What’s Next for Wind?

http://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/read/whats-next-for-wind

Wind power is cheap. At around 7 cents per kilowatt-hour (kWh), including subsidies, wind turbines can already compete with natural gas combined cycle plants that produce power at 6 to 9 cents per kWh. So why are utilities still building gas plants? In the U.S. in 2009, natural gas plants represented 43% of all new generating capacity installed, and wind represented 39%.

The intermittent nature of wind power puts it at a major disadvantage: gas plants can provide power 24 hours a day. Compressed air, batteries or other types of storage can offset this liability, but at around 5 cents or more per kWh, storage isn’t cheap. But if wind could get down to 4 cents per kWh, and storage continues to lower its cost, wind with storage could eventually dominate the electricity generation market.

So how do we get there?

Based on a basic cost breakdown for a traditional 2.5 MW turbine, the most promising areas for shaving costs are the blades, gearbox, generator, and tower, which combined represent 53% of the total turbine capital cost. Of all these pain points, the gearbox, and the potential for direct drives, has garnered quite a bit of attention. After all, 24% of the total turbine cost relates to the gearbox and the generator.
joint effort by General Electric Ecomagination and Greentech Media

by Brett Prior
Greentechmedia www.greentechmedia.com
March 11, 2011 

Policies and design elements for the repowering of wind farms: A qualitative analysis of different options

Link: http://dx.doi:10.1016/j.enpol.2010.12.035

Abstract: Repowering of a wind farm is the process of replacing existing wind turbines with new turbines that either have a larger nameplate capacity or more efficiency, resulting in a net increase of the power generated. Although repowering brings, both, social and private benefits, there are also several obstacles to repowering which justify public support. The aim of this paper is to provide an overview and a qualitative analysis of instruments and design options to support repowering of on-shore wind farms. The multicriteria analysis carried out in this paper shows that all instruments have their advantages and drawbacks. However, feed-in tariffs and investment subsidies seem to be particularly appropriate instruments in this regard. Furthermore, we provide an assessment of different design options to promote repowering according to key assessment criteria. The relevance of design elements hinges on the fact that these are the ones directly affecting the variables that are relevant in the decision to repower (capacity factors and investment costs).

by Pablo del Río 1, Anxo Calvo Silvosa 2 and Guillermo Iglesias Gómez 3
1 Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas, Calle Albasanz 26-28, Madrid 28037, Spain
2. Universidade da Coruña, Departamento de Economía Financeira e Contabilidade, Campus de Elviña s/n, A Coruña 15071, Spain
3. Universidade da Coruña, Departamento de Economía Aplicada I, Campus de Elviña s/n, A Coruña 15071, Spain
Keywords: Repowering; Wind energy; Support schemes
Energy Policy via Elsevier Science Direct www.ScienceDirect.com
Volume 39, Issue 4; April, 2011; Pages 1897-1908

The Scale and Scope of Environmental Taxation

http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:ays:ispwps:paper1019&r=res

Abstract: This paper provides a discussion of the principles of environmental taxation. It considers the empirical identification of environmental taxes and the problems associated with the choice of the right tax base from the point of view of the correction of market incentives. It then presents a model of optimal second best environmental taxation when taxes must fulfil the double role of modifying market incentives and generating tax revenue. It also considers the issues of the double dividend, the interaction between intrinsic and extrinsic incentives and the problem of designing a tax policy for the alleviation of global environmental problems.

by Agnar Sandmo, Norwegian School of Economics and Business Administration (NH)
via REPEC Research Papers in Economics www.REPEC.org

China to slow GDP growth in bid to curb emissions

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/feb/28/china-gdp-emissions#
...
The announcement that economic growth targets will be lowered from 8% to 7% over the next five years may mark the end of China's peak growth years as environmental constraints drive up the expense of resources and pollution control.

'In China's thousands of years of civilisation, the conflict between humanity and nature has never been as serious as it is today,' the environment minister Zhou Shengxian wrote on his ministry's website.

'The depletion, deterioration and exhaustion of resources and the deterioration of the environment have become serious bottlenecks constraining economic and social development.'

In an online discussion on Sunday, the premier, Wen Jiabao, said China's 2011-15 economic plan would lower the target for annual GDP growth – 'to raise the quality and efficiency of economic growth'.

He said: 'We absolutely cannot again sacrifice the environment as the cost for high-speed growth, to have blind development, and in that way to create over-capacity and put greater pressure on the environment and resources. That economic development is unsustainable.'
...

A similar line emerged from a report released last Friday by Tsinghua University's climate policy initiative. It noted that from 2000-10, China's GDP grew at an annual rate of 10.4%, which took it from sixth to second place in the world. Per capita GDP in that period rose from $996 to $4,300.

China's energy demand, meanwhile, has surged by 220%, compared to a world average of 20%. Since 2006, the country has accounted for 75% of the global increase in coal consumption and 60% of the increase in oil use.
...

But demographic pressures are easing. China's population increase of 6.3 million people in 2010 was the lowest for many years.

...
by Jonathan Watts
FOR FULL STORY GO TO:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2011/feb/28/china-gdp-emissions#
The Guardian, www.guardian.co.uk
February 28, 2011

The Value of Terroir: Hedonic Estimation of Vineyard Sale Prices

http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:fem:femwpa:2011.12&r=res

Abstract: We examine the value of terroir, which refers to the special characteristics of a place that impart unique qualities to the wine produced. We do this by conducting a hedonic analysis of vineyard sales in the Willamette Valley of Oregon to ascertain whether site attributes, such as slope, aspect, elevation, and soil types, or designated appellations are more important determinants of price. We find that prices are strongly determined by sub-AVA appellation designations, but not by specific site attributes. These results indicate that the concept of terroir matters economically, although the reality of terroir – as proxied for by locational attributes – is not significant"

by Robin Cross, Andrew J. Plantinga, Robert N. Stavins
National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) www.NBER.org
NBER Working Paper No. 16762; Issued in February 2011
via REPEC Research Papers in Economics www.REPEC.org and FEEM Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei www.FEEM.it

WeatherBill: Is it the Riskiest Startup Ever?

http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/greentechmedia-all-content/~3/XuwQYxpDLoc/

WeatherBill says it will use probability to ensure farmers against the unexpected.

The question now is which side--certainty or chaos--will win.

The company, which received a $42 million injection from Google Ventures, Khosla Ventures, NEA and others today, has produced a product called Total Weather Insurance. In a nutshell, it exploits the magic of probabalistic computing, the underlying technology of Google and other search engines, to predict weather patterns and help farmers plan accordingly.

The company's algorithms continually examine streams of incoming weather data, past history, local conditions and other factors to devise a personalized insurance policy for a farmer. Then if the farmer experiences unusual amounts of rain or snow, or a lengthy drought, WeatherBill pays the claim automatically. (Last year we predicted Google would shift its green investments toward technologies that took advantage of its expertise in probability.). Founders David Friedberg and Siraj Khaliq came from Google.

The company charges $15 to $75 per acre per policy. Here's an example of how it might work. Let's say a farmer buys drought coverage for $10 an acre for the month of July. The farmer under this policy mighht get $100 per acre if rainfall is 2.31 inches less than normal, and $50 an acre if it is 1.15 inches less than normal. Premiums are calculated on the likelihood of loss.
...
Farmers might be able to hedge their losses against the weather, but it could become difficult for WeatherBill in some situations to properly value risks or even pay off claims. Expectations, exclusions, exceptions--an entire cultural dynamic for this type of service to be developed for it to succeed as well. Does this have to be regulated, state-by-state, by the Department of Insurance, or can it be classified as a different type of transaction?

It's a great idea, but Mother Nature sometimes plays with a stacked deck.

by Michael Kanellos
www.GreenTechMedia.com
February 28, 2011