Download
slide1 n.
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
THE WORLD ENERGY CHALLENGE is A GREAT OPPORTUNITY FOR KANSAS PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
THE WORLD ENERGY CHALLENGE is A GREAT OPPORTUNITY FOR KANSAS

THE WORLD ENERGY CHALLENGE is A GREAT OPPORTUNITY FOR KANSAS

93 Vues Download Presentation
Télécharger la présentation

THE WORLD ENERGY CHALLENGE is A GREAT OPPORTUNITY FOR KANSAS

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

  1. THE WORLD ENERGY CHALLENGE is A GREAT OPPORTUNITY FOR KANSAS

  2. Almost All U.S. Ethanol Plants Are Located in the U.S. Midwest Argonne National Laboratory: Energy Systems Division Seminar. August 2005.

  3. U.S. Ethanol Plants and Capacities by State IA (28) 1,796 MGY MN (16) 677 MGY NE (15) 781 MGY SD (14) 627 MGY KS (10) 360 MGY IL (7) 679 MGY WI (6) 280 MGY IN (5) 312 MGY ND (4) 263 MGY MI (4) 212 MGY MO (4) 155 MGY CA (4) 69 MGY CO (3) 85 MGY KY (2) 35 MGY TN (1) 67 MGY AZ (1) 55 MGY OR (1) 35 MGY NM (1) 30 MGY WY (1) 11 MGY OH (1) 4 MGY VA (1) unknown Total U.S. Capacity = 6.4 BGY Additional Capacity Under Construction = 6.0 BGY Source: American Coalition for Ethanol; Renewable Fuels Association – July 2007

  4. Biofuels Overview *MGY: Million gallons per year

  5. U.S. Ethanol Plants and Capacities by State IA (28) 1,796 MGY MN (16) 677 MGY NE (15) 781 MGY SD (14) 627 MGY KS (10) 360 MGY IL (7) 679 MGY WI (6) 280 MGY IN (5) 312 MGY ND (4) 263 MGY MI (4) 212 MGY MO (4) 155 MGY CA (4) 69 MGY CO (3) 85 MGY KY (2) 35 MGY TN (1) 67 MGY AZ (1) 55 MGY OR (1) 35 MGY NM (1) 30 MGY WY (1) 11 MGY OH (1) 4 MGY VA (1) unknown KS Today787 KS Tomorrow1613 Total U.S. Capacity = 6.4 BGY Additional Capacity Under Construction = 6.0 BGY Source: American Coalition for Ethanol; Renewable Fuels Association – July 2007

  6. Energy Issues were prominently featured in State of the State Address by Governor Sebelius… “Our goal is to produce 10 percent of our state’s electricity from wind power by 2010, and 20 percent by 2020. ” ….State of the State Address, Jan. 10, 2007

  7. Certainty Rating of the Wind Resource Estimates for Areas with Class 3 or Higher Wind Power in the Contiguous United States http://rredc.nrel.gov http://rredc.nrel.gov

  8. Wind Energy Projects As of Dec 31, 2006

  9. Kansas Wind Projects – In operation and announced WIND PROJECT (County) DEVELOPER UTILITY SIZE YEAR_______ Jeffery Energy Center (Pottawatomie Co.) Westar Westar 1.5 MW 1999 Gray County Wind Farm (Gray Co.) FPL Energy Aqula 112.2 MW 2001 Elk River Wind Facility (Butler Co.) PPM Energy Empire 150 MW 2005 Spearville Wind Energy Facility (Ford Co.) enXco KCP&L 100.4 MW 2006 Smoky Hills Wind Farm (Ellsworth/Lincoln Cos) Tradewind Sunflower 50.4 MW 2007 (4th Qtr) KC BPU 25 MW 2007 (4th Qtr) Midwest 25.2 MW 2007 (4th Qtr) Westar Announcement (2/26/07) RFP Due 4/2/07 Westar 500 MW 250 MW by 2008 250 MW by 2010 KCP&L Announcement (3/20/07) RFP Due 6/15/07 KCP&L 400 MW 100 MW by 2008 300 MW by 2012 Meridian Way Wind Farm Horizon Wind Energy, LLC Empire 201MW 2007 Compiled by Kansas Energy Office (April 2007)

  10. 1565.7 1265.7 665.7 364.1

  11. People Want Renewable Energy! Total Installed Wind Capacity 1. Germany: 20952 MW 2. Spain: 12500 MW 3. United States: 12376 MW 4. India: 7093 MW 5. Denmark: 3136 MW World total July 2007: 78728 MW Source: WindPower Monthly

  12. KANSAS AS A WIND EXPORTERFOR IT TO HAPPEN • New wind becomes cheaper than new coal • Congress passes a National RPS • Congress passes a Carbon Tax

  13. Wind Cost of Energy 12 Natural Gas (fuel only) 10 8 2007: New Wind Low wind speed sites COE (¢/kWh [constant 2000 $]) 6 New Bulk Power Competitive Price Band High windspeed sites 4 2 Depreciated Coal Depreciated Wind 1990 2010 2020 1995 2005 2015 2000

  14. In 2006, Wind Projects Built Since 1997 Were Competitive with Wholesale Power Prices in Most Regions

  15. Case Study: Texas • Utilities and wind companies invested $1B in 2001 to build 912 MW of new wind power, resulting in: • 2,500 quality jobs with a payroll of $75M • $13.3M in tax revenues for schools and counties • $2.5M in 2002 royalty income to landowners • Another 2,900 indirect jobs as a result of the multiplier effect • $4.6M increase in Pecos County property tax revenue in 2002

  16. Case Study: Minnesota 107-MW Minnesota wind project $500,000/yr in lease payments to farmers $611,000 in property taxes in 2000 = 13% of total county taxes 31 long-term local jobs and $909,000 in income from O&M (includes multiplier effect)

  17. Case Study: Iowa 240-MW Iowa wind project $640,000/yr in lease payments to farmers ($2,000/turbine/yr) $2M/yr in property taxes $5.5M/yr in O&M income 40 long-term O&M jobs 200 short-term construction jobs Doesn’t include multiplier effect

  18. Economic Impacts to Kansas from 7158 MW of new wind development by 2030 Wind energy’s economic “ripple effect” • Direct Impacts • Payments to Landowners: • $20.8 million/year • Local Property Tax Revenue: • $19 million/year • Construction Phase: • 11,133 new construction jobs • $1.35B to local economies • Operational Phase: • 1805 new long-term jobs • $152M/yr to local economies • Indirect Impacts • Construction Phase: • 5,000 new jobs • $424M to local economies • Operational Phase: • 438 local jobs • $43 M/yr to local economies • Induced Impacts • Construction Phase: • 6,223 new jobs • $559 M to local economies • Operational Phase: • 850 local jobs • $76 M/yr to local economies Totals (construction + 20 yrs) Total economic benefit to Kansas = $7.8 billion New local jobs during construction = over 23,000 New long-term jobs for Kansans = over 3,000 Construction Phase = 1-2 years Operational Phase = 20+ years

  19. HOW WE CAN MAKE THIS HAPPEN? WE BRING EVERYONE TOGETHER… ENVIRONMENTALISTS, UTILITIES, AND CONSUMER ADVOCATES MUST COME TOGETHER IN AN UNPRECEDENTED WAY