
turbines as the increased energy productions from the higher wind speeds for taller
turbines may be cost effective.
23
Times in the plot are Universal Time. To adjust for local time, subtract 6 hours for standard time.
The average annual wind shear at the Newport Chemical Depot site is characterized by a
power law equation exponent of 0.203. This value is consistent with what is expected in
this area of the country and could suggest that higher hub-height turbines may be cost
effective. This is because, as hub height of a given turbine increases, the cost for
construction in materials and labor also increases, but the return on investment from the
increased turbine production outweighs this cost.
3. The respective wind turbine power curve, a function that demonstrates the energy
produced at a given wind speed
The potential project size at the Newport Chemical Depot is highly constrained by
industry standard setbacks from adjacent landowners, bat habitat and buffer, and future
use areas for the industrial park development. Figure 7 shows two separate possible
turbine layouts depending on the setback requirement for bat habitats. The green markers
show possible turbine locations if a 1,000-foot setback from all bat habitats is required.
This scenario results in roughly 10 suitable turbine sites with adequate turbine spacing. If
the bat setback constraint is removed (e.g., by increasing cut in speed or if detailed
surveys do not reveal any bats living in these possible habitats), then roughly 14 suitable
turbine sites are possible given adequate turbine spacing (shown as red markers).
Modern utility-scale turbines, especially turbines designed for the lower wind resource
areas, are reducing the cost differential between lesser wind resource sites and sites where
the wind resource is stronger. This trend is illustrated in Figure 8. Energy production
estimates are based on inputs of wind resource potential derived from the AWS-modeled
data, turbine-specific power curves extracted from manufacturer data by NREL, and
estimated losses. Energy production estimates were then used to estimate the average
capacity factor for the respective hypothetical facilities noted in Table 1.
24
DSIRE. “Indiana.” Accessed November 20, 2013:
http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/incentive.cfm?Incentive_Code=IN12R.
25
DSIRE. “Indiana.” Accessed November 20, 2013:
http://www.dsireusa.org/incentives/incentive.cfm?Incentive_Code=IN05R&re=0&ee=0
3.6.1 Ownership
In the case where a third party would own and operate a wind farm on the Newport
Chemical Depot lands, the owner would lease land and the rights to install turbines and
electrical components from the industrial park. The magnitude of this payment may be on
the order of $5,000–$10,000 per turbine, which is typical for agricultural areas.
26
SAM. Accessed June 5, 2013: https://sam.nrel.gov/.
27
Figure 14. Installed wind power project costs by region: 2012 projects
27
Wiser, R.; Bollinger, M. 2012 Wind Technologies Market Report. Washington, D.C.: Department of
Energy, August 2013. Accessed November 19, 2013: http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy13osti/58784.pdf.
Multiple customers on site may be interested in paying for portions of the wind energy, a
more local example of consumers paying for renewable energy credits or local energy.
Further development of ownership and investment options should be explored.
It is recommended that the Newport Chemical Depot Reuse Authority further pursue
opportunities for a wind system installation on the Newport Indiana Chemical Depot site.
It is recommended that a public request for intent be issued to gauge interest from
developers in the location and site. For multiple reasons—a combination of acceptable
resource, potential developable area, utilization of contaminated lands, on-site loads, on-
site electrical infrastructure, and low impact to surrounding neighbors—this report shows
that a wind system is a reasonable use for the site. A third-party ownership PPA is the
most feasible way for a system to be financed and installed on this site; as ownership of
the wind farm would require substantial financing, transaction costs for production tax
credits, and renewable energy credits. There is also the risk of turbine failure and
potential future environmental issues (e.g., bat conflicts) which may be easier for a larger
developer/owner to manage, should they arise.