Wind Energy Weekly #702, Vol 15, June 1996
*********************************************************************
The following is the electronic edition of WIND ENERGY WEEKLY,
Vol. 15, #702, 17 June 1996, published by the American Wind
Energy Association. The full text of the WEEKLY is available
in hardcopy form for $595/year and is recommended for those with
a serious commercial interest in wind (the electronic edition
contains only excerpts). A monthly hardcopy publication, the
WINDLETTER, more suitable for those interested in residential
wind systems is included with a $50/year individual membership in
the Association. AWEA's goal is to promote wind energy as a
clean and environmentally superior source of electricity. Anyone
sharing this goal is invited to become a member--please help!.
For more information on the Association, contact AWEA, 122 C
Street, NW, 4th Floor, Washington, DC 20001, USA, phone (202)
383-2500, fax (202) 383-2505, email windmail@mcimail.com. Or
visit our World Wide Web site at http://www.econet.org/awea.
ENERGY OUTLOOK
Texas utility's customers back efficiency, renewables
Little effect on birds at one Spanish site, study finds
SOUTH TEXANS BACK CLEAN
ENERGY IN UTILITY MEETING
"Central Power and Light had better start working on energy
efficiency and renewable energy if they are going to satisfy
customers," said Karl R. Rabago, Environmental Defense Fund 's
(EDF) national energy program manager, about results from an
innovative polling exercise conducted June 1-2 by the Texas
utility. CP&L gathered a representative sample of electric
customers in Corpus Christi to discuss options for meeting a
projected need for new electric resources.
Rabago, a former Deputy Assistant Secretary for Renewable
Energy and Energy Efficiency, participated in the meeting as an
expert on those technologies. CP&L says it needs 200-400 MW of
new electric capacity by the year 2000, and given delays for
regulatory approvals, this means the company must start the
approval process now. A "Deliberative Polling(TM)" exercise was
used by the company to determine customer preferences. Identical
polls were conducted before and after the discussion process, and
the results were released June 10.
The poll brought surprises in a number of areas. Highlights
of the results include:
- Almost half the participants (46%) said the first thing the
utility should do is promote energy efficiency. An
additional 22% said energy efficiency was the second choice.
The most popular second choice was renewable (wind and
solar) energy, with 38% of customer support. The most
popular third choice was building a fossil fuel plant, using
coal or natural gas (29%).
- Customer views changed as a result of the process. These
changes are likely to be the most strongly debated issue to
come out of the poll. Only 11% of customers wanted energy
efficiency as their first choice before deliberating. This
number grew by a factor of four as a result of the
process--to 46%. Two-thirds of the customers wanted
renewable energy as their first choice before deliberation.
When presented with the immediacy of the need for a power
solution, CP&L's lack of experience with renewables, and the
abundance of low-cost efficiency resources, renewables as a
first choice dropped to 16%. Still, customer support for
renewables and the reduction of pollution were strongly
supported in response to other questions (see below). On
average, customers also felt very strongly that the costs of
renewable energy will drop with further development of these
technologies.
- Customers are willing to pay more for clean energy. 76% of
customers are willing to pay $1 or more per month for
renewable energy, 65% of customers will pay $1 or more for
energy efficiency each month, and 68% of customers will pay
$1 or more per month for unspecified options to provide
extra environmental protection. The results prove that
customers are willing to share in the cost of developing new
renewable energy generation options. Moreover, the slightly
lower willingness to pay for energy efficiency proves that
customers know these resources are available at very low
prices not requiring a premium payment. In fact, while
willingness to pay fell for all options after deliberation,
the amount customers were willing to spend on renewables
fell the least.
- Customers have very strongly held values. On a scale of 1
to 10, with 10 representing an "extremely important," the
following issues scored 8 or higher:
Reduce pollution 9.32
Reduce use of natural gas and coal
with customer-based energy efficiency 8.72
Using resources that maintain environmental quality 8.71
Promote economic growth in the community 8.57
Using renewable energy, like the sun or wind 8.55
Everyone has their basic needs met 8.46
Preserve limited fossil fuels for the future 8.18
Rates and services to treat low income customers
fairly 8.01
- Customers also understood the concept of long and short term
costs. Fully 76.5% of customers expressed a preference for
projects with high capital costs and low operating costs
like renewable energy, and 50.2% of customers also said that
the utility should focus on the long term (over the next
10-20 years). An additional 37.8% of customers felt the
utility should focus on both the long and short term in
their planning.
- Customers had strong opinions on CP&L planning priorities as
well. On a scale of 1 to 10, with 10 representing an
"extremely important," the following options scored 8 or
higher:
Energy efficiency services and technologies 8.5
Solar and wind energy 8.4
Options to add an extra measure of
environmental protection 8.35
- Customer concerns about environmental problems were very
strong, with 77.9% saying that global warming is a very
serious (43.8%) or somewhat serious (34.1%) problem, while
83.5% viewed air pollution as a very serious (32.3%) or
somewhat serious (51.2%) problem. Moreover, demonstrating a
lack of faith in current pollution control efforts, 51.2% of
customers felt that air pollution is a problem that is
likely to get worse.
"This marks the first time a utility has involved a
statistically representative sample of customers in the process
of resource planning," said Rabago. "CP&L has taken a very
positive step as a utility toward satisfying the requirement of
public participation, as required by integrated resource planning
requirements passed into law last year. This is why consumers
and environmental advocates fought so hard for IRP [Integrated
Resource Planning]."
IRP became law in Texas last year, although the Public
Utility Commission (PUC) has yet to adopt final rules. "EDF
hopes the PUC will look closely at these polling results, and
ensure that the final IRP rules will ensure customers get what
they want from their utility," concluded Rabago. "Texas
customers want an increased effort to make energy use more
efficient, cleaner, and more renewable--all without compromising
reliability. There is a huge untapped demand for clean energy
that customers will buy if they are allowed to choose. With
aggressive efforts to increase energy efficiency and renewable
energy to complement our low-priced natural gas resources, Texas
can get more jobs, more power, cleaner air and a brighter
future."
"Customers grasped the issues and came up to speed quickly,"
said Professor James Fishkin, chairman of the Government
Department at the University of Texas at Austin and originator of
the concept of the Deliberative Poll(TM). "They went from 'off
the top of the head' opinions to a sophisticated discussion of
the advantages and disadvantages of the options. It was not an
easy process for them, but after about 12 hours of discussion,
they felt informed and empowered--especially by the dialogue with
the PUC commissioners.
"The participants loved the process," Fishkin added.
Seventy-three percent gave it a perfect '10' on a 10-point scale,
and 67% thought that the dialogue with the PUCT commissioners was
'very valuable.'
"It's obvious that customers place a high value on doing
everything possible to eliminate or reduce the need through
energy efficiency programs as a first course of action. "It is
also significant that many customers seemed to believe that
renewable energy could meet all of CPL's future energy needs
prior to the Deliberative Poll(TM)," Fishkin said. "While that
view changed after deliberation, it's clear that customers
strongly believe that renewable energy should be a part of the
energy resource mix and that they are willing to pay extra for
renewable energy.
"The customers sample was highly representative in terms of
both demographics and attitudes," Fishkin continued. "We had, in
effect, all of CPL's customers in one room where they could come
to thoughtful and more informed conclusions. The changes were
large and statistically significant because the participants had
not thought about these issues much before the process began."
The results of the meetin will be evaluated as a part of
the integrated resource plan that CPL plans to file this fall.
While the ultimate responsibility for CPL's resource plan falls
the company, the results of the poll send some very clear signals
regarding customer preferences, according to CPL President Bruce
Evans.
STUDY OF ONE TARIFA PLANT
FINDS LITTLE AVIAN IMPACT
A study of the effect on local bird populations of a 10-MW
wind power plant in Tarifa, Spain, near the Straits of Gibraltar
has concluded that the facility did not have "an important impact
on the birds present in its surroundings and, on the contrary,
created a new habitat for some species of birds not present in
adjacent areas."
The study, which was reported at the recent European Wind
Energy Conference in Sweden, was funded by Ecotecnia, the wind
plant developer. The Estacion Biologica de Donana designed the
study and was responsible for interpreting the data.
The Ecotecnia project consists of 66 150-kW turbines
approximately 40 meters in height, situated in a single row on a
north-south mountain ridge. Observations of nesting birds in the
wind plant were slightly higher than in two comparable control
areas, a fact the study attributed to nests in "small crests or
rocks" absent in the control areas. Observations of roosting
birds in the wind plant were somewhat lower than in one control
area, but similar to the other.
Migrating birds, however, were far more common over the wind
site, with nearly four times as many being recorded as over the
control areas. Notes the study, "A total of 72,000 birds were
recorded, most of them passing above the wind farm, but at a
higher altitude than over the other two areas.
"Average flight altitude in the wind farm was more than 100
m, while in the other two areas birds flew at about 60 m above
the mountain ridge. . . .
"Weekly visits were made to all the wind turbines to check
any collision incidents. The visit frequency was actually higher
when other activities near the turbines not directly related to
bird collision registration were conducted. Two birds, a griffon
vulture and [a] short-toed eagle (Circaetus gallicus), collided
with a turbine in the course of the 16 months of study at the
wind farm. Annual passage of vultures over the farm is estimated
to be about 45,000, and annual passage of eagles about 2,500.
"Therefore, [the] collision rate at the wind farm was
considered to be low. The figure of griffon vulture collision[s]
with power lines is higher than the observed rate at the wind
farm and even so it is considered to be low.
"On the whole, the wind farm did not prove to represent an
important impact on the birds present in its surroundings. On
the contrary, the wind farm created a new habitat for some
species of birds not present in adjacent areas.
"Although a reaction to the wind farm could be observed in
bird flight behavior, differences in flight frequency were such
that there were no indications of the wind farm obstructing the
passage of birds at all. Bird mortality was recorded but could
be considered insignificant when weighed against other bird
mortality causes."
"Bird Impact Study on the 10-MW Wind Farm of La Pena
(Tarifa)" was authored by N. Cererola and A. Martinez of
Ecotecnia and M. Ferrer of Estacion Biologica de Donana.
BACK TO
*********************************************************************