Wind energy’s lopsided growth in the us, explained with 4 maps – vox electricity el paso apartments

###

Wind turbines have cropped up like dandelions across large areas of the United States, and thousands more are coming. The US Department of Energy projects that we’ll have 404 gigawatts of wind energy capacity across the country by 2050, up from 89 GW today. Since overall electricity demand is expected to hold steady, that would fulfill more than one-third of the country’s needs.

The above map of 57,636 wind turbines across the US is drawn from a terrific interactive website recently launched by the US Geological Survey, the American Wind Energy Association, and the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. And it pulls data from the US Wind Turbine Database, a years-long effort to map the gale of wind power sweeping the country.

I wanted to understand what was going on here, so, naturally, I went looking for more maps. And it turns out there are several reasons states like Alabama and Georgia are so far apart from states like Nebraska and Wyoming, and why it’s unlikely that they’ll be able to close the gap anytime soon.

“The main difference between the southeastern US and the rest of the country is the intensity of the resource,” said Paul Veers, chief engineer at the National Wind Technology Center at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory. “Wind power is very sensitive to the wind speed, more than you might guess.”

The power you get from a wind turbine has a cubic relationship to the wind speed, he says. If you double the wind speed, you get eight times more power. So it makes sense that utilities are planting wind turbines in the places with the most wind.

The major driver to invest in wind in many states is renewable portfolio standards, which mandate a minimum amount of electricity to come from renewable sources, like hydroelectric, wind, solar, and geothermal power plants. While federal incentives like the production tax credit, which benefits wind energy installations, apply across the country, state-level programs make a major difference on the ground.

“The states that have stronger RPSs are the places where you see renewables being deployed more actively,” said Ian Baring-Gould, a technology deployment manager at the National Renewable Energy Laboratory. “In places that don’t have RPSs, the utilities don’t have as much motivation to develop renewables.”

The lack of an RPS doesn’t necessarily mean that a state is hostile to renewable energy. Every state in the country now has installed photovoltaic solar to some degree. But the upfront cost of building a turbine is much higher than it is for installing a PV panel, so every incentive counts when making the business case for deploying more wind energy.

For some utilities, the optimal strategy is to buy wind electricity from states where it is more abundant. Georgia Power, an investor-owned public utility serving most of Georgia, buys wind power Oklahoma via renewable energy certificates and long-term power sourcing contracts.

John Kraft, a Georgia Power spokesperson, told me in an email that the utility has a development initiative to add up to 1,600 megawatts of renewable energy capacity by 2021. But so far, solar energy has won out, with a power purchase agreement already signed in February to buy 510 megawatts in 2019.

So to get actual wind turbines to blossom in the Southeast, the generators themselves have to see their prices shrink further and get better at harnessing more marginal sources of wind. Here there’s some good news: The installed price for wind energy has fallen more than 90 percent since the 1980s and is continuing to drop as wind energy scales up. States like Georgia are also investigating their large potential for offshore wind.

“It might change a little bit, but you are still going to be dealing with the fact that there are relatively inferior wind resources in those areas of the country,” said Ben Hoen, a research scientist at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory who worked on the wind turbine database. “It’s not as if renewable energy is not being deployed there; it’s just that the choice is based on economics, largely.”