A new Department of Energy map is a bit of an eye opener for those of us getting skeptical about the Golden State’s wind potential. According to an article in the Wallstreet Journal, wind power makes sense in Texas, but not in California, “which isn’t located in the ‘wind belt.’” That may be true, but guess where the technology first took root!
With the help of DOE’s online map, you can track the development of US wind energy since the first turbines were erected in 1975. Another 48 wind farms were added over the next 18 years and, as you can see from the screen above, every one of them was in California!
According to the California Energy Commission, 95% of the state’s wind generating capacity comes from three regions: Altamont Pass (east of San Francisco), Tehachapi (southeast of Bakersfield), and San Gorgonio Pass (east of Los Angeles).
“In 1995, these areas produced 30 percent of the entire world’s wind-generated electricity.”
Minnesota came online in 1994. Three more states started using wind energy soon after that: Texas (1995), Alaska (1997), and Vermont (1997).
The focus doesn’t really shift outside California until 1998. See all the turquoise dots on the map? Those are new wind farms and every one of them was built outside California. (You will need to zoom in on those Californian clusters to watch their development for awhile because the turquoise dots are not easy to find among the existing wind farms.)
The number of wind farms more than doubled by 2001 and doubled again by 2005, at which there were 226 wind farms that had the capacity, if running at 100%, to power 2.2 million homes. Note the lack of development in California, compared to midwestern states. In August 2006, Renewable Energy World reported, “Texas for the first time supplanted historic leader California as the top state in cumulative wind power capacity.” (That’s also the year Hawaii came online.)
By 2008, Texas’ capacity was more than any two other states combined and California dropped to #3:
1. Texas, 7,116 MW
2. Iowa, 2,790 MW
3. California, 2,517 MW
4. Minnesota, 1,752 MW
5. Washington, 1,375 MW
California’s Renewables Portfolio Standard (RPS) Program was passed in 2002, but you will need to zoom in on those three clusters to easily see development prior to 2009. In the beginning of that year, President Obama signed a stimulus package that enabled wind-farm developers to get a federal cash grant or tax credit covering up to 30% of their capital investment.
According to Patrick Jenevein, of Dallas-based Tang Energy Group, “After the 2009 subsidy became available, wind farms were increasingly built in less-windy locations.” Politics, rather than economic feasibility, has been driving the market. In the article he wrote last year in the Wall Street Journal, Jenevein stated:
” … California, which isn’t located in the ‘wind belt,’ is America’s second-largest wind-energy producer but also its costliest. The state’s high costs are partly due to “aggressive renewable energy policies . . . that give developers a strong negotiating position,” according to the Department of Energy report.
He added: “The industry’s success in Texas (where my company is based, and which is the nation’s largest and cheapest producer of wind power) suggests that wind farms do make sense in relatively windy areas where electricity shortages occur.”
Jenevein had been doing wind projects since the late 1990’s, but left that sector.
Ryan Koronowski was arguing from a totally different perspective when he wrote, “In parts of Texas and the Great Plains, wind prices are competitive with coal and gas without the wind PTC.” Koronowski had no doubt the industry would survive without the grant, but would it thrive?
Running through the figures on the DOE’s map, there is not an obvious jump in the number of wind farms the year in 2009:
2007 — 318 farms
2008 — 416 farms
2009 — 523 farms online year the incentives established
2010 — 581 farms
2011 — 677 farms
2012 — 815 farms
What is obvious, however, is that incentives are fueling the industry. A recent Bloomberg article points out that the industry’s development almost came to a halt in 2013 because of Congress’ negligence in approving them and, “Once the credit was reinstated, it took much of the year for development activity to resume.”
The last map of this series is from 2012. California has once again taken second place and the ranking, as of December 2013, is as follows:
1. Texas (12,355 MW)
2. California (5,830 MW)
3. Iowa (5,178 MW)
4. Illinois (3,568 MW)
5. Oregon (3,153 MW)
All Maps courtesy DOE