Facts on Energy: Wind

September 26, 2008· No Comments

U.S. Wind Statistics: (Updated May 19, 2009)

  • In 2008, wind represented 0.5% of all energy consumed in the US.[1]
  • In 2008, wind represented 1.3% of all electricity generated in the US.[2]
  • The U.S. Department of Energy’s Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE) report “20% Wind Energy by 2030” (2008) envisioned production that is over 7 times more than the generation level that EIA is projecting.[6] This would require, according to the DOE, 280 gigawatts of new wind capacity (or almost 13,000 megawatts of new wind turbines) each year. This growth level is equivalent to adding about half of the total installed wind capacity in the U.S. in 2008 each and every year through 2030. This growth in wind turbine capacity would require siting wind units on publicly owned lands where a large percentage of the development sites are located, continued taxpayer-funded subsidies, the building of power lines to remote areas where wind turbines are located, and the public acceptance of noise and other wind-related effects. Since wind is intermittent, the wind capacity would also need to be backed-up with reliable capacity, most likely from fossil fuels, adding additional cost and reducing the carbon dioxide benefits of introducing this level of wind energy. The DOE analysis is also predicated on the assumption of very high capacity factors for wind of more than 40 percent. The experience of wind in Texas highlighted below does not support capacity factors at that level, although such technology is improving (along with the technology of conventional energies).[7]
  • Because wind power is available a relatively small fraction of the time, typical statements about how a wind unit can produce enough electricity to serve a large number of homes are misleading.[8] Since a wind unit cannot supply power continuously or even upon customer demand due to intermittency, dispatchable generators (usually fossil-fuel) are required to provide back-up power to the system to maintain reliability.[9] Wind on average serves fewer homes than advertised, and on hot summer days wind can serve far fewer still.

U.S. Transmission Statistics

  • Total spending on new transmission by all investor-owned utilities in 2006 [current dollars] was $6.9 billion.[10] This figure underestimates total transmission spending since it excludes government-owned utilities and cooperatives.
  • According to a November 2008 study by Brattle Group, total investment in transmission and distribution through 2030 is expected to total $880 billion, where $298 billion would be for transmission and $582 billion would be for distribution. The figure includes integration of 214 gigawatts of new generating capacity of which 39 gigawatts is for renewable technologies required under existing state renewable portfolio standards, continued installation of a “smart grid”, accommodation for new end-use technologies such as plug-in hybrid electric vehicles, and bringing new efficiencies and service options to end use customers. The authors caution that the figure could be an underestimate since it is derived from shareholder-owned electric utility expenditure data that excludes investments made by electric cooperatives and Government-owned utilities.[i]
  • There is no standard definition of a “smart grid”. It generally refers to technologies that: 1) provide customers with information and tools that allow them to be responsive to system conditions, 2) ensure more efficient use of the electric grid, and 3) enhance system reliability. The latest federal stimulus law provides $11 billion for smart grid technology, including $4.5 billion for smart-technology matching grants.[ii] The $11 billion is a small percentage of what’s needed to get to the $880 billion mark, and that amount does not support a 20 percent renewable scenario by 2030.
  • In Europe, it is estimated that 1.2 trillion Euros ($1.55 trillion) would be needed to build a super grid that captures offshore wind, hydropower, and solar panel arrays.[iii] It would require a new network of cables and interconnectors to bring offshore generated electricity to land and modernization of the onshore grid to deal with sudden changes in supply and demand and clear bottlenecks. It would also allow countries to export electricity at times of surplus wind generation and import from other green power sources. Currently, Denmark exports its surplus wind power free to Germany and Norway and imports coal-powered electricity from Germany.
  • A report prepared by organizations responsible for electricity-system reliability in roughly half the states in the U.S. indicates that it would cost $100 billion to build a transmission system, including 15,000 circuit miles of extremely high voltage lines, that would move power from the Midwest and Great Plains, where most of the wind resources are located to big cities along the East Coast. They also estimate that building the wind turbines would cost about $720 billion. The report was prepared by the Midwest Independent System Operator, SERC Reliability Region, PJM Interconnection LLC, the Southwest Power Pool, the Mid-Continent Area Power Pool, and the Tennessee Valley Authority.[iv]

U.S. Wind Subsidies

  • The Energy Information Administration estimates that total Federal subsidies for electric production for fiscal year 2007 from wind power are $23.37 per megawatt hour, compared to 44 cents for traditional coal, 25 cents for natural gas and petroleum liquids, 67 cents for hydroelectric power, and $1.59 for nuclear.[11] For wind power, these subsidies include a production tax credit of 2.0 cents per kilowatt-hour.[12] However, they do not include accelerated depreciation, (a five-year write-off), a favorable accounting treatment that wind developers receive. (Figures are in 2007 dollars.)
  • According to the General Accounting Office, in fiscal year 2007, wind received 2.8 percent of all federal research subsidies to power generation but produced only 0.4 percent of U.S. electricity. Per kilowatt-hour, this was 14.7 times higher than the amount allocated to coal, most of which was spent to develop cleaner technologies. Coal produced 51.4 percent of all U.S. electricity in fiscal year 2007.[13]
  • Approximately nine percent of electricity generated is lost in its transmission and distribution from power plants to end-use consumers (also called “line losses”).[14] Given that the production tax credit for wind is based on electricity generated, not sold, the PTC is actually costing taxpayers and consumers more than its current value (since 1/1/09) of 2.1 cents per kilowatt-hour since one-tenth of that electricity is not reaching consumers. Also, wind is an inefficient user of transmission because capacity must be available to handle the full rated output of turbines but wind turbines run at full capacity only a small portion of time.

U.S. Policies Affecting Wind

  • While no federal renewable portfolio standard (RPS) exists, 28 states and the District of Columbia have a renewable portfolio standard mandating a certain percentage of a utility’s power plant capacity or generation to come from renewable sources by a certain date.[15] However, most States are out of compliance with their own program due to issues with their RPS formulation, reporting mechanisms, monitoring, and exaction of penalties for non-compliance.[16] (Texas is the major exception.) Wind is the technology that generally benefits the most from an RPS since it has lower costs than many other renewable generating technologies, particularly when subsidies are included.
  • The federal production tax credit (PTC) for wind was first introduced as part of the Energy Policy Act of 1992. It was defined as a 1.5-cents-per-kilowatthour payment (adjusted annually for inflation), available for 10 years to investors for facilities placed in service between 1994 and June 30, 1999. The PTC for wind has expired and been reinstated several times since its origination. The Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 (Public Law 110-343) signed on October 3, 2008 extended the PTC to 2.1-cents-per-kilowatt-hour through 2012. The $787 billion economic stimulus President Obama signed into law in February 2009 makes a 30 percent investment tax credit available in lieu of the production credit.[17]

What Does Wind Cost?

  • The Energy Information Administration assumes the total overnight capital cost of an onshore wind turbine to be $1,923 per kilowatt (in 2007 dollars) and that of an offshore wind unit to be $3,851 per kilowatt.[18] These costs are similar to the estimated cost made by the National Association of Manufacturers (NAM) and the American Council for Capital Formation (ACCF) of $2,000 per kilowatt for onshore units and $3,800 per kilowatt for offshore units (in 2008 dollars).[19].
  • The Energy information Administration calculates the levelized cost of generating technologies, which is the present value of the total cost of building and operating a generating plant over its financial life, converted to equal annual payments and amortized over expected annual generation. In 2016, the levelized cost of onshore wind is 14.15 cents per kilowatt hour (in 2007 dollars) and for offshore wind, it is 22.96 cents per kilowatt hour. These values do not include the production tax credit since it is slated to expire at the end of 2012. The cost for onshore wind is higher than that of natural gas combined cycle, whose costs are 7.99 to 8.39 cents per kilowatt hour. Pulverized coal and coal-fired integrated gasification combined cycle have levelized costs at 9.46 and 10.35 cents per kilowatt hour, respectively. EIA includes a 3-percentage point increase in the cost of capital when evaluating investments in greenhouse gas intensive technologies, such as these coal projects, which is equivalent to a $15 per ton carbon dioxide emission fee, and a 2 percentage point reduction in the cost-of-capital for eligible renewable technologies under the loan guarantee program of the Stimulus Act.[20]
  • All estimates of the potential cost per kilowatt hour of electricity are based on assumptions. Three important assumptions are (a) projected useful life of the generating unit, (b) the unit’s capacity factor over the projected useful life, and (c) operating and maintenance and replacement costs during the useful life. These factors are particularly important in the case of wind turbines because most wind turbines now being installed have relatively little operating history – often less than 5 years. If, for example, a per kilowatt hour cost estimate assumed a 20 year useful life and the actual useful life turned out to be only 10 years, the ACTUAL cost per kilowatt hour for that unit would be nearly double the original cost estimate.
  • A report by the Lawrence Berkley laboratory sampled recently built wind units in the United States. Among the sample of projects built in 2007, reported installed costs ranged from $1,240/kilowatt to $2,600/kilowatt, with an average cost of $1,710/kilowatt.[21]

Climate and Land Mass

  • If ten percent of the nation’s power is produced by renewable energy through a renewable electricity standard (RES), Resources for the Future estimated that the RES would reduce electricity’s carbon emissions by approximately 6 percent in 2020. Wind is estimated to represent 28 percent, geothermal 24 percent, and biomass 43 percent of the 10 percent of qualifying renewables. Coal-burning generators that emit the most carbon will be base-loaded and operate most of the time, supplying 48 percent of total generation, while production by lower-emitting gas-fired units will be partially replaced by the increased renewable generation and vary production to make up for wind’s intermittency.[22]
  • For comparison purposes, and taking into account capacity (or load factors), the land area covered by a wind power station of the same energy output as a nuclear power station would be about 2,000 times as great (or an area of land 20km by 25km would be covered by wind turbines to produce the same electrical output as one nuclear power station occupying an area of land 500m square).[23]

Texas

  • In 2008, wind capacity in Texas was 7,116 megawatts.[24]
  • Texas leads the nation in wind capacity having 28% of the total wind capacity in the US. [25]
  • Texas law requires that 5,880 MW of new renewable generation be built in the state by 2015, which will meet about 5 percent of the state’s projected electricity demand. The legislation also sets a cumulative target of installing 10,000 MW of renewable generation capacity by 2025. The measure also includes a requirement that the state must meet 500 MW of the 2025 target with non-wind renewable generation.[26]
  • Frequently, estimates for wind energy include only turbine construction and maintenance, leaving out transmission, grid connection and management, and backup generation. One study estimates that direct subsidies, tax breaks, and increased production and ancillary costs associated with wind energy could cost Texas electric customers more than $4 billion per year and at least $60 billion through 2025.[v]
  • In 2007 (the most recent year available), wind represented 4.4 percent of the state’s total capacity of 101,938 megawatts, yet wind produced only 2.2 percent of the state’s electricity that year.[27]
  • The average output of wind turbines during Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT) system peaks (from 4 pm to 6 pm in July and August) was 16.8 percent of capacity. However, for any hour during these months, the output of the wind turbines could range from zero to 49 percent of installed capacity.[28] Because the use of an average number would be too optimistic due to the intermittency of wind, ERCOT assigns 8.7 percent of the installed capacity of wind turbines to its calculation of the ERCOT peak capacity reserve margin, based on a study of the effective load serving capability of wind.[29]
  • The estimated cost for building transmission capacity in ERCOT to support new wind farms in the Competitive Renewable Energy Zones is $2.95 billion for the lowest cost plan (for 12 gigawatts) and from $3.78 billion to $6.38 billion for expandable plans, supporting 12 gigawatts of new wind capacity at the low cost end and 25 gigawatts at the high cost end of the range. Figures are as of 4/15/08.[30]

California

  • The California Energy Commission has estimated that its requirement of 33 percent renewables in 2020 will entail $5.7 billion in new 500 and 230 kV transmission lines alone, in addition to lower-voltage lines, substations, and reactive power supplies. The figure does not include lines associated with new or upgraded conventional generation.[32]
  • In 2008, wind capacity in California was 2,517 megawatts.[33]
  • In 2007 (the most recent year available), California’s wind capacity represented 3.6 percent of its total generating capacity of 63,813 megawatts. It produced 2.6 percent of the state’s electricity that year.[34]
  • In 2008, California’s wind capacity was third in the nation with 10 percent of the total wind capacity in the US. [35]
  • During August, 2007, the highest five percent of load hours in California almost all had wind production levels below 600 megawatts and most were even below 200 megawatts, less than 8 percent of its capacity. Regarding the most critical hours, in 75 percent of the year’s top 20 load hours, wind production was at or under 150 megawatts, and the highest figure achieved in any of those 20 hours was just over 450 megawatts. Only in one of the twenty hours of highest load during the summer of 2007 did the actual hourly wind production exceed the net qualifying capacity, which is the amount of a resource’s capacity that can be counted for resource adequacy compliance filings.[vi]

International

  • According to the Global Wind Energy Council, world installed capacity for wind in 2008 was 120,798 megawatts, increasing 29 percent from 2007 levels. The U.S. leads the world in wind generating capacity, with 20.8 percent (25,170 megawatts) of the world total, Germany is second with 19.8 percent (23,903 megawatts), and Spain is third with 13.9 percent (16,754 megawatts).[vii]
  • The European Union generated 3.7 percent of its electricity from wind in 2007.[viii]
  • According to the International Energy Agency’s energy statistics, the world generated 130 terawatt hours in 2006 from wind capacity totaling 74 gigawatts. Assuming all the units were on-line for the entire 2006 year results in a 20 percent capacity factor.[ix] Since not all units were constructed and operating at the beginning of 2006, the capacity factor would be higher. An earlier study, with mostly data for 2005, indicated world capacity was 59,010 megawatts with a capacity factor of 19.6 percent.[36]
  • France, in 2008, had 3.4 gigawatts of capacity and generated 5.6 terawatt hours of electricity at a capacity factor of 24 percent. It ranked 7th internationally in wind capacity with 2.8 percent of the world’s total.[x]
  • Denmark, a country with over 6,000 wind turbines, many offshore, finds that it needs to import electricity due to the intermittency of its wind generating units and export the wind power. In 2003, 84 percent of western Denmark’s wind-generated electricity was exported at a revenue loss. Denmark’s conventional power plants are generally run at full capacity backing-up their wind units. When the wind does blow, the wind power is usually surplus and exported to other countries at a discounted price.[37] In 2008, Denmark had 3.18 gigawatts of wind power, 2.6 percent of world capacity, ranking 9th overall.[xi]
  • Britain has a European target of meeting 15 percent of its electricity demand in 2020 with renewable sources. Some government insiders feel the task is hopeless. The government’s clean-energy advisers have warned that Britain could spend £100bn over the next decade and still not hit the target. The credit crunch slowed the already slow rate of renewable deployment to a crawl. With financing and debt harder to come by, expensive offshore wind farms such as the London Array look less attractive to the big utilities.[xii] Almost half the power generated in Britain comes from coal and a bit more than a third from natural gas. Nuclear power stations contribute 17 percent and windmills provide 0.6 percent. Although the UK has built, with enormous subsidy, enough wind turbines to generate 5 percent of its electricity, no more than 1 percent is operational when needed since it is not operational during periods of intense heat or cold.[xiii] IN 2008, the UK had 3.24 gigawatts of wind capacity, 2.7 percent of the world total, and ranked 8th overall.[xiv]
  • Spain has legislation that requires 20 percent of its electricity production to be from renewable energy by 2010. The Government’s Renewable Energy Plan expects to have 20,155 megawatts of wind capacity by 2010. Spain’s National Energy Commission estimates that 15,617 megawatts of wind capacity was installed by year-end 2008, 77 percent of the 2010 target, making Spain the third-largest country for installed wind capacity. In 2008, wind energy provided 10.2 percent of the country’s electric consumption at a price per kilowatt hour that was almost 50 percent higher than wind’s generating price 10 years prior, partly due to high premiums in the regulated rates for renewable energy and the requirement that all renewable energy be purchased by electricity retailers. To attract investors and make renewable energy profitable against other forms of energy, Spain found that renewable energy must be subsidized. Spain provides both regulated rates and direct incentives to attract investment and meet its policy goals. However, a Spanish university researcher found that the “green jobs” agenda that the Spanish Government has instituted, and to which the U.S. government now promotes, has, in fact, resulted in job loss elsewhere in the country’s economy. For each “green” megawatt installed, 5.28 jobs on average were lost in the Spanish economy, and for each megawatt of wind energy installed, 4.27 jobs were lost.[xv]
[1] Energy Information Administration (EIA), Monthly Energy Review (MER), Table 1.3, http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/mer/pdf/pages/sec1_7.pdf.

[2] Energy Information Administration, Monthly Energy Review, Table 7.2a, http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/mer/pdf/pages/sec7_5.pdf

[3] Capacity found at http://www.awea.org/newsroom/releases/wind_energy_growth2008_27Jan09.html; generation at Energy Information Administration, Monthly Energy Review, http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/mer/pdf/pages/sec7_5.pdf.

[5] Energy Information Administration, Annual Energy Outlook 2009, Reference Case Tables A8 and A16, http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/aeo/index.html .

[6] DOE, EERE, “20% Wind Energy by 2030”, July 2008, http://www1.eere.energy.gov/windandhydro/pdfs/41869.pdf

[7] “U.S. DOE Report “20% Wind Energy by 2030” Presents Implausible Scenario,” http://www.windaction.org/releases/16239 .

[8] Glenn R. Schleede, “False Claims about homes served by electricity from wind”, February 4, 2009.

[9]Electricity Reliability Council of Texas, http://www.ercot.com/news/presentations/2006/RenewablesTransmissi.pdf

[10] Edison Electric Institute, Actual and Planned Transmission Investment by Shareholder-Owned Utilities, 2000-2009. http://www.eei.org/common/images/industry_issues/Energy_Data_Alert/bar_Transmission_Investment.jpg.

[11] Energy Information Administration, Federal Financial Interventions and Subsidies in Energy Markets 2007, http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/servicerpt/subsidy2/pdf/chap5.pdf, Table 35

[12] Energy Information Administration, Assumptions to the Annual Energy Outlook 2008, page 160, http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/aeo/assumption/pdf/renewable.pdf

[13] General Accounting Office, Federal Electricity Subsidies, Oct. 2007, page 21, http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d08102.pdf

[14] Energy Information Administration, Annual Energy Review 2007, page 62, http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/aer/pdf/pages/secnote2.pdf .

[15] Annual Energy Outlook 2009, Legislation and Regulations, Table 3, http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/aeo/pdf/leg_reg.pdf.

[16] “A National Renewable Portfolio Standard: Politically Correct, Economically Suspect,” Robert J. Michaels, April 2008 Electricity Journal.

[17] Energy Information Administration, Federal Financial Interventions and Subsidies in Energy Markets 2007, http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/servicerpt/subsidy2/index.html; Energy Information Administration, Annual Energy Outlook 2009, Legislation and Regulations, http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/aeo/pdf/leg_reg.pdf; and E&ENews, Wind Power: Industry boosters still blustery, even in a recession, April 13, 2009, http://www.eenews.net/eenewspm/2009/04/13.

[18] Energy Information Administration, Assumptions to the Annual Energy Outlook 2009, Table 8.2, http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/aeo/assumption/index.html.

[19] American Council for Capital Formation/National Association of Manufacturers Study of the Economic Impact of the Lieberman-Warner Climate Security Act, http://www.accf.org/nam.html .

[20] Email from C. Namovicz, Energy Information Administration, to M. Hutzler, Institute for Energy Research, April 29, 2009.

[21] U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy, Annual Report on U.S. Wind Power Installation, Cost, and Performance Trends: 2007, http://www.eere.energy.gov/windandhydro/windpoweringamerica/pdfs/2007_annual_wind_market_report.pdf.

[22] Karen Palmer and Dallas Burtraw, ”Cost-effectiveness of Renewable Energy Policies,” RFF DP 05-01, January 2005, http://www.rff.org/rff/Documents/RFF-DP-05-01.pdf .

[23] “Evidence to the House of Lords Economic Affairs Committee Inquiry into ‘The Economics of Renewable Energy’,” Memorandum by Dr. Phillip Bratby, May 15, 2008, http://www.parliament.uk/parliamentary_committees/lords_economic_affairs/eaffwrevid.cfm.

[24] http://www.awea.org/newsroom/releases/wind_energy_growth2008_27Jan09.html

[25] http://www.awea.org/newsroom/releases/wind_energy_growth2008_27Jan09.html

[26] http://www.pewclimate.org/node/1303

[27] Energy Information Administration, http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/epa/epa_sprdshts.html.

[28] Issues Associated with Renewable Energy in Texas, Informal White Paper for the Texas Legislature, Mar. 28, 2005, page 7, at http://www.ercot.com/news/presentations/2006/RenewablesTransmissi.pdf

[29] Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT) press release (May 16, 2008), “ERCOT Expects Adequate Power Supplies for Summer,” http://www.ercot.com/news/press_releases/2008/nr-5-16-08 .

[30] Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT), http://www.ercot.com/meetings/board/keydocs/2008/B0415/Item_6_-_CREZ_Transmission_Report_to_PUC_-_Woodfin_Bojorquez.pdf

[32] California Energy Commission, Intermittency Analysis Project: Summary of Final Results, CEC 500-2007-081 (2007) at 26. http://www.energy.ca.gov/2007publications/CEC-500-2007-081/CEC-500-2007-081.PDF.

[33] http://www.awea.org/newsroom/releases/wind_energy_growth2008_27Jan09.html

[34] Energy Information Administration, http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/epa/epa_sprdshts.html

[35] http://www.awea.org/newsroom/releases/wind_energy_growth2008_27Jan09.html

[36] The Lightbucket, The Capacity Factor of Wind, March 13, 2008, http://lightbucket.wordpress.com/2008/03/13/the-capacity-factor-of-wind-power/. Data are tabulated from a number of sources.

[37] http://www.aweo.org/ProblemWithWind.html

[i] The Brattle Group, “Transforming America’s Power Industry: The Investment Challenge 2010-2030, November 2008, www.thebrattlegroup.org/_documents/UploadLibrary/Upload726.pdf

[ii] Greenwire, Electricity: “Will Americans learn to love the ‘smart grid’?”, www.eenews.net/Greenwire/2009/02/27/archive/1?terms=smart+grid+cost

[iii] ClimateWire, “Renewable Energy: Pricey ‘supergrid’ seen as key to offshore wind power in Europe”, 2/9/09, www.eenews.net/climatewire/2009/02/09/1

[iv] The Wall Street Journal, “New Grid for Renewable Energy Could Be Costly”, 2/9/09, http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123414242155761829.html

[v] Texas Public Policy Foundation, “Texas Wind Energy: Past, present, and Future”, October 2008, http://www.texaspolicy.com/pdf/2008-09-RR10-WindEnergy-dt-new.pdf

[vi] California Public Utilities Commission, “2007 Resource Adequacy Report”, April 15, 2008, http://docs.cpuc.ca.gov/word_pdf/REPORT/81717.pdf .

[vii] Global Wind Energy Council, http://www.gwec.net/index.php?id=13

[viii] Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development/ International Energy Agency, October 1, 2008, http://www.iea.org/textbase/work/2008/neet_russia/Weis_Taylor.pdf

[ix]Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development/ International Energy Agency, 2008, World Energy Outlook

[x] Global Wind Energy Council, Global Wind 2008 Report, http://www.gwec.net/fileadmin/documents/Global%20Wind%202008%20Report.pdf

[xi] Global Wind Energy Council, Global Wind 2008 Report, http://www.gwec.net/fileadmin/documents/Global%20Wind%202008%20Report.pdf

[xii] The Guardian, March 21, 2009, http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/mar/21/renewable-energy

[xiii] “Windmills flap helplessly as coal remains king”, February 18, 2009, http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/natural_resources/article5 755210.ece

[xiv] Global Wind Energy Council, Global Wind 2008 Report, http://www.gwec.net/fileadmin/documents/Global%20Wind%202008%20Report.pdf

[xv] Study of the effects on employment of public aid to renewable energy sources, Universidad Rey Juan Carlos, March 2009, http://www.juandemariana.org/pdf/090327-employment-public-aid-renewable.pdf .

Comments are closed.

LATEST POSTS

SIGN UP FOR IER EMAIL UPDATES

Email Address*
First Name
Last Name
Zip Code
 
 

CATEGORIES

ANWR (17)
Biofuel (8)
Blog (131)
Cap and Trade (40)
Carbon Tax (7)
Climate Change (37)
CO2 Emissions Regulation (53)
Coal (26)
Electricity Issues (24)
Energy Independence (28)
Facts On Energy (8)
Geothermal (6)
Green Jobs (33)
Low Carbon Fuel Standards (5)
Miscellaneous Regulation (14)
Nuclear (19)
OCS (72)
Oil and Natural Gas (111)
Oil Shale (15)
Press Releases (135)
Renewables (5)
Solar (24)
Speculation (4)
Stimulus Plan (23)
Studies (39)
Uncategorized (3)
Wind (24)

WP Cumulus Flash tag cloud by Roy Tanck requires Flash Player 9 or better.


FAN US ON FACEBOOK!

The Institute for Energy Research on Facebook

IER'S TWEETS