![]() ![]() ![]() in many cases, moving beyond the now-standard partnership flip structures. More recently, a handful of community wind projects built in the United States over the past year have been financed via new and creative structures that push the envelope of wind project finance in the U.S. wind market today - the 'partnership flip structure' - was first developed by community wind projects in Minnesota more than a decade ago (and is therefore sometimes referred to as the 'Minnesota flip' model) before being adapted by the broader wind market. For example, a variation of one of the most common financing arrangements in the U.S. Just as it has provided a proving ground for new turbines, so too has the community wind sector in the United States served as a laboratory for experimentation with innovative new financing structures. installations of wind turbines from Suzlon (in 2003), DeWind (2008), Americas Wind Energy (2008) and later Emergya Wind Technologies (2010),1 Goldwind (2009), AAER/Pioneer (2009), Nordic Windpower (2010), Unison (2010), and Alstom (2011). For example, community wind projects have deployed the first U.S. has similarly served as a proving ground - but in this case for up-and-coming wind turbine manufacturers that are trying to break into the broader U.S. Just as in Europe, however, the community wind sector in the U.S. Community wind has been slower to take root in the United States - the first such projects were installed in the state of Minnesota around the year 2000. The fact that orders from community wind more ยป projects seldom exceeded more than a few turbines at a time enabled the manufacturers to correct any design flaws or manufacturing defects fairly rapidly, and without the risk of extensive (and expensive) serial defects that can accompany larger orders. In the 1980s and 1990s, for example, Vestas and other now-established European wind turbine manufacturers relied heavily on community wind projects in Scandinavia and Germany to install - and essentially field-test - new turbine designs. In the relatively brief history of utility-scale wind generation, the 'community wind' sector - defined here as consisting of relatively small utility-scale wind power projects that are at least partly owned by one or more members of the local community - has played a vitally important role as a 'test bed' or 'proving ground' for wind turbine manufacturers. Original copy available until stock is exhausted Country of Publication: United States Language: English Subject: 32 ENERGY CONSERVATION, CONSUMPTION, AND UTILIZATION 29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY AND ECONOMY FOSSIL-FUEL POWER PLANTS ECONOMIC IMPACT REFUSE-FUELED BOILERS ECONOMIC ANALYSIS STEAM GENERATORS FUEL SUBSTITUTION BOILERS COAL INDUSTRY MUNICIPAL WASTES SOLID WASTES TAX CREDITS CARBONACEOUS MATERIALS ECONOMICS ENERGY SOURCES FOSSIL FUELS FUELS MATERIALS POWER PLANTS THERMAL POWER PLANTS VAPOR GENERATORS WASTES 320604* - Energy Conservation, Consumption, & Utilization- Municipalities & Community Systems- Municipal Waste Management- (1980-) 320303 - Energy Conservation, Consumption, & Utilization- Industrial & Agricultural Processes- Equipment & Processes 299003 - Energy Planning & Policy- Unconventional Sources & Power Generation- Other- = , Publication Date: Sat Oct 01 00:00: Research Org.: CSI Resource Systems, Inc., Washington, DC (USA) OSTI Identifier: 5839150 Report Number(s): DOE/CS/24312-7 ON: DE83017996 DOE Contract Number: AC01-80CS24312 Resource Type: Technical Report Resource Relation: Other Information: Portions are illegible in microfiche products. Nine options for new coal and MSW plants were analyzed, reflecting a matching of technology and energy output to various process steam demands, as well as different ownership and operating structures. In addition, information is provided on available tax benefits in light of recent tax law changes. Information is also provided on the types of technologies that would be appropriate given the assumed steam demands. The analysis was structured to cover a range of steam demands, different plant ownership and operating structures, and the tax benefits available to these types of plants. The financial analysis is based on replacing an existing oil-fired plant with a new plant financed via 100-percent debt. ![]() The results of the analysis indicate that the use of coal or solid waste, rather than oil, in a new energy production plant represents an attractive investment. An analysis is presented of the financial impacts to the industrial energy user of using either coal or MSW in a new process-steam-generating plant.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |