NREL is a national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy

Office of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy

Operated by the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy

Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

Contract No. DE-AC36-08GO28308

U.S. Department of Energy 

Regional Resource Centers 

Report: State of the Wind 

Industry in the Regions

Ruth Baranowski, Frank Oteri, 

Ian Baring-Gould, and Suzanne Tegen 

National Renewable Energy Laboratory

Technical Report

NREL/TP-5000-62942

March 2016
NREL is a national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy

Office of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy

Operated by the Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy

Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

Contract No. DE-AC36-08GO28308

National Renewable Energy Laboratory

15013 Denver West Parkway

Golden, CO 80401

303-275-3000 • www.nrel.gov

U.S. Department of Energy 

Regional Resource Centers 

Report: State of the Wind 

Industry in the Regions

Ruth Baranowski, Frank Oteri, 

Ian Baring-Gould, and Suzanne Tegen 

National Renewable Energy Laboratory

Prepared under Task No. WE14.BB01

Technical Report

NREL/TP-5000-62942

March 2016
NOTICE

This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States government. 

Neither the United States government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, 

express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of 

any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately 

owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, 

trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, 

or favoring by the United States government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors 

expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States government or any agency thereof.

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy

Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

Available electronically at SciTech Connect http:/www.osti.gov/scitech

Available for a processing fee to U.S. Department of Energy

and its contractors, in paper, from:

U.S. Department of Energy

Office of Scientific and Technical Information

P.O. Box 62

Oak Ridge, TN 37831-0062

OSTI http://www.osti.gov

Phone: 865.576.8401

Fax: 865.576.5728

Email: reports@osti.gov

Available for sale to the public, in paper, from:

U.S. Department of Commerce

National Technical Information Service

5301 Shawnee Road

Alexandria, VA 22312

NTIS http://www.ntis.gov

Phone: 800.553.6847 or 703.605.6000

Fax: 703.605.6900

Email: orders@ntis.gov

Cover Photos by Dennis Schroeder: (left to right) NREL 26173, NREL 18302, NREL 19758, NREL 29642, NREL 19795.

NREL prints on paper that contains recycled content.
iii

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

Acknowledgments

The authors wish to thank the U.S. Department of Energy Wind and Water Power Technologies 

Office for funding the Regional Resource Centers, this report, and broader stakeholder 

engagement and education efforts, including the WINDExchange initiative. Thanks also to 

Patrick Gilman, Maggie Yancey, and Amber Passmore for their leadership and support.

Thanks to the Regional Resource Centers for their work and contributions to this document:

• Four Corners Wind Resource Center: Sarah Cottrell Propst, Meghan Dutton, Rebecca 

Nelson, Amanda Ormond, Karin Wadsack, Sarah Wright

• Islanded Grid Resource Center: Suzanne MacDonald, Stephanie Nowers, Chris Rose, 

Brooks Winner

• Midwest Wind Energy Center: Lisa Daniels, Karen Majewicz, Tom Wind

• Northeast Wind Resource Center: Maria Blais Costello, Deborah Donovan, Warren 

Leon, Val Stori, Anthony Vargo, Paul Williamson

• Northwest Wind Resource and Action Center: Mia Devine, Jennifer Grove, Julie 

Peacock, Rachel Shimshak, David Wolf

• Southeast Wind Energy Resource Center: Jen Banks, Mary Hallisey Hunt, Katharine 

Kollins, Jon Miles.

Thanks to individuals from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory who reviewed the report 

(Dave Corbus and Brian Smith), provided input (Robi Robichaud), and work behind the scenes 

to support the Regional Resource Centers project and its many aspects (Corrie Christol and Julie 

Jones).

The authors also wish to thank the following individuals and organizations for their contributions 

to this report: Bruce Burcat, Mid-Atlantic Renewable Energy Coalition; Mike Kostrzewa, 

Colorado State University; Kylah McNabb, Oklahoma Department of Commerce; Ruth Douglas 

Miller, Kansas State University; Dan McGuire, McGuire Consulting; Nancy Rader, CalWEA; 

Remy Pangle, James Madison University; Susan Stewart, Pennsylvania State University; Rich 

Stromberg, Alaska Energy Authority; Brent Summerville, Appalachian State University; Heather 

Thomson, Mid-Atlantic Renewable Energy Coalition; and Michael Twedt, South Dakota State 

University.
iv

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

List of Abbreviations and Acronyms

4CWRC Four Corners Wind Resource Center

BOEM Bureau of Ocean Energy Management

CNMI Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands 

CREP Community Renewable Energy Project 

DOE U.S. Department of Energy

MW megawatt

MWEC Midwest Wind Energy Center

NREL National Renewable Energy Laboratory

NWRC Northeast Wind Resource Center

PURPA Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act

RPS renewable portfolio standard

RRC Regional Resource Center

SWERC Southeast Wind Energy Resource Center
v

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

Executive Summary

Significant expansion of wind energy deployment will be required to achieve the President's goal 

of doubling renewable energy production in the United States by 2020. Wind energy currently 

provides more than 4% of the nation's electricity but has the potential to provide much more. In 

2014, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) established six wind Regional Resource Centers

(RRCs) to provide information about wind energy, focusing on regional qualities. 

The wind industry and DOE are addressing technical challenges to increasing wind energy's 

contribution to the national grid (such as reducing turbine costs and increasing energy production 

and reliability), and they recognize that public acceptance issues can be challenges for wind 

energy deployment. Wind project development decisions are best made using unbiased 

information about the benefits and impacts of wind energy. Well-informed decision-makers and 

communities are better prepared to navigate the sometimes contentious development process, 

maximizing the benefits experienced while reducing potentially negative impacts when 

deploying wind in their regions. Expanding the nation’s wind energy portfolio requires highimpact, regionally specific strategies to inform the policy and permitting processes and improve 

public discourse, thereby reducing conflict around deployment decisions and ultimately 

increasing the annual rate of wind deployment.

This document summarizes the status and drivers for U.S. wind energy development on regional 

and state levels. It is intended to be a companion to DOE’s 2014 Distributed Wind Market 

Report (U.S. DOE 2015a), 2014 Wind Technologies Market Report (U.S. DOE 2015b), and 2014 

Offshore Wind Market and Economic Analysis (Navigant 2014) that provide assessments of the 

national wind markets for each of these technologies. Figure ES.1 shows the installed capacity of 

wind energy in the United States as of December 2015.

The RRCs have identified a wide array of market challenges that continue to hinder wider-scale 

deployments of wind technologies. Highlighted by region in the following sections, these issues 

include:

• Insufficient transmission capacity and the need for transmission improvements

• Energy market modifications (such as more liquid bilateral markets for integration resources, 

15-minute scheduling, and development of regional energy imbalance markets)

• Lack of local wind siting or zoning ordinances; ordinances that do not reflect best practices

or do not allow the flexibility in wind development to address small, distributed, community, 

or utility-scale wind projects

• Integration challenges and costs 

• Lack of clear federal policy

• Need for public education and engagement of wind siting issues, exacerbated by 

misinformation and negative public opinion regarding wind energy
vi

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

• Poor understanding of wind energy’s economic impacts, including local tax benefits, jobs 

and economic development, and turbine manufacturing

• State and regional competition

• Challenges with development on federal and native lands

• Need to advance the state-of-the-art in power sector resource planning processes, ensuring 

that accurate wind information is utilized in utility integrated resource and state-based clean 

energy planning

• Need for science-based resource planning in siting guidelines, especially for development in 

sage grouse and other environmentally sensitive areas

• Restricted access to capital; limited financing, funding, and technical assistance for 

small/community/distributed wind development

Figure ES-1. Installed wind capacity in the United States as of December 2015

• The high costs of offshore wind energy, lack of independent information and outreach geared 

toward innovative regional procurement targets, attracting financing, alternative financing 

mechanisms, and regional supply chain development 
vii

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

• Complexity of the offshore wind regulatory process; addressing technical issues related to 

installation, interconnection, and operation; researching and mitigating environmental 

impacts; interacting with other human uses; and public acceptance of offshore wind

• The fact that there are no full-scale offshore wind turbines currently deployed in the United 

States, leading to an inability to build credibility around the market opportunity.

Focused primarily on isolated, islanded power systems in Alaska, coastal New England, and the 

Territories of the United States, the Islanded Grid Resource Center identified additional distinct 

challenges unique to their situation. The primary development challenge in their region: the upfront cost of deploying a sophisticated wind-diesel system in an isolated, remote, or islanded area 

with relatively low technical and human capacity. Since most of these islanded power grids are 

located a distance away from the road system, transportation and mobilization costs are much 

higher than they are for communities in other regions on the road system. Besides transportation 

and mobilization, another challenging cost driver is scale. 

There are several wind energy development challenges for large islanded grids in the Railbelt 

transmission system1 in Alaska. They include the region’s heavy dependence on natural gas-fired 

power; the risk-adverse nature of the six utilities serving the region, which prevents them from 

accepting wind energy; a relatively weak, inflexible grid that makes it more difficult to integrate 

wind power; lack of clear regulatory policy that defines the rules of engagement between those 

utilities and independent power producers that wish to develop wind; lack of a universal 

transmission tariff; lack of any regional generation and transmission planning; and lack of any 

regional transmission organization or independent system operator.

In general the goal of the RRCs is to make it easier for stakeholders and decision-makers to 

decide whether responsible and appropriate wind project development is right for their 

communities by producing relevant, actionable, and fact-based information and to deliver that 

information in useful forms to those who need it when they need it. 

In their first year, the DOE’s RRCs have had a tremendous impact on key stakeholders, engaging 

them in wind power issues in their communities and regions. The RRCs reported more than 

22,000 touches with key stakeholders and have positively “engaged” more than 12,600 people, 

moving them toward wind power acceptance as a viable option to address the nation’s long-term 

energy needs. Engagements were typically made through events such as meetings with identified 

stakeholders, interactive webinars, workshops, tours, and presentations at topical regional 

conferences. Additional efforts were undertaken through outreach products such as handouts, 

meeting materials, and newsletters, while direct engagement with regional media organizations 

was also supported. In total, more than 1.2 million people were identified as being reached by 

RRC outreach efforts. More targeted efforts ensured that key stakeholders received information 

that allowed them to include wind technology in plans or policies that had either not included 

wind or that included outdated wind information.

In addition to outreach activities to provide science-based information to key stakeholders, 

several RRC projects are underway that may help support expanded wind development. These 

include: 

 1 A small, isolated transmission system in Alaska that covers the state’s population centers along the main railroad 

line, including the Seward, the Kenai, Anchorage, Wasilla, and north to Fairbanks.
viii

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

• The Northeast Wind Resource Center developed web-based information resources and a 

set of evaluation criteria that can be applied to information resources so that stakeholders 

can discern their suitability for decision-making or journalistic coverage. 

• The Northwest Wind Resource and Action Center developed a Distributed Wind Siting 

Toolkit that provides guidance to local decision makers about developing smart siting and 

zoning regulations.

• The Island Institute, as part of the Islanded Grid Resource Center, produced a community 

engagement handbook for offshore wind development.

The overall wind industry experienced record growth in 2015, rivaling the highest deployment 

levels of previous years. Congress recently approved 5-year extensions of the Production Tax 

Credit and Investment Tax Credit, which will undoubtedly spur further wind project 

developments. However, uncertainty lingers around the lack of stable policy for distributed wind 

technologies, as well as consistent approaches around the implementation of the federal Clean 

Power Plan, the wider role of energy in addressing climate change impacts, state renewable 

portfolio standards, net metering, and other state-based incentives. These uncertain policies are 

among other challenges that the RRCs continue to address.
ix

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

Table of Contents

Acknowledgments ____________________________________________________________ iii

List of Abbreviations and Acronyms ______________________________________________ iv

Executive Summary ___________________________________________________________ v

1 Introduction______________________________________________________________ 1

2 Four Corners Wind Resource Center___________________________________________ 3

2.1 Renewable Portfolio Standards _________________________________________________ 3

2.2 Workforce Development_______________________________________________________ 4

2.3 Manufacturing _______________________________________________________________ 5

2.4 Key Stakeholder Groups and Deployment Challenges _______________________________ 6

2.5 Collaborating Organizations ____________________________________________________ 6

2.6 State Updates _______________________________________________________________ 7

2.6.1 Arizona ___________________________________________________________________________ 7

2.6.2 Colorado__________________________________________________________________________ 7

2.6.3 New Mexico _______________________________________________________________________ 8

2.6.4 Nevada ___________________________________________________________________________ 9

2.6.5 Utah _____________________________________________________________________________ 9

3 Islanded Grid Resource Center ______________________________________________ 11

3.1 Renewable Portfolio Standards ________________________________________________ 12

3.2 Workforce Development______________________________________________________ 12

3.3 Manufacturing ______________________________________________________________ 13

3.4 Key Stakeholder Groups and Deployment Challenges ______________________________ 13

3.5 Collaborating Organizations ___________________________________________________ 15

3.6 State and Territory Updates ___________________________________________________ 15

3.6.1 Alaska___________________________________________________________________________ 15

3.6.2 American Samoa __________________________________________________________________ 16

3.6.3 Hawaii __________________________________________________________________________ 17

3.6.4 Guam ___________________________________________________________________________ 17

3.6.5 Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands ________________________________________ 17

3.6.6 Maine and Other Northeast Island Communities _________________________________________ 18

3.6.7 U.S. Virgin Islands__________________________________________________________________ 18

4 Midwest Wind Energy Center_______________________________________________ 19

4.1 Renewable Portfolio Standards ________________________________________________ 20
x

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

4.2 Workforce Development______________________________________________________ 21

4.3 Manufacturing ______________________________________________________________ 22

4.4 Key Stakeholder Groups and Deployment Challenges ______________________________ 24

4.5 Collaborating Organizations ___________________________________________________ 25

4.6 State Updates ______________________________________________________________ 26

4.6.1 Illinois ___________________________________________________________________________ 26

4.6.2 Indiana __________________________________________________________________________ 26

4.6.3 Iowa ____________________________________________________________________________ 26

4.6.4 Michigan ________________________________________________________________________ 27

4.6.5 Minnesota _______________________________________________________________________ 27

4.6.6 Missouri _________________________________________________________________________ 28

4.6.7 North Dakota _____________________________________________________________________ 28

4.6.8 Ohio ____________________________________________________________________________ 28

4.6.9 South Dakota _____________________________________________________________________ 29

4.6.10 Wisconsin _____________________________________________________________________ 29

5 Northeast Wind Resource Center ____________________________________________ 30

5.1 Renewable Portfolio Standards ________________________________________________ 31

5.2 Workforce Development______________________________________________________ 32

5.3 Manufacturing ______________________________________________________________ 33

5.4 Key Stakeholder Groups and Deployment Challenges ______________________________ 33

5.5 Collaborating Organizations ___________________________________________________ 34

5.6 State Updates ______________________________________________________________ 35

5.6.1 Connecticut ______________________________________________________________________ 35

5.6.2 Maine ___________________________________________________________________________ 35

5.6.3 Massachusetts ____________________________________________________________________ 35

5.6.4 New Hampshire ___________________________________________________________________ 36

5.6.5 New Jersey _______________________________________________________________________ 36

5.6.6 New York ________________________________________________________________________ 37

5.6.7 Pennsylvania _____________________________________________________________________ 37

5.6.8 Rhode Island _____________________________________________________________________ 38

5.6.9 Vermont _________________________________________________________________________ 38

6 Northwest Wind Resource and Action Center __________________________________ 39

6.1 Renewable Portfolio Standards ________________________________________________ 39

6.2 Workforce Development______________________________________________________ 41

6.3 Manufacturing ______________________________________________________________ 41

6.4 Key Stakeholder Groups and Deployment Challenges ______________________________ 42

6.5 Collaborating Organizations ___________________________________________________ 43
xi

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

6.6 State Updates ______________________________________________________________ 43

6.6.1 Idaho ___________________________________________________________________________ 43

6.6.2 Montana_________________________________________________________________________ 45

6.6.3 Oregon __________________________________________________________________________ 46

6.6.4 Washington ______________________________________________________________________ 47

6.6.5 Wyoming ________________________________________________________________________ 48

7 Southeast Wind Energy Resource Center______________________________________ 49

7.1 Renewable Portfolio Standards ________________________________________________ 50

7.2 Workforce Development______________________________________________________ 50

7.3 Manufacturing ______________________________________________________________ 51

7.4 Key Stakeholder Groups and Deployment Challenges ______________________________ 51

7.5 Collaborating Organizations ___________________________________________________ 53

7.6 State Updates ______________________________________________________________ 55

7.6.1 Alabama _________________________________________________________________________ 55

7.6.2 Arkansas_________________________________________________________________________ 55

7.6.3 Florida __________________________________________________________________________ 55

7.6.4 Georgia__________________________________________________________________________ 56

7.6.5 Kentucky_________________________________________________________________________ 56

7.6.6 Louisiana ________________________________________________________________________ 56

7.6.7 Mississippi _______________________________________________________________________ 56

7.6.8 North Carolina ____________________________________________________________________ 56

7.6.9 South Carolina ____________________________________________________________________ 57

7.6.10 Tennessee _____________________________________________________________________ 58

7.6.11 Virginia________________________________________________________________________ 58

8 Updates for States Outside of RRC Regions____________________________________ 59

8.1 California __________________________________________________________________ 59

8.2 Delaware __________________________________________________________________ 61

8.3 Kansas ____________________________________________________________________ 61

8.4 Maryland __________________________________________________________________ 63

8.5 Nebraska __________________________________________________________________ 64

8.6 Oklahoma__________________________________________________________________ 66

8.7 Texas______________________________________________________________________ 67

8.8 West Virginia _______________________________________________________________ 69

9 References ______________________________________________________________ 71
xii

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

Table of Figures

Figure ES-1. Installed wind capacity in the United States as of December 2015 ........................................ vi

Figure 1. Map of Regional Resource Centers................................................................................................ 1

Figure 2. Map of school wind turbine projects, educational programs, and locations with both wind 

turbines and educational programs within the Four Corners Wind Resource Center’s area................5

Figure 3. Wind resource at 80 meters overlaid with federal lands ............................................................ 10

Figure 4. Map of school wind turbine projects, educational programs, and locations with both wind 

turbines and educational programs within the Islanded Grid Resource Center’s area .......................13

Figure 5. Island Institute team members met with Maine island residents to discuss energy development 

options for islanded communities. Photo courtesy of Islanded Grid Resource Center.......................14

Figure 6. MWEC footprint and average wind speeds at 80 meters............................................................ 19

Figure 7. Map of school wind turbine projects, educational programs, and locations with both wind 

turbines and educational programs within the Midwest Wind Energy Center’s area.........................21

Figure 8. Map of school wind turbine projects, educational programs, and locations with both wind 

turbines and educational programs within the Northeast Wind Resource Center’s area...................32

Figure 9. Map of school wind turbine projects, educational programs, and locations with both wind 

turbines and educational programs within the Northwest Wind Resource and Action Center’s area41

Figure 10. Map of school wind turbine projects, educational programs, and locations with both wind 

turbines and educational programs within the Southeast Wind Energy Resource Center’s area.......50

Figure 11. Map of school wind turbine projects, educational programs, and locations with both wind 

turbines and educational programs in California................................................................................. 60

Figure 12. Map of sole educational program location in Delaware ........................................................... 61

Figure 13. Map of school wind turbine projects, educational programs, and locations with both wind 

turbines and educational programs in Kansas..................................................................................... 62

Figure 14. Map of school wind turbine projects, educational programs, and locations with both wind 

turbines and educational programs in Maryland................................................................................. 64

Figure 15. Map of school wind turbine projects, educational programs, and locations with both wind 

turbines and educational programs in Nebraska ................................................................................. 65

Figure 16. Map of school wind educational programs in Oklahoma.......................................................... 67

Figure 17. Map of school wind turbine projects, educational programs, and locations with both wind 

turbines and educational programs in Texas....................................................................................... 68

Figure 18. Map of sole school wind educational program in West Virginia ...............................................70
xiii

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

Table of Tables

Table 1. Key Statistics for the Four Corners Wind Resource Center Region................................................. 4

Table 2. RPS Overview for Four Corners Wind Resource Center States....................................................... 4

Table 3. Wind-Related Manufacturing Overview for Four Corners Wind Resource Center States..............5

Table 4. Key Statistics for the Islanded Grid Resource Center Region........................................................ 11

Table 5. RPS Overview for Islanded Grid Resource Center States and Territories.....................................12

Table 6. Key Statistics for the Midwest Wind Energy Center Region ......................................................... 20

Table 7. RPS Overview for Midwest Wind Energy Center States................................................................ 21

Table 8. Wind-Related Manufacturing Overview for Midwest Wind Energy Center States ......................22

Table 9. Key Statistics for the Northeast Wind Resource Center Region ................................................... 31

Table 10. RPS Overview for Northeast Wind Resource Center States........................................................ 32

Table 11. Wind-Related Manufacturing Overview for Northeast Wind Resource Center States ..............33

Table 12. Key Statistics for the Northwest Wind Resource and Action Center Region..............................39

Table 13. RPS Overview for Northwest Wind Resource and Action Center States ....................................40

Table 14. Wind-Related Manufacturing Overview for Northwest Wind Resource and Action Center

States.................................................................................................................................................... 41

Table 15. Key Statistics for the Southeast Wind Energy Resource Center Region .....................................49

Table 16. RPS Overview for Southeast Wind Resource Center States........................................................ 50

Table 17. Wind-Related Manufacturing Overview for Southeast Wind Energy Resource Center States ..51

Table 18. California Wind-Related Manufacturing Overview..................................................................... 60

Table 19. Kansas Wind-Related Manufacturing Overview ......................................................................... 63

Table 20. Maryland Wind-Related Manufacturing Overview..................................................................... 64

Table 21. Oklahoma Wind-Related Manufacturing Overview.................................................................... 67

Table 22. Texas Wind-Related Manufacturing Overview ........................................................................... 69
1

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

1 Introduction

Significant expansion of wind energy deployment will be required to achieve the Obama 

Administration’s goal of doubling renewable energy production in the United States by 2020. 

Additionally, the 5-year extension of the federal Production Tax Credit (PTC) and potential early 

impacts of the state-based responses to the Clean Power Plan also point to robust wind 

development through the rest of the decade. Wind energy currently provides more than 4% of the 

nation's electricity but has the potential to provide much more (U.S. DOE 2015d). Increasing the 

country's electricity percentage from wind power means cleaner energy, leading to cleaner air 

and water for the nation, lower energy costs over the long term, and reduced water usage in the 

power sector. 

The wind industry and the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Wind and Water Power 

Technologies Office are addressing technical challenges to increasing wind energy's contribution 

to the national grid (such as reducing turbine costs and increasing energy production and 

reliability), and they recognize that public acceptance issues (i.e., wind farm opposition) are 

barriers to wind energy deployment. Wind energy is a rapidly evolving technology that can play 

an important role in the U.S. energy generation mix, and credible information about it and the 

diversity of its possible applications should be communicated to a variety of stakeholders. In 

2014, DOE established six Regional Resource Centers (RRCs) to fill this role, providing 

information to familiarize the public with wind energy, raising awareness about potential 

benefits and issues, and disseminating data on siting considerations such as turbine sound and 

wildlife habitat protection. 

Figure 1. Map of Regional Resource Centers
2

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

The goal of the DOE RRC project is to make it easier for stakeholders and decision-makers to 

decide whether responsible and appropriate wind project development is right for their 

communities by:

• Producing relevant, actionable, and fact-based information

• Delivering that information in useful forms to those who need it when they need it.

The RRCs are as follows (in alphabetical order here and in the report sections):

• Four Corners Wind Resource Center, serving Arizona, Colorado, New Mexico, Utah, 

Nevada, and part of Wyoming 

• Islanded Grid Resource Center, serving Alaska, Maine, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, 

Hawaii, Guam, American Samoa, Commonwealth of Northern Marianas, and U.S. Virgin

Islands

• Midwest Wind Energy Center, serving eastern Montana and Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, 

Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, North Dakota, Ohio, South Dakota, and Wisconsin

• Northeast Wind Resource Center, serving New England (Connecticut, Maine, 

Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, and Vermont) and New York for land-based 

wind, and that same region plus New Jersey for offshore wind

• Northwest Wind Resource and Action Center, serving Washington, Oregon, Idaho, 

western Montana, and part of Wyoming

• Southeast Wind Energy Resource Center, serving North Carolina, Florida, Louisiana, 

South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, Virginia, Kentucky, Tennessee, and 

Arkansas. 

Each RRC applies a unique regional context to identify key stakeholders in the area. 

Stakeholders may include, for example, county commissioners, state legislators, landowners, 

tribal authorities, and organizations such as utilities, schools, and non-profit agencies. During 

their first year of operations, the RRCs reached more than 22,000 key stakeholders and 

documented that 12,600 of these stakeholders took actions, demonstrating a wider acceptance of 

wind technology deployment. 

This “state of the regions” report provides an overview of each RRC region, describing the 

regional and state markets for wind development, impact of the current policy environment, and 

updates on the progress to inject credible information into regional discussions and activities to 

mitigate the use of biased or misleading information, allowing fair consideration of projects in 

areas where wind projects could be built. 

The role of this document is to summarize the status and drivers for U.S. wind energy 

development on regional and state levels. This document is intended to be a companion to the 

Energy Department’s 2014 Distributed Wind Market Report (U.S. DOE 2015a), 2014 Wind 

Technologies Market Report (U.S. DOE 2015b), and 2014 Offshore Wind Market and Economic 

Analysis (Navigant 2014) that provide assessments of the national wind markets for each of these 

technologies.
3

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

2 Four Corners Wind Resource Center

The Four Corners Wind Resource Center worked with National Renewable Energy Laboratory 

(NREL) researchers to provide the following assessment of the state of the wind industry in this 

region.

The Four Corners Wind Resource Center (4CWRC)

2 is managed by Utah Clean Energy in 

partnership with Interwest Energy Alliance and Northern Arizona University. The RRC targets

wind energy stakeholders in Arizona, Colorado, Nevada, New Mexico, Utah, and Wyoming. 

Collaborating in this region allows the 4CWRC to leverage the experience of states with more 

historic wind deployment experience, like Colorado, Wyoming, and New Mexico, to inform 

stakeholders and expand markets in Utah, Nevada, and Arizona, including tribal lands. 

Additionally, the commonalities among the states enable a centralized approach to addressing 

wind barriers that further leverages resources and efforts within the region. For example, as the 

region experiences increasing droughts and water shortages, both of which are exacerbated by 

changes in climate, these arid Southwest states share an interest in water conservation and waterwise energy resources. 

Similarly, air quality and haze issues relating to the region’s fossil fuel-intensive energy mix is 

an increasingly critical issue for the states in the region. In light of emerging federal regulations 

on greenhouse gas emissions from power plants, reducing the carbon intensity of the Western 

generation mix is increasingly pertinent. As such, the RRC’s collaborative efforts focus on 

promoting the water-saving, air quality, and emissions mitigation benefits of wind energy along 

with the ripe opportunities this resource provides to meet the West’s growing energy needs. 

Furthermore, coordination and engagement on relevant Western regional transmission, 

integration, and interconnection issues, including the implementation of an energy imbalance 

market,3 support regional and national efforts to address key barriers to expanding wind power in 

the Western market. 

The following section provides an overview of the wind industry in the 4CWRC region. 

2.1 Renewable Portfolio Standards 

Two of the states in the 4CWRC region have a renewable portfolio standard (RPS) targeting 

2020 (Colorado and New Mexico), two have an RPS targeting 2025 (Arizona and Nevada), and 

Utah has a renewable portfolio goal instead of a standard (Table 1). Wyoming does not currently 

have an RPS. 

Several pieces of legislation to reduce or otherwise roll back the Colorado and New Mexico 

RPSs were introduced during the 2015 legislative sessions but did not pass. In New Mexico, the 

state’s House of Representatives voted in favor of reducing the 20% by 2020 renewable energy 

requirement (Montoya Bryan 2015). The effort stalled as the Senate’s Conservation Committee 

voted to keep the bill from advancing to a full Senate vote (KOB4 2015).

 2 http://www.fourcornerswind.org/

3 An energy imbalance market is a means of supplying and dispatching electricity to balance fluctuations in 

generation and load. It aggregates the variability of generation and load over multiple balancing authority areas.
4

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

Colorado’s Senate Bill 44 intended to halve the state’s 30% by 2020 renewable requirement for 

large utilities while reducing the standard for rural electricity associations from 20% to 15%

starting in 2020. The state’s House of Representatives voted down the effort (Bunch 2015). The 

constitutionality of the state’s RPS was also upheld in the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals, ending 

litigation that began in 2011 (Proctor 2015).

Table 1. Key Statistics for the Four Corners Wind Resource Center Region

AZ CO NM NV UT WY

Installed Wind, 2015 (MW)4

268 2,992 1,080 152 327 1,410

Percentage of Energy 

Supplied by Wind Projects

(2014)

5 0.4% 13.6% 7.0% 0.8% 1.5% 8.9%

Projected Potential Capacity 

(MW), 80 m, 30% CF 10,904 387,220 492,083 7,247 13,103 552,072

Projected Potential Capacity 

(MW), 100 m, 30% CF 25,791 429,456 568,112 12,034 26,237 593,769

Contribution from Distributed 

Wind Projects, 2014 (MW)6 3.33 28.8 36.6 12.3 1 5.9

Table 2. RPS Overview for Four Corners Wind Resource Center States

RPS

Arizona 15% by 2025

Colorado

30% by 2020 (investor-owned utilities) 

20% by 2020 (co-ops serving 100,000 or more meters)

10% by 2020 (co-ops serving fewer than 100,000 meters and 

municipal utilities serving 40,000 or more customers)

Nevada 25% by 2025

New Mexico

20% x 2020 (investor-owned utilities)

10% x 2020 (electric co-ops)

Utah Goal of 20% by 2025

Wyoming None

2.2 Workforce Development 

The 4CWRC region has a strong and well developed wind energy educational infrastructure with 

colleges or universities active in all six states in the region; see each state section for specifics. 

The WINDExchange website also offers information and interactive maps regarding workforce 

development, the DOE’s Collegiate Wind Competition, the DOE’s Wind for Schools project, 

 4 2015 Year End Wind Power Capacity Map. Available at 

http://apps2.eere.energy.gov/wind/windexchange/wind_installed_capacity.asp

5 U.S. Energy Information Administration Electricity Data Browser. Available at 

http://www.eia.gov/electricity/data/browser/#/topic/0?agg=1,0,2&fuel=008&geo=0000000001jo&sec=o3g&freq=

A&start=2001&end=2014&ctype=linechart<ype=pin&rtype=s&maptype=0&rse=0&pin= 6 Distributed wind project installed capacity is defined as 2003-2014 cumulative capacity (DOE 2015a). 
5

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

school wind project locations, and locations of education and training programs in the 4CWRC 

region and other states.7

Figure 2. Map of school wind turbine projects, educational programs, and locations with both 

wind turbines and educational programs within the Four Corners Wind Resource Center’s area 

2.3 Manufacturing

NREL researchers compiled the following wind energy manufacturing data for this region as part 

of DOE’s annual wind market report effort (DOE 2015c). Nevada, New Mexico, Utah, and 

Wyoming do not have any manufacturing facilities supporting the wind industry. In Table 3, Tier 

I represents major components such as blades and towers, and Tier II components are subcomponents, such as inverters and electrical equipment, to make the Tier I equipment.

Table 3. Wind-Related Manufacturing Overview for Four Corners Wind Resource Center States

Name City State Component Tier

Power-One Phoenix AZ Power converters II

Cobham Slip Rings Prescott AZ Slip rings II

Primus Windpower Lakewood CO Distributed wind I

Vestas Windsor CO Blades I

Vestas Brighton CO Blades I

Woodward Governor Fort Collins CO Inverters II

SGB USA Wheat 

Ridge

CO Electrical II

 7 http://apps2.eere.energy.gov/wind/windexchange/schools/
6

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

Name City State Component Tier

PMC Technology Golden CO Hydraulics II

O’Neal Steel Pueblo CO Tower internals II

Aluwind Castle 

Rock

CO Tower internals II

Vestas Pueblo CO Towers I

Vestas Brighton CO Turbine (nacelle assembly) I

2.4 Key Stakeholder Groups and Deployment Challenges

The 4CWRC targets three stakeholder groups: 

• Utility regulators, commissioners, utility representatives, and staff

• State, local, and tribal decision makers and staff

• Interested members of the public.

The information provided to these stakeholder groups addresses the following wind energy 

deployment market barriers that are prevalent in this region:

• Insufficient transmission capacity that has historically hindered growth in the region

• Lack of local wind siting ordinances or ordinances that do not reflect best practices 

• Wind technology costs and outputs

• Integration challenges and costs 

• Lack of clear policy direction supporting wind 

• Misinformation and negative public opinion regarding wind energy

• Wildlife issues

• Challenges with development on federal land.

2.5 Collaborating Organizations

Organizations that have collaborated with the 4CWRC include:

• Advanced Energy Economy

• American Wind Energy Association

• Arizona Governor's Office of Energy 

Policy

• Beaver County, Utah

• Coconino County, Arizona

• Colorado Energy Office

• Colorado State University Center for the 

New Energy Economy

• Distributed Wind Energy Association

• Hopi Tribe Renewable Energy Office

• Hualapai Tribe Planning Office

• Lincoln County, Colorado

• New Mexico Renewable Energy 

Transmission Authority
7

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

• State of New Mexico Energy, Minerals 

and Natural Resources Department

• State of Utah Office of Energy 

Development

• Summit County Council

• Western Area Power Administration.

2.6 State Updates

Although the 4CWRC contributes to engagement activities in Wyoming, in this report the state’s

activities are listed in the Northwest Wind Resource and Action Center’s section.

2.6.1 Arizona

By the end of 2015, Arizona had 268 megawatts (MW) of installed wind capacity

(WINDExchange 2016). The wind industry in Arizona supplied $710,000 in annual land lease 

payments to farmers, ranchers, and other landowners (AWEA 2015a).

Wind energy development in Arizona slowed down with the fulfillment of state utility RPS 

goals; the instability of the federal Production Tax Credit; BP’s exit from renewable energy 

development; and the preference of the Hualapai Tribe, Navajo Nation, and Hopi Tribe for solar 

development over wind. Development ceased on a number of projects that were well underway 

with feasibility or pre-construction studies. These include BP’s wind project (up to 500 MW), 

Gray Mountain (500 MW) and Big Boquillas (180 MW) on the Navajo Nation, and Hualapai 

(170 MW) and Hopi (100 MW) proposed projects. In addition, developers of the Sunshine Wind 

Project permitted for 40 MW for Foresight Renewables elected not to renew the county permit. 

Resource assessment is taking place in a number of counties, but there is no indication that 

projects will be built in the near term.

The 4CWRC is working with the Hopi Tribe on resource assessment activities and tribal council 

education on wind development steps and is supporting the Hualapai Tribe in pursuing additional 

wind resource assessment. 

Arizona is also participating in the DOE Wind for Schools project; Northern Arizona University

has led the effort and the installation of 18 school systems in the state. Northern Arizona 

University also participated in the 2014 Collegiate Wind Competition and is an entrant for the 

2016 Competition.

2.6.2 Colorado

The wind industry is a thriving market in Colorado, with wind power providing nearly 14% of 

the electricity generated in the state by the end of 2014. By the end of 2015, Colorado had 2,992

MW of installed wind capacity (WINDExchange 2016). The wind industry in Colorado provided 

a total capital investment of $4.8 billion across 24 projects and more than $7.8 million in annual 

land lease payments to farmers, ranchers, and other landowners (AWEA 2015c). Communities 

benefit from a broader tax base, which helps to pay for roads, schools, and other critical public 

projects.

Colorado’s RPS has helped to spur wind development in the state. The original RPS was 

established when Colorado voters approved Amendment 37 in 2004, and the legislature has 
8

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

made several adjustments over the years. Investor-owned utilities must meet a 30% by 2020 

renewable standard. Legislation passed during the 2013 session increased the standard for 

electric co-ops serving 100,000 or more electric meters to 20% by 2020 and left the standard at 

10% by 2020 for smaller co-ops and municipal utilities. 

Recent low prices for wind power have spurred procurement over and above state RPS 

requirements. The Colorado Public Utilities Commission approved a 2011 Public Service 

Company of Colorado’s request to add 450 MW of new wind resources acquired at 

unprecedented low bid prices, finding that the wind energy would save ratepayers $231 million 

from the displacement of fuel and variable operating costs required by facilities powered by 

fossil fuels (Xcel Energy 2015). Diversifying Colorado’s energy supply with wind provides 

long-term price stability, protecting consumers when natural gas prices suddenly increase.

Like many states, barriers to increased wind development in Colorado include instability of the 

federal Production Tax Credit and transmission constraints. Public Service Company of 

Colorado is exploring the possibility of joining a regional transmission energy imbalance market, 

which could provide additional opportunities for Colorado wind. Continued low costs of wind, 

compliance with the Environmental Protection Agency’s Clean Power Plan, and Public Service 

Company of Colorado’s ongoing improvements in integration and forecasting technology present 

opportunities for more Colorado wind power. 

Colorado has been heavily engaged in wind energy education, with university programs at 

Colorado State University, University of Colorado at Boulder, and the Colorado School of 

Mines. These three educational organizations have teamed with NREL to develop the Center for 

Research and Education in Wind,8 a research center under the Colorado Renewable Energy 

Collaboratory. The Colorado School of Mines also participated in the 2014 Collegiate Wind 

Competition. Colorado also participates in the DOE’s Wind for Schools project; Colorado State 

University leads the effort with 12 school systems currently installed in the state. The Ecotech 

Institute in Aurora, Colorado, hosts an extensive wind technician training program. 

2.6.3 New Mexico

At the end of 2015, New Mexico was home to 1,080 MW of installed wind capacity

(WINDExchange 2016) with 330 MW under construction (AWEA 2015h). State utilities are on 

track to meet a 20% by 2020 RPS for investor-owned utilities and 10% by 2020 for rural electric 

co-ops. In addition to the RPS, the state’s renewable energy production tax credit (available for 

wind, solar, and biomass) has contributed to wind project development in the state. The New 

Mexico Energy, Minerals & Natural Resources Department recently commissioned an economic 

analysis of the state renewable energy production tax credit, which was published in February 

2015. The study indicated that between 2003 and 2012, the state expended $61.6 million on the 

production tax credit (of which $54.2 million was for wind projects). For these same projects and 

time period, the study estimates the total labor income impacts to New Mexico’s economy were 

$434 million and more than 9,000 jobs, with more than 80% of the impact coming from wind 

facilities. The study estimates an additional value of more than $400 million of avoided 

emissions in the state (New Mexico Energy, Minerals and Natural Resources Department 2015).

 8 http://crew.colorado.edu/
9

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

New Mexico’s relatively slow economic recovery from the global recession combined with a 

small, rural population presents challenges for finding in-state markets for new wind 

development. In addition, utilities serving New Mexico customers have frequently chosen solar 

PV in relatively small megawatt procurements for RPS compliance. New Mexico’s state utilities 

and the Public Regulation Commission have not demonstrated a willingness to consider beyondRPS renewable energy purchases.

The most significant opportunities for New Mexico wind are likely in western markets beyond 

its borders. While there are transmission constraints for exports, several major projects are 

underway, including SunZia, Southline, and Western Spirit. 

The Southwest Technology Development Institute based at New Mexico State University has a 

long history of outreach and development work focusing on distributed wind technologies.

2.6.4 Nevada

Nevada’s first (and only) utility-scale wind project, Spring Valley, came online in 2012 near Ely. 

Spring Valley is a 152-MW project with total capital investment of approximately $280 million

(AWEA 2015g). While wind developers remain interested in Nevada, wind energy developers 

face competition from the state’s strong solar and geothermal resources. However, NV Energy’s 

recent announcement that it plans to join the regional energy imbalance market could help to 

create additional opportunities for Nevada wind power throughout the region. 

The state still faces many hurdles regarding the wildlife impacts or perceived potential impacts 

associated with wind energy. Concerns include golden eagles (Brean 2015), Mexican free-tailed 

bats, and desert tortoises. These hurdles have resulted in project delays and increased measures 

to reduce impacts from Spring Valley. An additional challenge related to the expansion of wind 

energy in Nevada pertains to siting issues on or near federal lands (Emmerich 2015) (which 

comprise 81.1% of Nevada’s total acreage) (Congressional Research Service 2014). Figure 3 

shows the U.S. wind resource at 80 meters overlaid with federal land.

2.6.5 Utah

Utah has four wind projects online with a total of 327 MW of installed capacity and 144 MW 

under construction. The industry supplies nearly $1 million in annual land lease payments to 

farmers, ranchers, and other landowners (AWEA 2015o). Two of the four wind projects are 

located in Beaver County, where these projects increased the tax base from $680 to more than $3 

million, paying for a new hospital, a new elementary school, and improved road infrastructure.

Challenges to wind development in Utah include the state’s use of a voluntary renewable energy 

goal of 20% by 2025 instead of a mandatory standard, a lack of available transmission capacity, 

issues siting on or near federal lands that comprise 66.5% of Utah’s total acreage (Congressional 

Research Service 2014), lack of wind siting ordinances, developer efforts focused on solar prior 

to the scheduled reduction of the federal investment tax credit for solar, and integration 

challenges including costs. The 4CWRC is working to address many of these challenges.

PacifiCorp’s recent announcements that it plans to join the regional energy imbalance market 

and explore the possibility of joining the California ISO could help to create additional 

opportunities for Utah wind power throughout the region.
10

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

Figure 3. Wind resource at 80 meters overlaid with federal lands
11

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

3 Islanded Grid Resource Center

The Islanded Grid Resource Center worked with NREL researchers to provide the following 

assessment of the state of the wind industry in this region.

Interested parties of the Islanded Grid Resource Center9 are located in Alaska, Maine, 

Massachusetts, Rhode Island,10 Hawaii, Guam, American Samoa, Commonwealth of the 

Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI), and U.S. Virgin Islands. The three main focus areas of the 

RRC are wind-diesel systems, megawatt-scale systems on islanded grids, and support for island 

communities in close proximity to proposed commercial-scale offshore wind and other ocean 

energy projects. Any interested party may join the group. 

Although not linked geographically, islanded grid communities share common challenges and 

opportunities for wind development. Most have small populations with limited human capacity 

and sub-optimal infrastructure. Transportation and distribution costs tend to be higher than in 

other parts of the country, exacerbating financing challenges. Many of these communities have 

severe climates and/or are being impacted by climate change and rising sea levels. Most rely on 

expensive diesel fuel (subject to volatile price swings) to generate electricity and therefore share 

technical difficulties associated with wind integration. Reliance on diesel fuel comes with a host 

of environmental concerns, including meeting emissions standards, the need for bulk fuel 

storage, and the potential for diesel spills. However, many of the islanded grid communities have 

excellent wind resources, with some in close proximity to proposed offshore wind projects. 

Because islanded communities are remote and geographically distant, many of these jurisdictions 

have not traditionally communicated with each other about progress related to wind energy 

implementation. Currently, islands and islanded regions have few places to turn for help. These 

regions rarely can look to wind development on large-scale grid systems as models, and, with 

sparse funding and resources, they have limited ability to do testing and development work on 

their own. 

The following section provides an overview of the wind industry in the Islanded Grid Resource 

Center region. 

Table 4. Key Statistics for the Islanded Grid Resource Center Region

Alaska Guam Hawaii

NE 

Islands

Installed Wind, 2015 (MW) 66 .005 203 4.5

Percentage of Energy 

Supplied by Wind Projects 2% <1% 5%

Projected Potential 

Capacity (MW), 80 m, 

30% CF 2,902 3,265

 9 http://islandedgrid.org/

10 Maine, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island are also part of the Northeast Wind Resource Center region.
12

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

Alaska Guam Hawaii

NE 

Islands

Projected Potential 

Capacity (MW), 100 m, 

30% CF 3,76511 3,564

Contribution from 

Distributed Wind Projects, 

2014 (MW)12 12.9 .7 4.5

3.1 Renewable Portfolio Standards 

Alaska does not have an RPS but has a renewable energy goal to be 50% powered by renewables 

by 2025. Hawaii enacted an RPS in 2001 and includes wind as an eligible technology in its 

standard. Applicable sectors are investor-owned utilities and rural electric cooperatives. Each of 

the U.S. Territories covered by this RRC has an RPS with the exception of American Samoa, 

which does not yet have one, and the U.S. Virgin Islands, which has renewable targets.

Table 5. RPS Overview for Islanded Grid Resource Center States and Territories

RPS

Alaska Target: 50% of electrical generation by 2050

American Samoa None

Guam

5% of net electricity sales from renewables by 2015 and 25% 

of sales by 2035

Hawaii 30% of net electricity sales by 2020/100% of sales by 2045

CNMI 20% of net electricity sales by 2016. 

Maine 40% of net electricity sales by 2017

U.S. Virgin Islands

Targets: 20% by 2015; 25% by 2020; 30% by 2025; increasing 

until 51% of generating capacity is derived from renewable or 

alternative energy

3.2 Workforce Development 

The Power Systems Integration Lab (formerly the Alaska Wind-Diesel Wind Application 

Center) is located at the University of Alaska-Fairbanks and supports educational programs 

through the Alaska Center for Energy and Power. The University of Alaska Fairbanks has also 

participated in the Collegiate Wind Competition and, in collaboration with the Renewable 

Energy Alaska Project, supported a state Wind for Schools effort. The Alaska Institute for 

Technology has also supported technical curricula associated with the operation and maintained 

of wind energy as part of its remote power system technician training curricula, supporting wind 

deployment in remote and islanded communities. See the map below for the locations of other 

school projects. The WINDExchange website also offers information and interactive maps 

regarding workforce development, the DOE’s Collegiate Wind Competition, the DOE’s Wind 

 11 Estimates provided by Alaska Energy Authority Wind Program Manager Rich Stromberg, based on developable 

land likely being limited to private land

12 Distributed wind project installed capacity is defined as 2003-2014 cumulative capacity (DOE 2015a). 
13

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

for Schools project, school wind project locations, and locations of education and training 

programs in the Islanded Grid region and other states.13

Figure 4. Map of school wind turbine projects, educational programs, and locations with both 

wind turbines and educational programs within the Islanded Grid Resource Center’s area

3.3 Manufacturing

There is no wind-related manufacturing in the region.

3.4 Key Stakeholder Groups and Deployment Challenges

The Islanded Grid Resource Center targets these stakeholder groups: 

• Utilities and wind operators

• Researchers and technical experts

• Trade associations and non-profits

• Military

• Policymakers, elected and non-elected

• Manufacturers and supply chain businesses

• General public.

The information provided to these stakeholder groups addresses the following wind energy 

deployment market barriers that are prevalent in this region:

 13 http://apps2.eere.energy.gov/wind/windexchange/schools/
14

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

• The primary development challenge facing wind-diesel development is the upfront cost of 

deploying a sophisticated system in a remote area with relatively low technical and human 

capacity. Since most of these grids are off the road system, transportation and mobilization 

costs are much higher than they are for communities in other regions on the road system. 

Besides transportation and mobilization, another challenging cost driver is scale. 

• There are several wind energy development challenges for large islanded grids in the Railbelt 

transmission system14 in Alaska. They include the region’s heavy dependence on natural gasfired power; the risk-adverse nature of the six utilities serving the region, which prevents 

them from accepting wind energy; a relatively weak, inflexible grid that makes it more 

difficult to integrate wind power; lack of clear regulatory policy that defines the rules of 

engagement between those utilities and independent power producers that wish to develop 

wind; lack of a universal transmission tariff; lack of any regional generation and transmission 

planning; and lack of any regional transmission organization or independent system operator.

Figure 5. Island Institute team members met with Maine island residents to discuss energy 

development options for islanded communities. Photo courtesy of Islanded Grid Resource Center

 14 A small, isolated transmission system in Alaska that covers the main population centers of the state along the 

main railroad line including the Seward, the Kenai, Anchorage, Wasilla, and north to Fairbanks
15

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

3.5 Collaborating Organizations 

Organizations that have collaborated with the Islanded Grid Resource Center include:

• Alaska Center for Energy and Power

• Alaska Congressional Delegation 

• Alaska Energy Authority

• Alaska Federation of Natives

• Alaska Power and Telephone Company

• Alaska Village Electric Cooperative

• American Samoa Power Authority

• American Wind Energy Association

• Bergey Windpower Company

• Chugach Electric Association

• College of the Atlantic

• Commonwealth Utilities Corporation 

(CNMI)

• Cook Inlet Region Inc.

• Cuttyhunk Electric

• Distributed Wind Energy Association

• Endurance Wind Power

• Fox Islands Electric Cooperative

• Guam Power Authority

• Hawaii Natural Energy Institute

• Kodiak Electric Association

• Maine Congressional Delegation

• Maine PUC

• Marsh Creek LLC

• Martinicus Isle Plantation

• Monhegan Plantation Power District

• Naushon Trust

• Ocean Renewable Power Company

• Sgurr Energy

• Solar Electric Light Fund

• Star Island Corporation

• State of Alaska

• Swan's Island Electric Cooperative

• Town of Nantucket

• Town of New Shoreham

• University of Alaska Anchorage Institute 

of Social & Economic Research

• University of Maine

• U.S. Virgin Islands Energy Office

• U.S. Department of Agriculture Rural 

Development

• Utility Variable-Generation Integration 

Group.

3.6 State and Territory Updates

3.6.1 Alaska

Alaska has two distinct markets for wind development: larger communities that are connected by 

the Railbelt and rural communities that are completely isolated from the state’s grid. At the end 

of 2015, Alaska had 62 MW of installed wind capacity, including 41 MW of capacity added 

since 2012 on the Railbelt grid that serves Anchorage, the main population center. One notable 
16

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

success is the 9-MW system located on Kodiak Island.15 Coupled with hydro and a battery and 

flywheel system, this system made the island 99.7% powered by renewables. 

Barriers to wind development in Alaska continue to be cost and the fact that high-contribution 

wind systems are technically complicated. The Islanded Grid Resource Center shares 

information on technical barriers, including control systems, secondary load control, and the use 

of energy storage. Other barriers include limited technical training, support, and human capacitybuilding for remote communities; limited financing; misalignment of the state’s power cost 

equalization fuel subsidy and incentives to decrease diesel usage; complicated foundation 

technology (due to areas of permafrost); high mobilization, construction, and logistics costs; and 

lack of understanding of the long-term benefits and applicability of wind technology to reduce 

usage of imported fuel options. 

In the past year, the state experienced a severe fiscal shock as the price of oil dropped 

precipitously and drastically reduced the state’s revenues. As a result, the Alaska Renewable 

Energy Fund, the state’s primary renewable energy driver, has experienced and could continue to 

experience major funding cuts by the state legislature into the near future. Several entities are 

working to make private, alternative financing available and to increase the percentage of state 

funds that are available for resource assessments and feasibility studies. Energy stakeholders are 

also working to reform the power cost equalization program to provide incentives for 

communities to use less diesel through renewables and efficiency. In the Railbelt, there has been 

significant progress toward establishing an independent system operator that would set a 

universal transmission tariff and help level the playing field for new wind developments. 

Progress has also been made in creating a private transmission company to finance needed 

transmission upgrades to further facilitate economic dispatch of the grid by the independent 

system operator.

Alaska participates in the Wind for Schools project. The University of Alaska Fairbanks worked 

to help install seven school systems in the state, participated in the 2014 Collegiate Wind 

Competition, and is an entrant for the 2016 Competition.

3.6.2 American Samoa

American Samoa, an unincorporated territory of the United States, is a group of five islands 

about halfway between Hawaii and New Zealand in the South Pacific Ocean. The territory’s only 

utility, the American Samoa Power Authority, provides electric, water, wastewater, and solid 

waste utility services for its 12,300 customers. American Samoa is almost completely dependent 

on fossil fuels for meeting its energy generation needs. In 2014, the peak load averaged about 22 

MW with annual diesel generation totaling 154 million kilowatt-hours. To date, American 

Samoa Power Authority has installed 2 MW of photovoltaic solar panels near the Pago Pago 

International Airport, which generates about 2% of the utility’s power. American Samoa 

currently has no wind projects installed. In 2013, the governor established the American Samoa 

Renewable Energy Committee, which developed a strategic energy plan and energy action plan. 

The plan includes a goal for Manu’a Islands, American Samoa's easternmost group, to be 100% 

powered by renewables by 2016. 

 15 Learn more at http://islandedgrid.org/100-renewably-powered-alaskas-kodiak-island-goes-all-in-with-wind-andhydro/
17

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

3.6.3 Hawaii

Hawaii's governor signed a law requiring 100% of Hawaii's electricity to be generated by 

renewable sources by 2045, increasing the state's former renewable energy goal of 40% clean 

energy by 2040 (Hawaii Clean Energy Initiative 2015). Hawaii had 203 MW of installed wind 

capacity as of the end of 2015 (WINDExchange 2016), providing 5% of the state’s electricity. 

The state has substantial renewable resources throughout the island chain and has a robust wind 

regime with wind farms’ capacity factors exceeding those commonly found elsewhere. Utilityscale wind potential is found onshore and offshore, with the state's six commercial wind farms 

on Oahu, Maui, and the “big island” of Hawaii. There are two proposals for offshore wind 

development off Hawaii’s coasts. The 408-MW Alpha Wind Energy floating offshore wind farm, 

which would transmit electricity to Oahu through an undersea cable, has submitted a license 

proposal with the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM).

Hurdles to wind development in Hawaii include endangered avian and plant species that can 

complicate the siting and development of wind projects in Hawaii’s unique environments. Visual 

impacts can also be of concern, given the height of wind turbines and limited sites suitable for 

wind development in Hawaii.

3.6.4 Guam

Guam, the largest island in Micronesia, is located in the Pacific Ocean about three-fourths of the 

way from Hawaii to the Philippines. Surrounded by coral reef, Guam sits on the edge of the 

Mariana Trench and its Challenger Deep, the deepest known place on earth. Guam has no 

renewable resources and meets nearly all of its energy needs, including electricity, with 

petroleum products shipped in by tanker. The island’s population is estimated to be about 

161,000, plus 12,000 to 14,000 military personnel and their dependents. 

Guam has substantial wind potential but also unique siting issues. It is seismically active and is 

in the Pacific's Typhoon Alley, so wind turbines must be engineered to resist earthquakes and 

typhoon-force winds. Other barriers to wind deployment on Guam include limited land, potential 

windy sites on privately owned land, concerns over aesthetics of wind turbines, a large amount 

of military land that may create issues with zoning variances, no local tax incentive, bat

concerns, and other potential environmental impacts. Both the Navy and Guam Power Authority 

have conducted wind resource mapping and assessments, and the Guam Power Authority 

installed a 275-kW turbine in 2015 as a pilot project (Dumat-ol Daleno 2016). Guam currently 

has a renewable energy portfolio goal that calls for 5% of net electricity sales to come from 

renewable energy resources by 2015, increasing to 25% by 2035. 

3.6.5 Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands

The CNMI is a chain of 14 islands in the Pacific Ocean, located between Hawaii and the 

Philippines. Only three islands on the southern end of the island chain are currently inhabited: 

Saipan, Tinian, and Rota. About 9 in 10 residents live on Saipan, the largest island. The 

population has been shrinking and totaled about 54,000 in the 2010 U.S. Census. The islands 

meet nearly all of their energy demand through imported petroleum products, including 22

million to 24 million gallons of diesel fuel annually to run the islands' five electricity-generating 

plants. The CNMI's electric system is owned and operated by the Commonwealth Utilities 

Corporation, a public corporation of the CNMI government. The CNMI has three small electric 
18

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

grids, one on each of the inhabited islands. Generating capability is about 70 MW on Saipan, 20 

MW on Tinian, and 4.5 MW on Rota.

Saipan, Tinian, and Rota are believed to have prevailing wind resources suitable for commercial 

turbines. However, potential sites are limited because the islands are mountainous, land is scarce, 

and turbines may interfere with airstrip and military facilities. There are also concerns about 

turbine impacts on several threatened bird species. Turbines must also be designed to withstand 

typhoons.

3.6.6 Maine and Other Northeast Island Communities

Several New England island communities have investigated community-scale wind as a costeffective option for reducing high, primarily diesel-based energy costs, but none of the islands 

has installed wind power generation since the 4.5-MW Fox Islands Wind Project was constructed 

in 2009. The Deepwater Wind project off Block Island, Rhode Island, is also in development but 

does not represent island projects because of its interconnection to the main grid. The Islanded 

Grid Resource Center has worked with the Block Island community and other island 

communities that face the potential development of large-scale offshore wind projects.

3.6.7 U.S. Virgin Islands

The U.S. Virgin Islands is a U.S. territory located in the Caribbean, about 600 miles from Miami, 

Florida. The U.S. Virgin Islands has two separate electricity grids, each with its own generation, 

managed by the Water and Power Authority, an independent government agency. Generating 

units include combustion, steam turbines, and backup diesel, all fueled by imported petroleum. 

The 199-MW St. Thomas system supplies nearby St. John and Water Island by underwater cable. 

The 122-MW St. Croix system, separated from St. Thomas by 40 miles of ocean, has its own 

grid. The USVI government's goal of reducing fossil fuel use 60% by 2025 has led to working 

with U.S. federal agencies and industry to find other energy sources. More than half of 

reductions are planned to come from energy efficiency, particularly in generation, transmission, 

street lighting, and desalination, with the balance coming from wind, solar, and biomass 

technologies, including waste-to-energy and landfill gas.

The U.S. Virgin Islands has potential commercial wind energy resources, but finding the large 

sites needed for utility-scale projects on the islands has been a challenge. The most promising 

locations for utility-scale wind projects are on high ridges and exposed capes. Wind data 

collected in 2012 and 2013 at potential sites around Longford on St. Croix and the Bovoni 

Peninsula on St. Thomas found wind speeds suitable for large turbines that could play a 

meaningful part in helping the U.S. Virgin Islands meet its 60% by 2025 goal. The Virgin 

Islands Water and Power Authority, in conjunction with the Virgin Islands Energy Office, 

completed wind studies to determine the economic feasibility of wind power development in the 

territory. As of July 2015, the Water and Power Authority is negotiating with several qualified 

facilities proposing wind projects that were approved by the Public Services Commission

pursuant to the Cogeneration and Small Power Production Act. The size of the proposed wind 

farm is 7 to 10.5 MW.
19

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

4 Midwest Wind Energy Center

The Midwest Wind Energy Center (MWEC) worked with NREL researchers to provide the 

following assessment of the state of the wind industry in this region.

The MWEC16 serves the following states: Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, 

Missouri, eastern Montana, North Dakota, Ohio, South Dakota, and Wisconsin. The MWEC’s 

main organizer is Windustry. Other key players are the Iowa Wind Energy Association and Tom 

Wind of Wind Utility Consulting. The following section provides an overview of the wind 

industry in the region.

The MWEC states have different levels of wind resources (Figure 6). The states in the western 

portion of the region (Montana, the Dakotas, Iowa, and western Minnesota) have strong, worldclass winds and vast rural areas. The states in the eastern portion of the region (Ohio, Missouri, 

Indiana, and Michigan) have moderate and low wind resources. Additionally, some states 

(Illinois, Ohio) have dense populations in some of their windiest areas and are limited in the 

extent of their land-based development (assuming 80-m hub heights). 

Figure 6. MWEC footprint and average wind speeds at 80 meters

Eight of the states in the MWEC region are in the top 20 nationally in installed wind capacity, 

and four MWEC states have 15% or higher in-state wind generation. The MWEC region is a 

strong national leader in distributed wind, defined as wind turbines of any size serving local 

loads, on either side of the meter, the retail customer side for on-site load or the wholesale side 

for large loads nearby. 

Overall, the states in this region have vastly different energy demands, with many existing 

energy plants in transition. This region has historically relied heavily on central station coal and 

nuclear plants for most of its electricity generation. These plants are aging, and other energy 

sources such as wind and solar are abundant locally. 

The energy demand of the most populous state, Illinois, is spurring development of dedicated 

transmission for renewable energy. Two large transmission projects dedicated to addressing wind 

generation in the MWEC region are currently in the planning process. One project is the Rock 

 16 http://www.midwestwindenergycenter.org/
20

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

Island Clean Line, a 500-mile overhead direct current transmission line that will deliver 3,500 

MW from northwest Iowa and the surrounding region to communities in Illinois and other states 

to the east. Another planned project is the Grain Belt Express Clean Line, a 750-mile direct 

current transmission line that will connect the rich wind resources of Kansas to Missouri, Illinois, 

Indiana, and markets farther east.

Table 6. Key Statistics for the Midwest Wind Energy Center Region

IL IN IA MI MN MO MT17 ND OH SD WI

Installed Wind, 

2015 (MW)18 3,842 1,895 6,212 1,531 3,235 459 665 2,143 443 977 648

Percentage of 

Energy 

Supplied by 

Wind Projects, 

2014

5% 3% 29% 2% 16% 1% 6.5% 16% .8% 21% 2%

Projected 

Potential

Capacity (MW), 

80 m, 30% CF

249,882 148,228 570,714 59,042 489,271 274,355 944,004 770,196 54,920 882,412 103,757

Projected 

Potential

Capacity (MW), 

100 m, 30% CF

329,618 183,832 601,957 179,056 603,427 399,635 1,012,355 771,791 123,328 890,626 215,447

Contribution 

from Distributed 

Wind Projects, 

2014 (MW)19

21.7 8.5 121.2 4 125.4 7.6 4.9 8.1 37.3 3.2 26.4

Proposed 

Offshore Wind 

Projects (MW)

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2720 0 0

4.1 Renewable Portfolio Standards 

In the MWEC region, eight states have an RPS (Illinois, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, 

Montana, Ohio, and Wisconsin) and three states have a renewable energy goal (Indiana, North 

Dakota, and South Dakota). 

 17 Montana is divided between two RRCs: Northwest Wind Resource and Action Center (western Montana) and 

Midwest Wind Energy Center (eastern Montana). For this report, each RRC provided data for the entire state. 

18 2015 Year End Wind Power Capacity Map. Available at 

http://apps2.eere.energy.gov/wind/windexchange/wind_installed_capacity.asp

19 Distributed wind project installed capacity is defined as 2003-2014 cumulative capacity (DOE 2015a). 20 On Lake Erie
21

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

Table 7. RPS Overview for Midwest Wind Energy Center States

RPS

Illinois 25% x 2026

Indiana Clean Energy Portfolio Goal of 15% x 2025

Iowa IOUs must contract for a total of 105 MW of renewables

Michigan 10% x 2015

Minnesota 26.5% x 2025 (investor-owned utilities) 

31.5% x 2020 (Xcel)

25% x 2025 (other utilities)

Missouri 15% x 2021

Montana 15% x 2015

North Dakota Goal of 10% x 2015

Ohio 12.5% x 2026, but frozen at 2014 level of 2.5% until 2017 

South Dakota Goal of 10% x 2015

Wisconsin 10% x 2015

4.2 Workforce Development

Figure 7. Map of school wind turbine projects, educational programs, and locations with both 

wind turbines and educational programs within the Midwest Wind Energy Center’s area

Educating the future generations of wind energy technicians, engineers, and stakeholders plays a 

key role in developing the domestic wind workforce. Iowa Lakes Community College was one 

of the first in the country to offer a wind technician training program and has been providing 

wind energy education since 2003. Now several community colleges and universities in the 
22

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

Midwest offer wind energy training and education. Figure 7 shows the school installations and 

educational programs for wind energy in the MWEC area. Educational activities are described in 

more detail in the state sections below. The WINDExchange website also offers information and 

interactive maps regarding workforce development, the DOE’s Collegiate Wind Competition, the 

DOE’s Wind for Schools project, school wind project locations, and locations of education and 

training programs in the MWEC region and other states.21

4.3 Manufacturing

NREL researchers compiled the following wind energy manufacturing data for this region as part 

of DOE’s annual wind market report effort (DOE 2015c). Tier I represents major components 

such as blades and towers, and Tier II components are sub-components, such as inverters and 

electrical equipment, to make the Tier I equipment.

Table 8. Wind-Related Manufacturing Overview for Midwest Wind Energy Center States

Name City State Component Tier

Winergy Drive Systems Elgin IL Gear drive I

Siemens/Winergy Elgin IL Gear drive I

Brad Foote Gear Works Cicero IL Power transmission gears II

HYDAC Glendale 

Heights

IL Hydraulics, brake systems II

Finkl and Sons Chicago IL Components II

Centa Corp. Aurora IL Couplings II

Deublin Company Waukegan IL Slip rings, hydraulic 

components

II

R&W America Bensenville IL Couplings II

Stanley Machining & 

Tool Corp.

Carpentersville IL Gear cases, torque arms, 

planetary carriers

II

Randack Fasteners 

America

Lake Zurich IL Bolts II

SMF Minonk IL Embed rings, template 

rings

II

Chicago Industrial 

Fasteners

West Chicago IL Blade studs II

Trinity Structural Towers Clinton IL Towers I

Carlisle Industrial Brakes 

and Friction

Bloomington IN Brakes II

Oerlikon Fairfield Lafayette IN Gears II

Brevini Yorktown IN Gearbox II

ATI Casting LaPorte IN Component castings II

Bedford Machine and 

Tool

Bedford IN Rotor hubs and plates II

Siemens Fort Madison IA Blades I

Goian North America Ankeny IA Elevation systems II

D.A.D. Manufacturing Hiawatha IA Walkways, doors, 

components

II

D.A.D. Manufacturing Lisbon IA Walkways, doors, 

components

II

Trinity Structural Towers Newton IA Towers I

Acciona West Branch IA Turbines I

Energetx Holland MI Blades I

 21 http://apps2.eere.energy.gov/wind/windexchange/schools/
23

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

Name City State Component Tier

Genzink Steel Holland MI Generator frames II

Ventera Wund Duluth MI Distributed wind I

Wind Turbine Industries 

Corp.

Prior Lake MI Distributed wind I

Citation Corporation Novi MI Gearbox covers and 

housings

II

Three M Tool and 

Machine

Commerce MI Gearbox housings and 

forward housings

II

Akebono Corp Farmington 

Hills

MI Brakes II

K&M Machine 

Fabricating

Cassopolis MI Hub and gearbox housings II

Great Lakes Gear 

Technology

Canton MI Gears II

ATI Castings Alpena MI Castings II

Dowding Industries Eaton Rapids MI Transmission housings, 

components

II

Ideal Fabricators Livonia MI Components II

Dokka Auburn Hills MI Fasteners II

Ventower Monroe MI Towers I

Columbia Gear 

Corporation

Avon MN Gears II

Zero-Max Plymouth MN Couplings II

Millwood Metal Works Freeport MN Embed rings, template 

rings, forms

II

Remelle Engineering Big Lake MN Machine castings II

Continental Disc 

Corporation

Liberty MO Brakes II

Gasket Engineering Kansas City MO Blade components II

FAG Bearings Joplin MO Bearings II

Vest-Fiber Moberly MO Components II

LM Wind Power Grand Forks ND Blades I

Trinity Structural Towers West Fargo ND Towers I

Federal Gear Willoughby OH Gears II

Advanced Manufacturing Cleveland OH Gearboxes II

Horsburgh and Scott Cleveland OH Gears II

Swiger Coil Systems Cleveland OH Generators II

Parker Hannifin Corp. Mayfield 

Heights

OH Hydraulic components, 

brakes

II

HPM America Mount Gilead OH Hubs, bases, generator 

frames

II

Minster Wind Minster OH Machine castings, 

components

II

Hamby Young Aurora OH Substations II

Rotek Inc. Aurora OH Slew bearings II

Kaydon Bearing Avon OH Bearings II

Kalt Manufacturing North 

Ridgeville

OH Large components II

Magna Machine Forest Park OH Rotor hubs, support bases II

Cast Fab Cincinnati OH Ductile iron component 

castings

II

Canton Drop Forge Canton OH Gear blanks II

Byrne Manufacturing Mansfield OH Speed increasers II

Dyson Corp. Painseville OH Fasteners II
24

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

Name City State Component Tier

Eaton Corp. Cleveland OH Electrical II

CMC/BMC Utility 

Products

Hamilton OH Power transmission 

components

II

EGC Enterprises Chardon OH Fasteners II

Tuf-Tug Products Moraine OH Fall protection gear II

The Benjamin Company Put-In-Bay OH Power transmission 

components

II

Milacron Inc Mount Orab OH Component II

The American Tank and 

Fabricating Company

Cleveland OH Power transmission 

components

II

Elyria Foundry Elyria OH Component castings II

Edco Inc. Toledo OH Power transmission 

machining

II

Molded Fiber Glass Aberdeen SD Blades I

Marmen Brandon SD Towers I

Merit Gear Antigo WI Gears II

Milwaukee Gear 

Company

Milwaukee WI Gears II

MAG Giddings and 

Lewis

Fond du Lac WI Turbine housing, gearbox, 

bearings

II

Ingeteam Milwaukee WI Generators II

Lindquist Machine Green Bay WI Gearbox, pitch linkage, 

main shafts, gearbox 

rebuilds

II

Avanti Wind Systems New Berlin WI Fall protection II

Plexus Neenah WI Electronic components II

Bassett Mechanical Kaukauna WI Embed rings, template 

rings, forms

II

Broadwind Manitowoc WI Towers I

4.4 Key Stakeholder Groups and Deployment Challenges

The MWEC targets these stakeholder groups: 

• Engaged citizens, including those impacted by existing or planned wind power projects, 

members of local energy committees, and community organizations either supportive of or 

concerned about wind energy impacts 

• Other stakeholders: educators, students, media, and members of the general public interested 

in learning more about wind energy 

• Policy makers, including regulators, legislators, and administrators 

• Policy implementers, including state, regional, and local regulatory/planning authorities, 

health department, municipal officials (e.g., planning board, economic development, etc.), 

siting and permitting officials and staff

• Utility representatives: municipal and investor-owned utilities

• Wind development community: developers, manufacturers, scientists.

The information provided to these stakeholder groups addresses the following wind energy 

deployment market barriers that are prevalent in this region:
25

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

• Transmission issues

• Permitting

• Zoning and legislative issues 

• Public acceptance and siting issues

• Poor understanding of wind energy’s economic impacts

• Limited understanding of and support for manufacturing

• State and regional competition

• Need for education and engagement of rural populations

• Limited financing and funding for small/community/distributed wind

• Issues with developing on Native lands

• Environmental issues and limitations.

4.5 Collaborating Organizations

Organizations that have collaborated with the MWEC include:

• American Wind Energy Association

• Distributed Wind Energy Association

• eFormative Options

• Energy and Environmental Research 

Center

• Great Lakes Wind Collaborative / Great 

Lakes Commission

• Green Energy Ohio

• Illinois Institute for Rural Affairs at 

Western Illinois University

• Illinois State University

• IndianaDG

• Intertribal Council on Utility Policy

• Iowa Economic Development Authority

• Iowa Energy Center

• Iowa Environmental Council

• Iowa Lakes Community College

• Iowa State University

• Iowa Wind Energy Association

• Juhl Energy

• Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory

• Midwest Renewable Energy Association

• Missouri Energy Initiative

• Montana Department of Commerce

• Navigant

• North Dakota Alliance for Renewable 

Energy

• Ohio Environmental Council

• RENEW Wisconsin

• Sand Creek Winds

• Small Wind Certification Council

• South Dakota Renewable Energy 

Association

• South Dakota Wind Energy Association

• Wind on the Wires.
26

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

4.6 State Updates

Due to the location of the East-West grid intertie, wind energy engagement in eastern Montana is 

covered by the MWEC while the Northwest Wind Resource and Action Center addresses 

engagement in the western part of the state. Since more of the state is covered under the western 

market, discussion of the Montana market is included in Section 6 of this document. 

4.6.1 Illinois 

Illinois has 3,842 MW of wind installed at the end of 2015 (WINDExchange 2016) with some 

new projects planned. A notable development is the Kankakee Wind Farm, a 175-MW project 

developed to supply Microsoft with electricity.

Illinois has several geographic advantages for wind. It has a strong wind resource located near 

urban centers and can take advantage of exporting energy to eastern markets through PJM

Interconnection. However, wind also faces competition from a powerful nuclear sector.

The state has an ambitious RPS of 25% renewables by 2025. Nevertheless, there are financial 

complexities in the utility market in Illinois that have caused the state to be at high risk to not 

meet this standard. An unintended consequence of the deregulation of electric utilities in Illinois 

rendered the current RPS “toothless.” Therefore, fixing the RPS continues to be a top priority for 

the wind industry. Although the Illinois General Assembly has not taken up any major energy 

legislation this year, an energy bill is possible in the near future because Exelon has a large 

nuclear plant in Illinois and has asked for state financial support.

Illinois is also participating in the Wind for Schools project, through the engagement of Western 

Illinois University, with seven school systems installed in the state.

4.6.2 Indiana

Indiana has 1,895 MW of wind installed at the end of 2015 (WINDExchange 2016), which 

reflects 200 MW brought online in 2014 by the Headwaters Wind Farm in Randolph County. A 

major new development for 2015 is the Amazon Wind Farm (Fowler Ridge), a 150-MW project 

developed to supply Amazon Web Services data centers.

A positive policy development for small wind occurred in Indiana this past legislative session.

NIPSCO, an investor-owned utility, agreed to extend its successful voluntary feed-in tariff 

program, which will facilitate more small wind in northern Indiana.

Indiana is one of three states in the MWEC region with a modest renewable energy goal (10% by 

2015) that is voluntary.

4.6.3 Iowa 

Iowa has 6,212 MW of wind installed at the end of 2015 (WINDExchange 2016). Iowa ranks 

second in the nation for installed capacity (American Wind Energy Association 2015n). One of 

the primary reasons for this high ranking is that Iowa is the headquarters of Mid-American 

Energy Utility, an investor-owned utility primarily owned by Warren Buffet, a vocal supporter of 

wind energy. While state policy in Iowa has played a role in supporting wind development, Mid-
27

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

American’s investment literally changed the farming landscape as well as the state’s energy 

landscape.

In addition to the strong industry players, Iowa has an exceptionally strong wind resource and is 

in a good location along the electrical grid to export electricity to eastern markets. It also enjoys 

high public acceptance and support from government leaders.

Iowa is already producing more electricity than the state needs. The recent and future huge 

growth in wind capacity means that Iowa will eventually need increased transmission lines to 

continue exporting its power. Experts predict that nearby states will rely on Iowa to help them 

meet new federal carbon emissions regulations; they will purchase Iowa’s clean energy exports 

to use as credits to reach their own Clean Power Plan targets.

Iowa is home to several wind education programs, including those at Iowa State University and 

the University of Iowa. Iowa Lakes Community College was one of the first colleges in the 

country to offer a wind technician training program.

4.6.4 Michigan

Michigan has 1,531 MW of wind installed (WINDExchange 2016). If offshore policy and 

technology advance, Michigan has good potential for offshore wind development. An important 

development in 2015 was the completion of a new high-voltage transmission line to serve the 

wind turbines in Michigan’s thumb region. ITC Transmission built this line to enable growth in 

the renewable energy market.

However, wind developers face obstacles in Michigan. One barrier is the uncertainty of dealing 

with unreceptive local governments because most zoning is decided at the township level. A 

second barrier is that the state’s RPS was challenged; although the challenge was not successful,

it resulted in uncertainty in the market. 

A recent statewide change is the new agency created by Governor Snyder via executive order: 

Michigan Agency for Energy. This agency will be housed under the Department of Licensing 

and Regulatory Affairs and will absorb the current Michigan Energy Office. A key task of the 

Michigan Agency for Energy will be to focus on coordinating efforts to replace the state’s coal 

power plants with cleaner energy sources. 

4.6.5 Minnesota

Minnesota has 3,235 MW of wind installed at the end of 2015 (WINDExchange 2016). It also 

has just more than 125 MW of distributed wind installed, which is the highest in the MWEC 

region. Minnesota began the 21st century as a leader in Midwestern wind, but even with several 

new projects planned, Minnesota’s wind development has slowed in recent years. 

Minnesota has a strong wind resource in the southwestern part of the state and enjoys relatively 

high public acceptance. Although the state historically has had receptive leadership and policies 

conducive to wind development, all new energy policy updates were stalled during the most 

recent legislative session.
28

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

The ongoing CapX2020 transmission line project may increase renewable energy in the near 

future. Two CapX2020 high-voltage transmission lines, the Brookings County-Hampton and 

Fargo-St. Cloud-Monticello lines, were energized in early 2015.

4.6.6 Missouri

Missouri has 459 MW of wind installed at the end of 2015 (WINDExchange 2016). No new 

wind projects are planned, and the installed capacity has remained the same for several years.

Missouri has a strong but underutilized wind resource in the northwestern part of the state.

Missouri gets most of its energy by importing coal. Eighty-two percent of Missouri's electricity 

comes from coal, nearly all of it shipped from Wyoming. However, Missouri has the potential to 

increase its energy independence and could even create its own renewable energy export 

industry. The 2015 Wind Vision Report suggests that Missouri could vastly increase its installed 

wind capacity in the coming decades and could produce as much wind energy as Minnesota and 

the Dakotas.

New solar initiatives moving forward in Missouri may lead the way to more in-state renewable 

energy development.

4.6.7 North Dakota

North Dakota has 2,143 MW of wind capacity installed at the end of 2015 (WINDExchange 

2016). North Dakota has been involved in several multi-state transmission projects in recent 

years, including one that was completed in 2014 (American Wind Energy Association 2015m). 

New projects have been aided by 2015 legislation that extended wind tax credits. North Dakota 

has a very strong wind resource, but the state’s leaders have been primarily focused on the 

economic benefits of traditional sources of energy. The state’s renewable energy goal (10% by 

2015) is voluntary. Wildlife impacts pertaining to sage grouse, bats, and a variety of avian 

species remain a concern in the state.

4.6.8 Ohio

Ohio has 443 MW of wind installed at the end of 2015 (WINDExchange 2016), which is the 

lowest in the MWEC region. However, it also has more than 37 MW of distributed wind

installed in 2014, which is the third highest in the region. Wind energy development continues to 

move forward in the state with the 250-MW Northwest Ohio wind project. DOE continues to 

provide support for the six-turbine, 18-MW Icebreaker pilot project on Lake Erie. The 

installation will likely be the nation’s first freshwater offshore wind farm. The Lake Erie Energy 

Development Corporation began taking core samples in September 2015 and has performed 

extensive resource assessment and engineering analysis work for the project (Funk 2015). 

Ohio has a strong manufacturing sector, which can produce many renewable energy jobs, and it 

could host offshore wind projects if current technology improves. However, the state’s 

leadership has discouraged new wind developments through public policy. In 2014, Ohio became 

the first state in the nation to freeze its RPS and energy efficiency standards. It also drastically 

increased setback requirements for large wind turbines. While these changes are in effect, they 

make it nearly impossible for developers to build any new wind farms in Ohio.
29

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

Case Western Reserve University in Cleveland has developed a strong offshore wind education 

collaborative with the Lake Erie Energy Development Corporation offshore wind project.

4.6.9 South Dakota

Although South Dakota has only 977 MW of wind installed at the end of 2015 (WINDExchange 

2016), the state has a very strong wind resource that has been developed without extensive state 

policy legislation: it is the only state in the region without a net metering policy, and its 

renewable energy goal (10% by 2015) is voluntary. South Dakota has an uncompetitive tax rate 

on wind compared to surrounding states, but tax rates were adjusted in a new bill passed in 2015. 

This bill reduced state taxes on wind to the levels of neighbors North Dakota and Minnesota to 

be more competitive.

A significant project is underway in South Dakota involving a partnership of Native American 

tribes. Eight Sioux tribes plan to jointly develop their wind resources. The resulting enterprise 

has the potential to build one of the largest utility-grade wind installations in the country, 

generating more than a gigawatt of power, and will provide economic self-sufficiency and 

political self-determination for the tribes, which occupy the poorest counties in the United States.

South Dakota participates in the DOE’s Wind for Schools project, with South Dakota State 

University helping to install six school systems in the state. 

4.6.10 Wisconsin

Wisconsin has 648 MW of wind installed at the end of 2015 (WINDExchange 2016) with no 

new projects under construction. Coal is the state’s main source of energy, and there are plans to 

increase it.

Although the state has strong laws on wind siting and is well positioned for transmission to load 

centers, it suffers from weak public acceptance. Individual counties have even defied state 

regulations on siting. In 2014, Brown County declared wind turbines a health hazard. The state 

has dedicated public funding for a study of health issues related to wind turbines and plans to 

include documentation from sources that have not been peer reviewed. Concerns regarding bats 

and other wildlife also continue to impact development in the state. Wisconsin had a healthy 

small and distributed wind sector through 2012, but both markets have slowed down 

considerably in recent years (U.S. Department of Energy 2015a).

University of Wisconsin-Madison is participating in the DOE 2016 Collegiate Wind 

Competition.
30

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

5 Northeast Wind Resource Center

The Northeast Wind Resource Center (NWRC) worked with NREL researchers to provide the 

following assessment of the state of the wind industry in this region.

The NWRC22 encompasses the following states: Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New 

Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Vermont.23 The NWRC 

spans offshore and land-based wind energy development at the commercial and community scale 

through interstate cooperation, information sharing, education, stakeholder engagement, 

knowledge transfer, and community dialogue. Clean Energy Group leads the offshore wind 

work; Sustainable Energy Advantage, LLC leads the land-based wind work; and the Maine 

Ocean and Wind Industry Initiative serves as a key liaison between the project and the wind 

industry. The NWRC is built on the foundation of previous stakeholder engagement and 

educational activities, including the New England Wind Energy Education Project, the New 

England Wind Forum, and current projects such as the Offshore Wind Accelerator Project.24

The challenges and opportunities for wind energy development in the region vary from state to 

state. In addition, land-based wind and offshore wind face different challenges. Land-based 

wind’s biggest challenges across the region are public acceptance and project siting, while 

offshore wind’s major challenges include cost, infrastructure, regulatory barriers, and public 

acceptance. 

Because of the Northeast’s demographics, population density, and land-use and ownership 

patterns, community-scale and larger installations face unique challenges to development. An 

increasing number of communities across the region are adopting strict zoning regulations or 

outright bans on land-based commercial wind installations. When doubt and uncertainty enter the 

debate, decision-makers usually revert to the status quo (no wind project). Many factors are 

contributing to land-based wind project delays or terminations, including systematically 

deployed opposition efforts that often derail projects in preliminary stages. Projects that progress 

beyond initial proposals are all subject to significant hurdles due to permitting appeals and 

lawsuits. Other factors contributing to declines in wind development include transmission 

constraints, lack of power purchase agreements, and federal tax policy. The factors make siting 

projects, even appropriately located ones, progressively more challenging. Developers, some 

with long-term power purchase agreements, are stepping away from some proposed projects. 

Development in Maine and Pennsylvania is the exception to this northeast land-based wind 

development story. Maine has a good amount of wind development potential in the northern, 

lower population areas of the state where wind development remains strong with more than 

1,500 MW in development. Pennsylvania has less near-term development underway but also has 

many areas of good wind resource and lower population density.

The high cost of offshore wind energy is a major barrier to its development. Offshore wind 

projects face high costs due to construction, installation, and operation at sea, as well as the 

modifications to turbines and foundations for life at sea. Infrastructure barriers include 

 22 http://www.northeastwindcenter.org/ 23 Island communities in coastal Maine, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island are also part of the Islanded Grid 

Resource Center region.

24 http://www.cesa.org/projects/accelerating-offshore-wind-owap/
31

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

transmission challenges, lack of deep-water ports, lack of specialized installation vessels, a 

workforce with limited experience, and a nascent supply chain. Complex permitting, lengthy site 

selection and leasing processes, and uncoordinated planning (jurisdiction by jurisdiction) pose 

regulatory challenges. Public acceptance issues and lengthy litigation battles mainly have been 

an issue in Massachusetts, the proposed site of the Cape Wind Project. The Block Island Wind 

Farm in Rhode Island initiated offshore construction in the summer of 2015 and will be 

America’s first offshore wind farm. This five-turbine, 30-MW project being developed by 

Deepwater Wind is expected to go online in 2016.

The following section provides an overview of the wind industry in the region.

Table 9. Key Statistics for the Northeast Wind Resource Center Region

CT ME MA NH NJ NY PA RI VT

Land-Based Wind Projects

Installed Wind, 2015 

(MW) 5 613 107 185 9 1,749 1,340 9 119

Proposed Offshore Wind 

Projects (MW) 1225

1,000 w/ RI 

(Deepwater 

One)

25

1,000 w/ MA 

(Deepwater 

One)26

Offshore Wind Projects 

Under Construction/ 

Permitted (MW)

30 

Percentage of Energy 

Supplied by Wind Projects, 

2014

0% 7% .6% 2% 0% 3% 2% 0% 3%

Projected Potential

Capacity (MW), 80 m, 

30% CF

27 11,251 1,028 2,135 132 25,781 3,307 47 2,949

Projected Potential

Capacity (MW), 100 m, 

30% CF

186 30,847 1,913 3,919 349 57,639 7,222 84 5,637

Contribution from 

Distributed Wind Projects 

(MW)27

.5 7.7 65.5 1.7 10.9 10.4 5.9 9.3 12

5.1 Renewable Portfolio Standards 

In the NWRC's region, eight states have an RPS, while Vermont has a Sustainably Priced Energy 

Enterprise Development Program created to promote renewable energy development. The 

program is not a renewable portfolio goal or standard. However, the Vermont Legislature 

recently passed a renewable energy bill that would create a renewable energy standard, requiring 

utilities to buy and sell renewable electricity beginning in 2017. It is expected that the Governor 

will sign the legislation into law. In other states, legislative proposals to modify the RPS 

programs are pending, although it is unclear whether they will be acted on or passed. 

 25 University of Maine 26 Block Island 27 Distributed wind project installed capacity is defined as 2003-2014 cumulative capacity (U.S. Department of 

Energy 2015a). 
32

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

Table 10. RPS Overview for Northeast Wind Resource Center States

RPS

Connecticut 27% x 2020

Maine

30% x 2000

New RE: 10% x 2017

Massachusetts

22.1% x 2020

(+1% annually thereafter)

New Hampshire 24.8% x 2025

New Jersey

20.38% RE x 2021

+ 4.1% solar x 2028

New York 29% x 2015

Pennsylvania 18% x 2021 (include non-renewable alternative resources)

Rhode Island 16% x 2020

Vermont 55% by 2017 and 75% by 2032 

5.2 Workforce Development

Figure 8. Map of school wind turbine projects, educational programs, and locations with both 

wind turbines and educational programs within the Northeast Wind Resource Center’s area
33

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

Several institutions provide wind energy education in the region, including Pennsylvania State

University, University of Massachusetts Amherst and Lowell, University of Delaware, 

University of Maine, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cornell University, and Cape Cod 

Community College. Educational activities are described in more detail in the state sections 

below. The WINDExchange website also offers information and interactive maps regarding 

workforce development, the DOE’s Collegiate Wind Competition, the DOE’s Wind for Schools 

project, school wind project locations, and locations of education and training programs in the 

NWRC region and other states.28

5.3 Manufacturing

NREL researchers compiled the following wind energy manufacturing data for this region as part 

of DOE’s annual wind market report effort (DOE 2015c). Tier I represents major components 

such as blades and towers, and Tier II components are sub-components, such as inverters and 

electrical equipment, to make the Tier I equipment.

Table 11. Wind-Related Manufacturing Overview for Northeast Wind Resource Center States

Name City State Component Tier

Second Wind Somerville MA Anemometers, controllers, 

sensors

II

BJA Magnetics Rutland MA Magnetics II

Pika Energy Westbrook ME Distributed wind I

Hendrix Wire and Cable Milford NH Cable systems II

Weaver Wind Energy Freeville NY Distributed wind I

UGE International New York NY Distributed wind I

Ioxus Oneonta NY Ultracapacitors II

Vacon Inc. Chambersburg PA A/C drives II

Ellwood Group Irvine PA Main shaft bearings II

Eickhoff Corporation Pittsburgh PA Gearbox I

Hodge Foundry Greenville PA Component castings II

Windurance Seneca PA Pitch control systems II

Northern Power 

Systems

Barre VT Distributed wind I

5.4 Key Stakeholder Groups and Deployment Challenges

The NWRC targets these stakeholder groups: 

• For offshore wind, the NWRC is focused on state clean energy funds and the public utility 

commission as its primary stakeholders.

• For land-based wind, the NWRC is focused on state and local policy-makers, media, and 

members of the public.

• Through its industry partner the Maine Ocean Wind Industry Initiative, some offshore wind 

outreach is provided to industry stakeholders and the general Maine public.

Information provided to these stakeholder groups addresses wind energy deployment market 

barriers that are prevalent in this region.

 28 http://apps2.eere.energy.gov/wind/windexchange/schools/
34

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

• The high costs of offshore wind energy are addressed on a regional basis. Information and 

outreach is geared toward innovative regional procurement targets, regional financing, 

alternative financing through green banks and bonds, and regional supply chain development. 

The Islanded Grid Resource Center reported that island communities in coastal New England 

choosing to pursue offshore wind projects face challenges including attracting financial 

investment; lowering the cost of energy produced; navigating the regulatory process; 

addressing technical issues related to installation, interconnection, and operation; researching 

and mitigating environmental impacts; interacting with other human uses; and public 

acceptance. The fact that there are no full-scale offshore wind turbines currently deployed in 

the United States further complicates many of these challenges, as there are no domestic 

projects that can serve as examples to inform these topics.

• Information on financing and cost reductions in Europe is shared with stakeholders.

• Information and outreach to the land-based wind stakeholder groups include publications, 

guidelines, and other materials that can aid sound decision-making when considering new 

policies or wind project proposals. 

• The NWRC is compiling information resources on its website as well as convening a 

working group that is developing a set of evaluation criteria that can be applied to individual 

information resources so that stakeholders can discern their suitability for decision-making or 

journalistic coverage. 

• The topics covered in the resource library include wind physiological and environmental 

impacts, along with technical, economic, financial, and operational issues.

5.5 Collaborating Organizations

Organizations that have collaborated with the Northeast Wind Resource Center include:

• Appalachian Mountain Club 

• Cape & Islands Self Reliance 

• Consensus Building Institute 

• Conservation Law Foundation 

• Distributed Wind Energy Association

• Fishermen’s Energy 

• Great Lakes Wind Collaborative 

• Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory

• Maine Renewable Energy Association 

• Massachusetts Clean Energy Center

• Meister Consultants Group 

• Metcalf Institute-University of Rhode 

Island

• Mid-Atlantic Reg. Resource Center

• Natural Resources Council of Maine

• New York State Energy Research and 

Development Authority

• Renewable Energy Long Island 

• Rhode Island Office of Energy 

Resources 

• Small Wind Certification Council 

• Southeast Coastal Wind Coalition 

• Southern Alliance for Clean Energy 

• UMass Wind Energy Center

• Union of Concerned Scientists 

• University of Maine 
35

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

• Utility Variable-Generation Integration 

Group 

• U.S. Offshore Wind Collaborative 

• Vermont Public Service Department.

5.6 State Updates

5.6.1 Connecticut

At the end of 2015, Connecticut had 5 MW of installed wind capacity (WINDExchange 2016). 

The state is moving toward initiatives on regional procurement of clean energy resources in 

collaboration with other states. Connecticut, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island have drafted a 

request for proposals that utility-scale wind resources would be eligible to respond to. The three 

states hope to complete the joint procurement process by the end of 2016. In 2014, the approval 

of wind siting guidelines ended an effective moratorium on wind development.

After a long legal battle, construction began on Connecticut’s first commercial wind turbines in 

the summer of 2015. BNE Energy is developing the Colebrook South Project, which consists of 

three turbines (Boughton 2015).

5.6.2 Maine

With 613 MW of installed wind capacity at the end of 2015 (WINDExchange 2016), Maine is 

the regional leader in wind power deployment for New England. Wind power provides 8% of the 

state’s total electricity supply and development of large-scale, onshore projects continues to 

expand with 276 MW of additional capacity under construction. However, the development of 

community-scale and offshore wind projects has slowed in recent years due to an unstable 

political climate and public acceptance issues surrounding sound and aesthetic impacts. 

The University of Maine received a $3 million DOE grant in May 2014 for its proposed 12-MW 

floating offshore wind farm. Earlier in 2014, the Maine Public Utilities Commission approved a 

term sheet for the Aqua Ventus project, calling on the offshore pilot project to sell electricity to 

Central Maine Power for 23 cents per kilowatt-hour. The University of Maine received 

additional funding from DOE in 2015 to continue developing its offshore wind project.

5.6.3 Massachusetts

At the end of 2015, Massachusetts had 107 MW of installed wind capacity (American Wind 

Energy Association 2015e). The single project constructed in 2014 was the Lynn Water & Sewer 

Commission’s 660-kW turbine (American Wind Energy Association 2015m). The project was 

partially funded through the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center, which continues to support 

installations in the state through its Commonwealth Wind Program.29 Several projects were 

initiated in 2015 with expected commissioning in 2016, including the 8-MW Future Generation 

Wind project in Plymouth, Massachusetts (Mass Energy Consumers Alliance 2016).

The Massachusetts Clean Energy Center also approved up to $1.8 million in relief assistance for 

the Town of Falmouth to financially assist the municipality as it attempts to navigate the impacts 

associated with reduced operations of the town’s wind project. Community concerns surrounding 

 29 http://www.masscec.com/programs/commonwealth-wind-program
36

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

sound impacts led to curtailment and unanticipated costs (Massachusetts Clean Energy Center 

2014). 

The proposed Cape Wind project in Massachusetts was dealt a major blow when the two utilities 

with power purchase agreements pulled their agreements after Cape Wind failed to obtain 

financing by the deadline. Without these power purchase agreements, the project cannot be built. 

Cape Wind brought the utilities’ action to court. Most recently, a federal appellate court 

overturned a lower court’s earlier ruling defending Cape Wind’s power purchase agreement, 

representing another potentially lethal setback for the project. 

Two federal lease sales in a second Massachusetts Wind Energy Area occurred in January 2015; 

the leases went to RES Americas and Offshore MW. Both leases were sold much cheaper than 

other lease areas, possibly due to the deeper water at the site. RES Americas paid $281,285 for 

the lease, which covers 760 square kilometers and has the potential to generate more than 1 

gigawatt of capacity. DONG Energy, a Danish developer and utility—and the largest offshore 

wind developer in the world—acquired RES Americas’ lease. This is encouraging news for the 

U.S. offshore wind sector, although DONG is awaiting BOEM approval of the lease transfer. 

Massachusetts is part of the three-state initiative for clean energy procurement described in the 

section on Connecticut.

Massachusetts has a number of wind energy education programs. The University of

Massachusetts at Amherst has had an active wind energy program for more than 40 years. The 

University of Massachusetts at Lowell has also participated in the 2014 Collegiate Wind 

Competition and is an entrant for the 2016 Competition. University of Massachusetts at Amherst

is also an entrant for the 2016 Competition.

5.6.4 New Hampshire

New Hampshire had 185 MW installed wind capacity at the end of 2015 (WINDExchange 

2016). Projects in the state have faced high levels of opposition, leading to some efforts being 

abandoned prior to construction. In 2014, Iberdrola announced that it would abandon its Wild 

Meadows Wind Farm plans, citing the company’s recent experience with the Groton Wind Farm 

and the state’s current political and regulatory environments (Morris 2014). Installed in 2012, the 

Groton Wind Farm has faced continued opposition and hearings due to alleged changes that were 

made to the project without consent or review by the state’s permitting authority (Seufert 2014).

The New Hampshire Legislature passed a bill creating an offshore wind study committee that 

presented its recommendations to the legislature and Governor. Included in the recommendations 

to the legislature was a multi-state approach to developing offshore wind and the designation of 

a BOEM multi-state task force to further explore the offshore wind potential in New Hampshire. 

The New Hampshire Site Evaluation Committee developed and released draft siting guidelines, 

but meanwhile towns continue to pass restrictive wind siting bylaws and moratoria.

5.6.5 New Jersey

Onshore and offshore developments have moved slowly in New Jersey, which had 9 MW of 

land-based installed wind energy at the end of 2014 (American Wind Energy Association 

2015m), with that number remaining the same at the end of 2015 (WINDExchange 2016). 
37

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

Fishermen’s Energy, a proposed five-turbine offshore project that is one of DOE’s Offshore 

Wind Advanced Technology Demonstration Projects, has not received approval from the New 

Jersey Board of Public Utilities to move forward. In a recent appellate court decision, the court 

backed the board’s rejection of the demonstration project, affirming that Fishermen’s Energy had 

not established the project’s financial viability. Fishermen’s Energy has been seeking approval to 

move forward with the project since 2008.

5.6.6 New York

With 1,749 MW of installed wind, New York leads the Northeast in overall wind energy 

capacity. This amount of development equates to a $3.4 billion capital investment for the state. It 

also provides approximately $5.2 million in annual land lease payments (American Wind Energy 

Association 2015i).

The small and distributed wind markets continue to be active in New York. While the main 

driver of this has historically been an incentive program provided through the New York State 

Energy Research and Development Authority, third-party leasing is a new model that is expected 

to further advance this type of installation. United Wind, a leader in this area, reported that it had 

five New York projects financed through third-party leasing in 2014. Though this was a slowerthan-expected beginning for the company, 2015 has seen an increase in total projects utilizing 

this model. As of May 2015, 27 projects had been commissioned using this financing mechanism

(U.S. Department of Energy 2015a).

Currently the state is re-designing its overall energy strategy. New York has adopted an 

aggressive goal of obtaining electricity from renewable sources, with RPS targets aimed at three 

groups: large-scale generators that sell power to the wholesale grid or in some cases generate 

power for onsite use; small-scale generators such as a wind turbine at a residence; and other 

market activities, such as individuals and businesses that choose to pay a premium on their 

electricity bill to support renewable energy (New York State Energy Research and Development 

Authority 2015). 

New York is also reviewing the planning process for its transmission system, which currently is 

constrained and is affecting wind development and operation. BOEM hosted public open houses 

in June 2015 to share visual simulations of potential offshore wind development.

5.6.7 Pennsylvania

At the end of 2015, Pennsylvania had 1,340 MW of installed wind capacity. A vast majority of 

this clean generation comes from 24 wind projects that have been installed across the state. This 

amount of development equates to a $2.7 billion capital investment and provides approximately 

$4 million in annual land lease payments (American Wind Energy Association 2015k). There 

have been no utility-scale wind farms installed in the state since 2012. Wildlife issues, including 

wind energy’s impact on bats in the state, have hampered development, as have concerns related 

to sound, health, and property values. Another significant issue for the state is that many of the 

windiest, undeveloped locations are on state game lands, which thus far are not available for 

wind project development (S. Stewart, personal interview, December 2015).
38

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

The proposed 2015-2016 budget for the state’s Department of Environmental Protection contains 

bonds that will provide $20 million to “increase the state's fleet of wind energy plants”

(Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection 2015).

In 2004, Pennsylvania established its Alternative Energy Portfolio Standards Act, which 

requires18% of the state’s energy to be generated by clean, efficient sources by 2021

(Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission 2016). 

Pennsylvania is also participating in the Wind for Schools project through the engagement of 

Pennsylvania State University and the installation of five school systems. Pennsylvania State 

University was the winner of the 2014 Collegiate Wind Competition and is an entrant for the 

2016 Competition.

5.6.8 Rhode Island

Rhode Island finished 2015 with 9 MW of wind energy installed (American Wind Energy 

Association 2015m). Development on the Block Island 30-MW offshore wind farm continues; 

construction began in the summer of 2015. Contracts have been secured for turbines, 

foundations, blades, and more. The project is scheduled to go online in the summer of 2016. The 

$225 million project will provide electricity to Block Island and Rhode Island customers. 

Although project construction has begun, opponents continue to pursue litigation, filing a 

complaint in August 2015 in the U.S. District Court in an attempt to overturn the project’s 

August 2010 power purchase agreement (Kuffner 2015).

Rhode Island is part of the three-state initiative for clean energy procurement described in the 

section on Connecticut.

5.6.9 Vermont

Vermont’s total wind energy capacity was 119 MW at the end of 2014 (American Wind Energy 

Association 2015o), and that number remains the same at the end of 2015. Issues concerning 

aesthetics, wildlife (Ring 2015), and property value impacts (Preedom 2015) still prevail in the 

state, slowing development and leading to community resistance to hosting wind turbines. 

The Vermont legislature passed a very aggressive RPS starting at 55% by 2017 and then 

increasing by 4% every 3 years until reaching 75% by 2032 (DSIRE 2015). Specifics are 

provided for distributed generation, retail electricity providers, and municipal utilities. While the 

targets for the program are high, the previously mentioned development challenges will likely 

limit the opportunities for utility-scale wind to participate.
39

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

6 Northwest Wind Resource and Action Center

The Northwest Wind Resource and Action Center worked with NREL researchers to provide the 

following assessment of the state of the wind industry in this region.

The Northwest Wind Resource and Action Center30 encompasses the following states: Idaho, 

western Montana, Oregon, Washington, and Wyoming. Renewable Northwest Project is the 

principal investigator. Northwest Sustainable Energy for Economic Development (Northwest 

SEED) facilitates committee activities related to distributed and community wind. The Oregon 

Department of Energy leads the offshore wind work. The Commerce Departments of 

Washington and Montana, along with Boise State University, serve on the steering committee.

All states in the region face barriers related to wildlife and project siting; depressed electric 

market prices; low natural gas costs; little load growth; and a combination of transmission 

constraints, a need for balancing area coordination, and better integration services markets. In 

addition, those states with renewable portfolio standards (Montana, Oregon, and Washington) are 

seeing decreased market potential as utilities fulfill their near-term target requirements. These 

factors have slowed the pace for new project development, although a pipeline of approved 

projects exists once markets improve. 

The following section provides an overview of the wind industry in the region.

Table 12. Key Statistics for the Northwest Wind Resource and Action Center Region

ID MT31 OR WA WY

Installed Wind, 2015 (MW)32

973 665 3,153 3,075 1,410

Percentage of Energy Supplied by 

Wind Projects, 2014 16% 6% 12% 6% 8%

Projected Potential Capacity (MW), 

80 m, 30% CF 18,076 944,004 27,100 18,479 552,073

Projected Potential Capacity (MW), 

100 m, 30% CF 44,770 1,012,355 50,566 32,606 593,769

Contribution from Distributed Wind 

Projects, 2014 (MW)33 2.4 4.9 4.9 12.7 5.9

Proposed Offshore Wind Projects 

(MW) 3034

6.1 Renewable Portfolio Standards 

In the Northwest Wind Resource and Action Center's region, Oregon, Washington, and Montana 

each have an RPS in place. 

 30 http://nwwindcenter.org/ 31 Montana is divided between two RRCs: Northwest Wind Resource and Action Center (western Montana) and 

Midwest Wind Energy Center (eastern Montana). For reporting purposes, each RRC provides data for the entire 

state. 

32 2015 Year End Wind Power Capacity Map. Available at 

http://apps2.eere.energy.gov/wind/windexchange/wind_installed_capacity.asp

33 Distributed wind project installed capacity is defined as 2003-2014 cumulative capacity (U.S. DOE 2015a). 34 Principle Power
40

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

• In 2005, Montana passed an RPS requiring large investor-owned utilities to acquire 15% of 

their energy from new renewable resources by 2015. Montana utilities will meet the overall 

2015 target but will need to add renewable resources in the future to maintain compliance. 

Montana also has a Community Renewable Energy Project (CREP) provision in the state’s 

RPS that requires utilities to procure a certain amount of nameplate capacity of smaller (less 

than 25 MW) locally owned renewable energy projects, either wholly utility-owned or at 

least 50% owned by Montana investors. NorthWestern Energy is the only utility with CREP 

obligation left in Montana and must procure roughly 45 MW. Satisfying the CREP 

requirement has resulted in regulatory and project development challenges in recent years but 

remains a near-term driver for renewable energy projects in the state. NorthWestern Energy 

is currently out of compliance with the CREP requirement and is requesting a waiver from 

the Public Service Commission for the 2014 compliance year.

• The Oregon Renewable Energy Act (SB 838) was signed into law on June 6, 2007. The Act 

establishes a Renewable Energy Standard that requires Oregon’s largest utilities to acquire 

25% of their electricity from renewable energy sources by 2025. Smaller Oregon utilities 

must meet targets of 5% or 10% by 2025. Oregon utilities have met the 2015 targets but will 

need to acquire new resources to meet the final 2025 targets.

• In November 2006, Washington voters passed Initiative 937, the Clean Energy Initiative. I937 enacts a renewable energy standard that requires Washington’s 17 largest utilities to get 

15% of their electricity from new, homegrown, renewable energy sources by 2020. Utilities 

will also be required to pursue all low-cost energy efficiency and conservation opportunities.

Washington utilities met their interim 2012 targets. Many utilities will need to acquire 

additional resources to meet the 2020 target.

Two of the states in the region, Idaho and Wyoming, have no RPS. 

Table 13. RPS Overview for Northwest Wind Resource and Action Center States

RPS

Idaho None

Montana 15% by 2015

Oregon

Large utilities: 25% by 2025

Small utilities: 10% by 2025

Smallest utilities: 5% by 2025

Washington 15% renewables by 2020

Wyoming None
41

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

6.2 Workforce Development

Figure 9. Map of school wind turbine projects, educational programs, and locations with both 

wind turbines and educational programs within the Northwest Wind Resource and Action Center’s

area 

Wind energy educational programs across the Northwest have been limited. Educational 

activities are described in more detail in the state sections below. The WINDExchange website

also offers information and interactive maps regarding workforce development, the DOE’s 

Collegiate Wind Competition, the DOE’s Wind for Schools project, school wind project 

locations, and locations of education and training programs in the Northwest Wind Resource and 

Action Center’s region and other states.35

6.3 Manufacturing

NREL researchers compiled the following wind energy manufacturing data for this region as part 

of DOE’s annual wind market report effort (DOE 2015c). Tier I represents major components 

such as blades and towers, and Tier II components are sub-components, such as inverters and 

electrical equipment, to make the Tier I equipment.

Table 14. Wind-Related Manufacturing Overview for Northwest Wind Resource and Action Center 

States

Name City State Component Tier

XZERES Wind Wilsonville OR Distributed wind I

Moventas Portland OR Gearbox I

PowerClimber Wind Seattle WA Hoist, rigging equipment II

 35 http://apps2.eere.energy.gov/wind/windexchange/schools/
42

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

6.4 Key Stakeholder Groups and Deployment Challenges

The Northwest Wind Resource and Action Center targets these stakeholder groups: 

• Bonneville Power Administration

• County commissioners

• Developers

• Educational institutions (academia)

• Experts (researchers, technical)

• Federal agencies

• Federal government (decision makers, elected officials, policy makers)

• Public interest groups (advisory, advocacy, affiliates, boards, committees, community, 

consumer, councils, NGOs, partner network, working group)

• Industry (manufacturers, supply chain, associated businesses)

• Industry trade groups

• Media

• Merchant energy suppliers

• Non-elected government officials

• Public (engaged citizens, interested and general public)

• Regulatory (public utility commissioners, decision makers, staff, interveners)

• State agencies

• State government (decision makers, elected officials, governor staff, policy makers)

• Tribal

• Utilities (power authorities, publics, munis, co-ops, decision makers, staff)

• Utility trade groups.

The information provided to these stakeholder groups addresses the following wind energy 

deployment market barriers that are prevalent in this region:

• Need to advance the state-of-the art in resource planning processes and ensure accurate 

wind information is utilized in utility integrated resource planning

• Need for transmission and energy market advances, including a liquid bilateral market for 

integration resources, 15-minute scheduling, and development of a regional energy 

imbalance market

• Need for science-based resource planning in siting guidelines, especially for development 

in sage grouse areas
43

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

• Need for improved zoning and permitting practices in jurisdictions with high 

distributed/community wind potential

• Restricted access to capital for distributed/community wind development

• Lack of technical assistance available for potential community wind projects

• Lack of strong baseline of technical information about offshore wind and the need to 

build credibility around the resource opportunity.

6.5 Collaborating Organizations

Organizations that have collaborated with the Northwest Wind Resource and Action Center 

include:

• American Wind Energy Association

• Beneficial State Bank

• Boise State University

• Columbia Gorge Community College

• Community Renewable Energy 

Association

• Distributed Wind Energy Association

• DNV GL 

• EDP Renewables North America

• eFormative Options 

• Endurance Wind Power

• EWT Americas

• Iberdrola Renewables

• Idaho National Laboratory

• McKinstry

• Montana Department of Environmental 

Quality

• Montana Renewable Energy Association

• Northwest National Marine Renewable 

Energy Center

• Oregon State University

• Oregon Wave Energy Trust

• Pacific Northwest National Laboratory

• Puget Sound Energy

• Oregon Wave Energy Trust

• Vaisala 3Tier.

6.6 State Updates

6.6.1 Idaho

As of the end of 2014, Idaho has 33 wind projects with a total installed capacity of 973 MW, and 

that number remained the same at the end of 2015 (WINDExchange 2016). Idaho has a larger 

percentage of smaller projects compared to neighboring states as many of the wind projects were 

developed under the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act (PURPA) limits. The major utility in 

the state, Idaho Power, has leveraged this to influence policy changes at the Public Utilities 

Commission that limit project size and make changes to rates for standard PURPA contracts that 

increase costs for developers. Opponents of wind development have also been very active, 

including billboard messaging on the I-84 corridor, focusing on areas with high concentrations of 

wind projects. The political climate has limited the effectiveness of messaging by wind 
45

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

proponents in a variety of venues. Idaho has 2.4 MW of distributed wind capacity installed and 

no community wind projects. 

Idaho participates in the Energy Department’s Wind for Schools project through the engagement 

of Boise State University, with the installation of seven school systems in the state. Boise State 

University also participated in the 2014 Collegiate Wind Competition and is an entrant for the 

2016 Competition.

6.6.2 Montana

As of the end of 2015, Montana had 17 wind projects with a total installed capacity of 665 MW. 

The state has a large wind resource, ranking third nationally in total wind energy potential, but 

the lack of transmission capacity to other states inhibits Montana from capturing it. This is 

especially problematic in eastern Montana, which has the lowest population and the highest wind 

resource. A growing local opportunity could be the industrial boom in the Bakken region.

Ironically, this boom has created a new market of local demand for electricity, which could be 

supplied by wind. Governor Steve Bullock supports energy development in general, including

wind, and holds a fairly conservative stance on carbon regulation, which would benefit wind but 

also impact Montana’s coal industry. Public support is overwhelmingly in favor of wind energy 

development but at the same time supportive of existing coal generation.

The Montana Public Service Commission currently has a mixed track record on wind energy 

development. Recently the commission approved a 25 MW negotiated Qualifying 

Facilities/PURPA wind contract on NorthWestern Energy’s system. At the same time, the 

commission has reduced the standard offer contract terms for new Qualifying Facilities/PURPA 

wind projects from 10 MW of maximum capacity to 3 MW. The Public Service Commission has 

also complicated proposals for CREPs, though perhaps not primarily because the projects were 

wind or renewable energy. 

Transmission issues make it challenging for Montana to export its power to population centers in 

other states. The two biggest electric grids in the United States are the Western Connection and 

the Eastern Connection, and they meet in eastern Montana. However, policy and financial issues 

make it impractical for eastern Montana to export energy across the grid divide into Washington 

State. As a result, the strong wind resource potential in eastern Montana is effectively cut off 

from exporting energy to the West.

While opposition to new transmission lines still exists, improvements to the siting process and 

some legislative changes have created a more favorable climate over the past few years. In the 

case of the Mountain States Transmission Intertie line, creating a citizens-based study group 

helped the average person’s voice be heard in the siting process. Unfortunately, market forces 

have delayed development of the line and other major projects in the region, such as Bonneville 

Power Administration’s Montana-to-Washington project. Planned and potential coal plant 

retirements may also affect transmission capacity available for wind energy export to certain 

markets. 

Montana has a 15% by 2015 RPS. Northwestern Energy, the largest utility in the state, will meet 

the 2015 RPS target mostly through generation from seven wind projects with a total installed 

capacity of 213.4 MW, plus three small hydro projects totaling 15.5 MW. 
46

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

As in other Western states, impact on sage grouse populations is an issue in terms of siting wind 

projects. Montana’s Sage Grouse Conservation Strategy, adopted in anticipation of Endangered 

Species Act listing decision by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, could affect wind energy 

development in Montana. The strategy calls for wind energy development to be avoided in all 

sage grouse core areas.

Montana has 4.9 MW of distributed wind capacity installed, primarily consisting of turbines 

rated at 100 kW or less. Gordon Butte, the only community wind project, has an interconnection 

and power purchase agreement with NorthWestern Energy. Several other community wind 

projects are in the development phase; however, low power purchase agreement prices and lack 

of the 1603 Treasury program grant in lieu of tax credit have limited the financial viability of 

these projects. During the 2015 legislative session, several bills were proposed that would help 

open the market for distributed wind projects, including aggregate net metering, neighborhood 

net metering, and increasing the net metering cap; however, these bills did not move forward. 

Montana participates in the Energy Department’s Wind for Schools project36 through the 

engagement of Montana State University, with 11 school systems installed in the state. The 

University of Montana also provides wind energy curricula.

Note that Eastern Montana is also supported by the Midwest Regional Resource Center.

6.6.3 Oregon

As of the end of 2015, Oregon has a total installed capacity of 3,153 MW (WINDExchange 

2016). Despite this incredible progress, new project development has stalled due to a number of 

factors including depressed demand for power, low natural gas prices, uncertainty about the 

persistence of federal policy, and utilities fulfilling their near-term RPS compliance targets. 

Because of this delay in construction activity, some projects that have already been approved 

through state and county processes need to either apply for permit extensions or let their existing 

permits expire. Twelve projects totaling 1,519 MW have approved permits, and another 1,628 

MW of wind are in the permitting process, so the pipeline is primed for activity once the market 

turns around.

Inaccurate wind energy information also undermines long-term planning for new renewable 

resources in utility integrated resource planning. This is being addressed through active 

participation in the planning processes at the Oregon Public Utility Commission.

Transmission and market issues in the region further suppress wind development in the state.

Improvements are needed in liquid bi-lateral markets for integration resources, a transition to 15-

minute scheduling, and development of a regional energy imbalance market. Regional advances 

are being made in certain areas, such as 15-minute scheduling and bilateral markets. Work on a 

regional energy imbalance market is more divided with many utilities and Bonneville Power 

Administration exploring a Northwest energy imbalance market option, while some larger 

 36 http://apps2.eere.energy.gov/wind/windexchange/schools_wfs_project.asp
47

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

utilities are considering joining CAISO37 as an alternative. One positive development is that 

Senator Ron Wyden has become a strong supporter of a regional energy imbalance market.

As in other Western states, impact on sage grouse populations is an issue in terms of siting wind 

projects. Oregon is developing a state plan for sage grouse conservation that will affect the 

potential for wind energy development in the southeastern quadrant of the state. Oregon is 

attempting to avoid the core area exclusion approach used in other states by formulating a new 

regulatory approach and enhancing the compensatory mitigation system. 

Oregon has 4.8 MW of distributed wind capacity installed, primarily located in territory covered 

by the Energy Trust of Oregon’s incentive program. Oregon has a single 9-MW community wind 

project, PaTu Wind, which sells power through a power purchase agreement with Portland 

General Electric and a long-term transmission contract with Bonneville Power. Like other states 

in the region, additional distributed wind projects are limited by high installed costs and 

community wind projects are challenged by low power purchase agreement prices and lack of 

the investment tax credit cash grant.

Oregon also has one proposed offshore wind project, the 30-MW Principle Power WindFloat 

Pacific project, one of DOE’s Offshore Wind Advanced Technology Demonstration Projects. 

Interest in offshore wind on the West Coast has been limited because the depth of the water is 

too great for typical offshore turbine installations. This demonstration project would use floating 

turbine platforms to address this issue. If successful, this approach could open up new areas for 

offshore development.

Columbia Gorge Community College was one of the original colleges offering wind technician 

training programs and continues to offer degree and certificate programs in renewable energy. 

6.6.4 Washington

As of the end of 2015, Washington has a total installed capacity of 3,075 MW (WINDExchange 

2016). Similar to other states in the Northwest, new project development has slowed due to 

factors such as depressed demand for power, low natural gas prices, uncertainty about the

persistence of federal policy, and utilities fulfilling their near-term RPS compliance targets. 

Despite this dynamic, six projects totaling 1,307 MW have approved permits, and another 601

MW of wind are in the permitting process, so projects are ready to move forward once the 

market turns around.

Inaccurate wind energy information also undermines long-term planning for new renewable 

resources in utility integrated resource planning. This is being addressed through active 

participation in the planning processes at the Washington Utilities and Transportation 

Commission.

Transmission and market issues in the region further suppress wind development in the state.

Improvements are needed in liquid bi-lateral markets for integration resources, a transition to 15-

minute scheduling, and development of a regional energy imbalance market. Regional advances 

are being made in certain areas, such as 15-minute scheduling and bi-lateral markets. Work on a 

regional energy imbalance market is more divided with many Washington public utilities and 

 37 An independent, non-profit Independent System Operator (ISO) serving California
48

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

Bonneville Power Administration exploring a Northwest energy imbalance market option, while 

Puget Sound Energy has signaled it would like to join the CAISO energy imbalance market as an 

alternative. 

Washington has 12.7 MW of distributed wind capacity installed, of which 10.4 MW are also 

community wind projects (Coastal Energy Project and Swauk Wind). Washington State offers a 

production-based incentive of $0.12 per kilowatt-hour for net-metered wind systems up to 100 

kW; however, the high installed cost of these systems remains a barrier. The incentive expires in 

June 2020, and efforts are underway to renew and expand this program. 

6.6.5 Wyoming

By the end of 2015, Wyoming had 1,410 MW of installed wind capacity, representing total 

capital investment of $2.6 billion across 21 projects. The wind industry in the state supplies more 

than $4 million in annual land lease payments to farmers, ranchers, and other landowners

potential (American Wind Energy Association 2015r). Wyoming has 5.8 MW of distributed 

wind capacity installed and no community wind projects.

As with other states in the region, transmission constraints limit development, although three 

large transmission projects have been proposed to deliver power to larger markets (American 

Wind Energy Association 2015r). Several large wind projects have been proposed for Wyoming 

to utilize that transmission capacity if the new lines move forward. Other siting considerations 

for wind development in Wyoming include a state tax on wind energy generated in the state and 

wildlife concerns relating to sage grouse and eagles. Wind education programs in Wyoming 

include programs at the University of Wyoming and Larimer County Community College, one of 

the original colleges offering certificate programs for wind turbine technicians.

Note that the Four Corners Wind Resource Center also supports activities in Wyoming.
49

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

7 Southeast Wind Energy Resource Center

The Southeast Wind Energy Resource Center (SWERC) worked with NREL researchers to 

provide the following assessment of the state of the wind industry in this region.

The SWERC38 encompasses the following states: Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, 

Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, and Virginia. The 

RRC works to advance the wind industry in the Southeast by providing fact-based information to 

stakeholders, engaging electric utilities, engaging on wind energy permitting processes, and 

preserving access to quality wind resources, both onshore and offshore. The RRC is a joint effort 

of The Southeastern Wind Coalition and several partners, including the North Carolina Clean 

Energy Technology Center at North Carolina State University, Clemson University, Coastal 

Carolina University, Georgia Institute of Technology, the Florida Energy Systems Consortium, 

James Madison University, Navigant Consulting, and a network of more than 80 affiliate 

organizations. These partners have long been reliable sources of unbiased information on wind 

energy and have a long history of stakeholder engagement in the region.

The following section provides an overview of the wind industry in the region. It should be noted 

that improved technology and accessing the wind resource at higher above-ground heights allow 

for geographic expansion of wind development into areas such as the Southeast, which 

historically was categorized as having a poor wind resource and little potential for wind 

development (DOE 2015b). New potential wind capacity maps are available for a 2014 industry 

standard wind turbine installed on a 110-m tower, which represents plausible current technology 

options, and a wind turbine on a 140-m tower, which represents near-future technology options

(WINDExchange 2015).

Table 15. Key Statistics for the Southeast Wind Energy Resource Center Region

AL AR FL GA KY LA MS NC SC TN VA

Installed Wind, 

2015 (MW)39

.07 .68 .39 .11 .20 .11 .03 .29 .03 29 .95

Projected 

Potential 

Capacity (MW), 

80 m, 30% CF 118 9,200 .4 130 61 410 0 808 185 309 1,793

Projected 

Potential 

Capacity (MW), 

100 m, 30% CF 568 49,962 .4 294 699 2,840 0 1,500 1,215 817 3,466

Contribution 

from Distributed 

Wind Projects, 

2014 (MW)40

.1 .7 .39 .11 .20 .11 0.03 .29 .03 .14 .95

Proposed 

Offshore Wind 

Projects (MW) 2,01241

 38 http://www.sewind.org/ 39 2015 Year End Wind Power Capacity Map. Available at 

http://apps2.eere.energy.gov/wind/windexchange/wind_installed_capacity.asp

40 Distributed wind project installed capacity is defined as 2003-2013 cumulative capacity (U.S. DOE 2015a). 41 Virginia Offshore Wind Technology Advancement Project 12 MW, Dominion Virginia Power 2,000 MW
50

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

7.1 Renewable Portfolio Standards

Of the states located in the SWERC's area, only North Carolina has an RPS. South Carolina and 

Virginia have goals, and the remaining eight states have neither in place.

Table 16. RPS Overview for Southeast Wind Resource Center States

RPS

AL None

AR None

FL None

GA None

KY None

LA None

MS None

NC

12.5% x 2021 (investor-owned utilities)

10% x 2018 (co-ops & munis)

SC Goal of 2% by 2021

TN None

VA Goal of 15% x 2025

7.2 Workforce Development

Figure 10. Map of school wind turbine projects, educational programs, and locations with both 

wind turbines and educational programs within the Southeast Wind Energy Resource Center’s

area 

University-based wind energy programs in the Southeast are more limited than in other regions; 

however, robust programs at James Madison University, land-based wind programs at Virginia 

Technical University, offshore wind programs at Clemson University and Georgia Technical 

University, and distributed wind programs at Appalachian State University provide diversity. 

Educational activities are described in more detail in the state sections below. The 

WINDExchange website also offers information and interactive maps regarding workforce 
51

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

development, the DOE’s Collegiate Wind Competition, the DOE’s Wind for Schools project, 

school wind project locations, and locations of education and training programs in the SWERC 

region and other states.42

7.3 Manufacturing

NREL researchers compiled the following wind energy manufacturing data for this region as part 

of DOE’s annual wind market report effort (DOE 2015c). Tier I represents major components 

such as blades and towers, and Tier II components are sub-components, such as inverters and 

electrical equipment, to make the Tier I equipment.

Table 17. Wind-Related Manufacturing Overview for Southeast Wind Energy Resource Center 

States

Name City State Component Tier

Molded Fiber Glass Opp AL Enclosures II

LM Wind Power Little Rock AR Blades I

GE Energy Pensacola FL Turbine (nacelle assembly) I

ZF Group Gainesville GA Gearbox I

Hailo LLC Elberton GA Climbing devices II

Blade Dynamics New 

Orleans

LA Blades I

Comer Industries Charlotte NC Yaw, pitch control systems II

ABB Inc. Huntersville NC Electrical II

IMO Group Charleston SC Slew rings and drives II

Ahlstrom Specialty 

Reinforcements

Bishopville SC Composites II

Timken Union SC Bearings II

Thomas and Betts 

Corporation

Memphis TN Fasteners II

BGB Technology Chesterfield 

County

VA Slipring assembly II

7.4 Key Stakeholder Groups and Deployment Challenges

The SWERC targets these stakeholder groups: 

• Utilities: Electric utilities are a critical stakeholder for all market sectors of wind energy, 

especially in the Southeast. The large, vertically integrated, regulated utilities are major 

economic drivers and have connections at the highest levels of state leadership. As a result, 

they have tremendous influence in energy policy and permitting, and that affects land-based, 

offshore, and distributed wind energy. SWERC engages utilities through its Utility Advisory 

Group, which provides a forum for the utilities to discuss wind energy issues in the 

Southeast. 

• Federal and state decision makers: State policies have been the largest driver for renewable 

energy demand creation in the United States. So far in the Southeast, only North Carolina 

passed an RPS. However, the RRC sees broader interest from other states creating possible 

demand signals for wind energy. The RPS may not be the policy of choice in every state, but 

whatever the mechanisms end up being, it is likely that state policy makers will play a 

 42 http://apps2.eere.energy.gov/wind/windexchange/schools/
52

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

leading role in advancing or holding back wind deployment in the region. The value and need 

for unbiased, relevant, and actionable information provided to state policy makers will prove 

critical in helping to insure the appropriate development of the region’s wind resources. 

• Local decision makers: County commissioners, city managers, town managers, and other 

local leaders can have a tremendous influence on the ability to deploy wind energy in 

appropriately sited locations. They are often a “make or break” party for development 

projects. For example, a land-based project by Apex Wind in Alabama was effectively shut 

down by opposition from the county commission. This is a critical audience for delivering 

unbiased and fact-based information so that they are able to make informed decisions about 

wind energy projects and related policies in their jurisdiction. 

• Industry: Wind industry developers, consultants, service, and supply chain companies are a 

powerful and historically underutilized ally in efforts to advance responsible wind energy 

deployment. As the voice of jobs and economic development, they have considerable 

influence with decision-makers and leaders. They are also a valuable source of technical 

information. 

• Affiliate network: Many organizations are engaged in supporting wind energy efforts in the 

Southeast, from state energy offices to environmental organizations to academic groups. The 

SWERC will connect these diverse groups that are able to reach a wide range of 

stakeholders. The affiliate network is SWERC’s “eyes, ears, and boots on the ground” to help 

identify issues that need to be considered and then to disseminate RRC information to 

address those issues. The affiliate network is open to any group with an interest in learning 

more about wind energy in the Southeast and is targeted toward those groups interested in 

engaging with SWERC’s key stakeholders. 

The information provided to these stakeholder groups addresses the following wind energy 

deployment market barriers that are prevalent in this region:

• Policy makers are not aware of the wind industry jobs and assets in their jurisdictions. This 

lack of information makes it difficult for them to support expanded wind development, 

especially in the face of vocal opposition to a project. SWERC activities include outreach to 

state and local decision makers to address this issue.

• Stakeholders in the region need credible, fact-based information to counter organized 

misinformation campaigns in the region.

• A lack of state RPS policies in the region (except for North Carolina) and low average 

electricity prices contribute to the lack of demand for wind energy and additional hurdles for 

wind deployment compared to some other regions. 

• Navigating the potential conflicts with existing offshore activities is a challenge and requires 

significant engagement with many stakeholders. The SWERC is working to navigate these 

issues in North Carolina and South Carolina.

• The military is a very large economic driver in many states in the Southeast. Any conflicts 

with military operations—whether real, perceived, or just unknown—create uncertainty for 

development, especially in discussions between base commanders and local government 

officials. 
53

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

• Some level of utility support will be necessary for offshore wind to move forward in the 

Southeast. Because Southeast utilities are conservative by nature and they have no first-hand 

operating experience with offshore wind, the unknowns are often extrapolated to “worstcase” perceived risks. That includes all of the typical questions that are still unanswered for 

Southeast development, such as diurnal wind patterns, ramp rates, seasonality, demand 

coincidence, transmission needs, O&M issues, etc. 

7.5 Collaborating Organizations

Organizations that have collaborated with the SWERC include:

• ABB Inc.

• Alabama Rivers Alliance

• Alliance for Affordable Energy

• American Council on Renewable 

Energy

• American Planning Association

• American Wind Energy Association

• Apex Wind

• Arkansas Advanced Energy

• Arkansas Energy Office

• AWS Truepower

• AXYS Technologies

• Blue Green Alliance Foundation

• Cape Fear Community College

• Chesapeake Climate Action Network

• City of North Myrtle Beach

• City of Tybee Island

• Clean Line Energy

• Coastal Carolina University

• Consumer Energy Alliance

• COWI

• Distributed Wind Energy 

Association

• Dominion Power

• Duke Energy

• Duke University

• E4 Carolinas

• eFormative Options

• Electric Power Research Institute

• Energy Foundation

• Enterprise Florida

• Environment America

• Fishermen's Energy

• Florida Energy Systems Consortium

• Florida Sea Grant

• Georgia Department of Natural 

Resources, Coastal Resources 

Division

• Georgia Energy Center of Innovation
54

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

• Georgia Energy Office

• Georgia Tech Strategic Energy 

Institute

• Green Law

• Gulf States Renewable Energy 

Association

• Iberdrola Renewables

• International Council for Local 

Energy Initiatives, Local 

Governments for Sustainability

• K&L Gates

• Kentucky Energy Office

• Marsh

• Mississippi & Alabama Sea Grant

• Mountain Association for 

Community Economic Development

• National Wildlife Federation

• Natural Resources Defense Council

• Navigant

• Nicholas Institute

• Normandeau Associates

• North Carolina Conservation 

Network

• North Carolina Energy Office

• North Carolina Ports Authority

• North Carolina Sea Grant

• North Carolina Sustainable Energy 

Association

• North Myrtle Beach Chamber of 

Commerce

• Nucor Corporation

• Ocean Isle Fishing Center

• Parker Poe

• REAP

• Research Triangle Cleantech Cluster

• Saertex

• Santee Cooper

• Savannah River National Laboratory

• SCANA Corporation

• ScottMadden

• Siemens

• Sierra Club

• Signal Energy

• South Carolina Clean Energy 

Business Alliance

• South Carolina Coastal Conservation 

League

• South Carolina Sea Grant

• South Carolina State Ports Authority 

• Southeast Energy Efficiency 

Alliance

• Southern Company

• Tennessee Energy Office

• Tetra Tech
55

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

• U.S. Offshore Wind Collaborative

• University of North Carolina Chapel 

Hill

• University of North Carolina 

Charlotte (EPIC Center)

• Virginia Conservation Network

• Virginia Offshore Wind Coalition

• Wake Forest University.

7.6 State Updates

7.6.1 Alabama

Although Alabama has no utility-scale wind installed, the state is home to 16 companies and 18 

facilities that are involved in the full value chain of the wind energy industry (including 

headquarters), according to AWEA. Alabama Power has contracts in place to purchase 404 MW 

of wind energy from projects located in Kansas and Oklahoma. These contracts, put in place in 

2011 and 2012, can provide power for up to 100,000 homes. 

7.6.2 Arkansas

Arkansas does not have wind development, but it is home to 12 wind manufacturing facilities, 

according to AWEA, and the Arkansas Electric Cooperative Corporation has three power 

purchase agreements for wind energy totaling 309 MW from projects in Oklahoma and Kansas. 

All three agreements have been signed over the past few years: a 2012 agreement to purchase 51 

MW from the Flat Ridge 2 South Wind Farm in Kansas, a 2013 agreement to purchase 150 MW 

from the Origin Wind Farm in Oklahoma, and a 2015 agreement to purchase 108 MW from the 

Drift Sand Wind Farm in Oklahoma.

7.6.3 Florida

Although no wind projects have been installed in the state, Gulf Power signed a power purchase 

agreement to bring wind power into Florida from Oklahoma’s Kingfisher Wind Project. The 

Florida Public Service Commission approved the power purchase agreement for 178 MW in 

May 2015. Resource assessment and early development work for several sites in northern Florida 

have been undertaken, but there are no projects under development. 

Florida is the headquarters to several major players in the wind energy industry, with 50 facilities 

involved in the full value chain of the wind energy industry. NextEra Energy Resources, 

headquartered in Juno Beach, is the largest owner of wind power capacity in the United States,

and Siemens, a major wind turbine manufacturer, is headquartered in Orlando. Florida has been 

successful in attracting manufacturing investment for the wind industry. Market leader General 

Electric has a wind turbine assembly facility in Pensacola, several other wind energy 

manufacturers have Florida facilities, and Siemens Energy opened a Wind Service Training 

Center in Orlando in September 2013. 
56

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

7.6.4 Georgia

Georgia Power signed a power purchase agreement to bring 250 MW of wind energy into its 

service territory from Oklahoma wind projects starting in 2016. Additionally, Southern Company 

submitted an application to BOEM for an interim policy lease that would allow for 

meteorological measurement activities offshore from Tybee Island. 

Georgia is home to more than 32 companies and nearly 50 facilities that are involved in the full 

value chain of the wind energy industry. The Georgia Wind Working Group continues to 

advance the wind industry in the state by creating educational opportunities for all stakeholders. 

Close coordination with the Georgia Public Service Commission resulted in several opportunities 

for commissioners to speak in support of wind energy activities within the state. The second

annual Georgia Tech Energy Expo in April 2015 brought together state and national energy 

experts for a comprehensive and interactive event with an enthusiastic public audience. The 

Georgia Wind Working Group utilized its network of professional affiliates to populate the 

discussion panels for this event. Georgia Public Service Commissioner Chuck Eaton broached 

the importance of energy diversity and employing a long-term outlook when planning the energy 

utility future of the state, while Commissioner Tim Echols moderated a panel on the 

infrastructure and workforce of state energy development while advocating the importance of 

renewables.

7.6.5 Kentucky

Kentucky is already home to 15 companies and 16 facilities (according to AWEA) that are 

involved in the full value chain of the wind energy industry, even though no wind farms exist in 

the state. Some notable examples include companies like Rotek and Muehlhan Wind Power. 

Recently, turbine manufacturers have designed taller towers and longer blades, improving energy 

output, especially at lower-wind-speed sites. In Kentucky, the wind potential with future turbine 

technology is estimated to be more than 524.5 terrawatt-hours per year.

7.6.6 Louisiana

Louisiana has nine companies and 10 facilities that are involved in the full value chain of the 

wind energy industry, even though no wind farms exist in the state. Blade Dynamics 

manufactures wind turbine blades at their facility in New Orleans. The AEP Southwestern 

Electric Power Company has power purchase agreements for 469 MW of wind energy. These 

contracts bring wind from several projects in Texas, Oklahoma, and Kansas.

7.6.7 Mississippi

According to AWEA, Mississippi is home to seven companies and eight facilities that are 

involved in the full value chain of the wind energy industry. Though the state has no utility-scale 

wind installed, the potential areas for wind development in the state are increasing due to 

technological advancements for taller turbines and longer blades.

7.6.8 North Carolina

North Carolina will be home to the first large utility-scale wind farm in the Southeast. The 

Amazon Wind Farm U.S. East project by Iberdrola Renewables will include an initial phase of 

208 MW of wind energy in Pasquotank County and Perquimans County in the northeastern part 

of the state. During the project’s groundbreaking ceremony in July, North Carolina Governor Pat 
57

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

McCrory expressed support for the project’s economic development benefits. The turbines will 

be located on private land leased by Iberdrola and will result in millions in tax and landowner 

revenue over the 20- to 30-year lifetime of the project.

The jobs and economic development generated by this project will build on the wind industry 

jobs already present in the state through the supply chain. There are more than 25 facilities in 

North Carolina that supply component parts for the wind industry, according to AWEA, and 

building wind projects in the state can help to strengthen and build the local supply chain. The 

Amazon project will provide an opportunity for communities in the Southeast to see first-hand 

the benefits of utility-scale wind. Coastal North Carolina has several kilowatts of distributed 

wind, some of which are Wind for Schools project turbines. 

Despite these advancements, barriers to developing wind in North Carolina remain. The state has 

a weak RPS of 12.5% by 2021, and opponents have organized misinformation campaigns. In 

April 2015, the North Carolina Clean Energy Technology Center at North Carolina State 

University, as a part of SWERC, published fact sheets43 to address some of the key wind energy 

myths being spread regarding health impacts, economic impacts, environmental/wildlife impacts,

and grid/military impacts.

North Carolina is also participating in the Wind for Schools project, through the engagement of 

Appalachian State University, with the installation of 11 school systems within the state.

7.6.9 South Carolina

South Carolina has a few kilowatts of wind power capacity installed as a result of Wind for 

Schools projects deployed in North Carolina, as well as ongoing efforts for offshore wind in the 

state. The state’s BOEM task force is refining the areas offshore from Horry County and 

Georgetown County that will be included in a Call for Information and potentially offered for 

lease. In 2014, the South Carolina General Assembly passed a resolution in support of wind 

energy in the state. The resolution acknowledges the state’s wind manufacturing assets, offshore 

wind resource potential, supportive local governments and Clemson University’s large-scale 

wind turbine drivetrain testing facility in Charleston. Several local governments in the state 

(Charleston, North Charleston, and North Myrtle Beach) have also expressed support for wind 

energy.

Coastal Carolina University hosted a wind energy forum in late 2014 to engage industry experts, 

academics, and state and local leaders in a discussion about advancing offshore wind energy 

opportunities in South Carolina and the Southeast. The event included remarks from a number of 

state and local leaders, with Senator Greg Hembree outlining a bill that he introduced in 2015 to

enable the investor-owned utilities in the state to recover the costs of a small-scale demonstration 

project through their rates. 

Clemson University’s South Carolina Electric & Gas Energy Innovation Center44 is a wind 

turbine drivetrain testing and grid simulator facility that completed construction in 2013. Testing 

performed at the Center benefits the industry as a whole while also drawing attention to the 

Southeast. In addition to technical testing, the facility provides tours, offers education on the 

 43 Available at http://nccleantech.ncsu.edu/technology/renewable-energy/wind-energy/ 44 http://clemsonenergy.com/
58

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

technical characteristics of wind turbines, and creates opportunities for stakeholders to meet and 

learn.

7.6.10 Tennessee

Tennessee is home to the Southeast’s only utility-scale wind farm, the 29-MW Buffalo Mountain 

project completed in 2004. According to AWEA, the state also has 27 companies and more than 

30 facilities that are involved in the full value chain of the wind energy industry. The Tennessee 

Valley Authority has contracts for more than 1,500 MW of wind energy from Kansas, Illinois,

and Iowa (American Wind Energy Association 2015m). The Eastern Clean Line transmission 

line is a proposed project that could facilitate the import of additional wind energy from the 

Oklahoma Panhandle region (Monies 2015b).

7.6.11 Virginia

The state’s proposed land-based wind projects are making progress in the planning stages and the 

state has expanded net metering, but much of the focus remains on solar energy. Virginia’s 

offshore wind activities are moving forward with progress in the BOEM leasing process.

Virginia Electric and Power Company was awarded a lease for the Virginia Wind Energy Area, 

and Virginia’s Department of Mines Minerals and Energy was awarded a research lease for the 

two-turbine Virginia Offshore Wind Technology Advancement Project. This project, led by 

Dominion Virginia Power, is one of DOE’s Offshore Wind Advanced Technology 

Demonstration Project and will deploy two direct-drive Alstom wind turbines 26 miles off the 

coast of Virginia Beach. The project, designed to reduce costs and uncertainty for a future largescale project, is undertaking a stakeholder process to find a path forward for the project after 

initial cost estimates exceeded the conceptual estimate.

In addition, the Virginia Offshore Wind Coalition is an industry group comprised of developers, 

supply chain companies, localities, and utilities. The group’s objectives are to develop Hampton

Roads as a logistical hub of the offshore wind supply chain, to promote industry and employment

opportunities in the commonwealth, and to cultivate wind projects off the Virginia shore

(Virginia Offshore Wind Coalition 2014).

Installation of small wind projects has slowed.45 Some small wind projects are installed as part of 

the Wind for Schools project46 through the engagement of James Madison University, with nine

school systems installed in the state. James Madison University also participated in the 2014 

Collegiate Wind Competition. Virginia Technical University has also been active in wind energy 

programs, including hosting of the 2015 North American Wind Energy Academy symposium.

47

 45 James Madison University offers a time-lapse illustrating small wind energy system installations in Virginia from 

2000 to 2015: http://ecodefend.t15.org/ 46 http://apps2.eere.energy.gov/wind/windexchange/schools_wfs_project.asp 47 http://www.nawea.org/
59

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

8 Updates for States Outside of RRC Regions

The WINDExchange team based at NREL researched the current state of wind energy in states 

outside of RRCs and compiled the following brief summaries. The states not included as part of 

an RRC are California, Delaware, Kansas, Maryland, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Texas, and West 

Virginia. 

Note that Delaware, Nebraska, and West Virginia do not have any manufacturing facilities 

serving the wind industry.

8.1 California

As of the end of 2015, California’s installed wind capacity was 6,108 MW (WINDExchange 

2016). A vast majority of this clean generation comes from the 124 wind projects installed across 

the state. This amount of development equates to an $11.7 billion capital investment and 

provides approximately $17.8 million in annual land lease payments (American Wind Energy 

Association 2015b). California generated 12,998 gigawatt-hours from wind in 2014, equivalent 

to approximately 6.57% of the state’s gross system power (California Energy Commission 

2016). The state saw 107 MW of wind energy come online through the third quarter of 2015

(American Wind Energy Association 2015n).

Although the state adopted a 20% by 2020 RPS in 2002 that was increased to 33% in 2011, 

Governor Jerry Brown proposed a new goal of 50% renewable energy by 2030 in early 2015

(Siders 2015). The state has been working to build the necessary transmission to achieve its 

targets. Two transmission projects will play an integral role in the state meeting its RPS goal. 

The nearly $1.9 billion Sunrise Powerlink Project, a 117-mile transmission project that came 

online in 2012, has allowed San Diego Gas and Electric to increase the amount of clean 

generation it can provide its customers (San Diego Gas & Electric 2012). The $2.1 billion 

Tehachapi Renewable Transmission Project (Edison International) is a 173-mile project that is 

expected to be fully completed by late 2016 and have the ability to transmit 4,500 MW of wind

energy to the state (Southern California Edison 2014).

Siting challenges in California include impacts to wildlife (particularly raptors), desert tortoises, 

and other species. The state is developing its Desert Renewable Energy Conservation Plan to 

help address this issue, but the impact of this plan on wind energy’s ability to move forward in 

the state has raised concerns regarding future development (Roth 2014).

Although the state has a strong potential for offshore wind, there are many challenges to 

overcome prior to any project development. These include establishing a more streamlined 

regulatory process, working with BOEM to establish an offshore wind task force, and 

establishing an environmental baseline for potential project locations to understand impacts on 

avian and marine wildlife. The high cost of offshore wind compared to onshore wind and solar 

has also been a challenge. It should be noted that California’s deep waters will require floating 

platforms for offshore wind projects, and these platforms are still in the prototype stage (van 

Dam 2014).

California ranks third among the top five states for wind energy generation (the other top five 

states are Texas, Iowa, Oklahoma, and Kansas). California is home to more than 2,000 jobs 
60

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

related to the wind energy industry (American Wind Energy Association 2015b), and it ranked 

among the top three states in 2014 in terms of adding distributed wind capacity (U.S. Department 

of Energy 2015a).

Figure 11. Map of school wind turbine projects, educational programs, and locations with both 

wind turbines and educational programs in California

Two California schools have participated in the DOE Collegiate Wind Competition, with the 

California Maritime Academy participating in the 2014 Collegiate Wind Competition and as an 

entrant in the 2016 Competition. California State University Chico is also an entrant for the 2016 

Competition. Several universities in the state (such as the University of California, Davis and 

University of California, Berkeley) have been at the forefront of wind energy research. Visit the 

WINDExchange website for information about school wind projects and educational programs in 

California and other states.48

NREL researchers compiled the following California wind energy manufacturing data as part of 

DOE’s annual wind market report effort (DOE 2015c). Tier I represents major components such 

as blades and towers, and Tier II components are sub-components, such as inverters and 

electrical equipment, to make the Tier I equipment.

Table 18. California Wind-Related Manufacturing Overview

Name City State Component Tier

PowerWorks Tracy CA Distributed wind I

Molded Fiber Glass Adelanto CA Nacelle components II

Halus Power Systems San 

Leandro

CA Turbine Refurbishing I

 48 http://apps2.eere.energy.gov/wind/windexchange/schools/
61

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

8.2 Delaware

Delaware has 2 MW of wind capacity installed (at the University of Delaware’s Lewes campus),

with no wind projects under construction and no manufacturing facilities in the state supporting 

the wind industry. Delaware has implemented an aggressive RPS that requires all retail 

electricity suppliers to purchase 25% of the electricity sold in the state from renewable sources 

by the end of the 2026 state fiscal year. However, the RPS requirements leading to wind energy 

projects are effectively reduced by a determination that provides a two times REC multiplier for 

the energy output of certain natural gas powered fuel cells (State of Delaware Public Service 

Commission 2011).

Figure 12. Map of sole educational program location in Delaware

The University of Delaware has developed extensive capabilities in offshore wind technology 

and research involving the social acceptance of land-based and offshore wind technologies. Visit 

the WINDExchange website for information about school wind projects and educational 

programs in Delaware and other states.49

8.3 Kansas

At the end of 2015, Kansas had 3,766 MW of installed wind capacity (WINDExchange 2016). A 

vast majority of this clean generation comes from the 30 wind projects that have been installed 

across the state. This amount of development equates to a $5.5 billion capital investment and

provides approximately $8.9 million in annual land lease payments. Wind energy provides 

further economic development in the state through wind turbine manufacturing. Siemens 

operates a $50 million nacelle assembly facility in Hutchinson (American Wind Energy 

Association 2015d). Kansas generated 10,844 gigawatt-hours from wind in 2014 (American 

Wind Energy Association 2015m). 

 49 http://apps2.eere.energy.gov/wind/windexchange/schools/
62

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

The state enacted an RPS in May 2009 that requires certain utilities to generate or purchase 20%

of their electricity from renewable resources by 2020 (American Wind Energy Association 

2015d). The RPS was repealed in May 2015 and was replaced with a voluntary goal of 20% 

electricity from renewable resources by 2020.

Several barriers inhibit wind development in Kansas. According to a survey conducted by 

Kansas State University in 2010, environmental concerns rated the highest. People are very 

concerned about potential development in the Flint Hills; the proximity of wind turbines to the 

great wetlands of Cheyenne Bottoms and Quivera Wildlife Refuge, an extremely popular 

stopover point for waterfowl and cranes; and the impact on prairie chicken species that are under 

threat in Kansas. Other concerns about developing wind power in Kansas include health impacts 

and property rights. An additional barrier to wind development in the state is a lack of 

transmission from the wind-rich western part of the state to load centers in the eastern part of the 

state (National Renewable Energy Laboratory 2013). 

Figure 13. Map of school wind turbine projects, educational programs, and locations with both 

wind turbines and educational programs in Kansas

Kansas participates in the Wind for Schools project through the engagement of Kansas State 

University, with 28 school systems installed. According to state facilitator Ruth Douglas Miller, 

24 of the 28 turbines are operational, and the state’s Wind Application Center is working to get 

these systems collecting data and sending information to the OpenEI turbine database.

50 The 

disabled turbines must be repaired, dismantled and removed, or moved to other schools. A tight 

budget situation due to state-level policy makes it difficult for schools to maintain turbines; 

nevertheless, the Wind Application Center still receives occasional requests for assistance in 

installing a new turbine.

 50 http://en.openei.org/wiki/Wind_for_Schools_Portal
63

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

Kansas State University also participated in the 2014 Collegiate Wind Competition and is an 

entrant for the 2016 Competition. The University of Kansas also participated in the 2014 

Collegiate Wind Competition. Visit the WINDExchange website for information about school 

wind projects and educational programs in Kansas and other states.51

NREL researchers compiled the following Kansas wind energy manufacturing data as part of 

DOE’s annual wind market report effort (DOE 2015c). Tier I represents major components such 

as blades and towers, and Tier II components are sub-components, such as inverters and 

electrical equipment, to make the Tier I equipment.

Table 19. Kansas Wind-Related Manufacturing Overview

Name City State Component Tier

Jupiter Group Junction 

City

KS Nacelle covers and spinners II

Draka Hutchinson KS Electrical II

Siemens Hutchinson KS Turbines I

8.4 Maryland

Maryland has 190 MW of installed wind capacity at the end of 2015 (WINDExchange 2016).

With an RPS of 20% by 2022, Maryland has many additional opportunities for land-based and 

offshore projects, although most of the attention is focused on offshore wind. BOEM, under the 

U.S. Department of the Interior, has granted a competitive lease for sites in Maryland (U.S. 

Department of Energy 2015c). Nearly 80,000 acres of offshore federal waters were auctioned off 

in August 2014 with U.S. Wind Inc. attaining the rights. Preliminary project planning is 

underway, and a site assessment plan will be submitted to BOEM (Wheeler 2015a). Onshore 

development has recently been hampered due to concerns related to potential radar, wildlife, 

aesthetic, and property value impacts (Wheeler 2015b).

 51 http://apps2.eere.energy.gov/wind/windexchange/schools/
64

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

Figure 14. Map of school wind turbine projects, educational programs, and locations with both 

wind turbines and educational programs in Maryland

Although Maryland does not have many wind energy educational programs, the University of 

Maryland is an entrant for the 2016 Collegiate Wind Competition. Visit the WINDExchange 

website for information about school wind projects and educational programs in Maryland and 

other states.52

NREL researchers compiled the following Maryland wind energy manufacturing data as part of 

DOE’s annual wind market report effort (DOE 2015c). Tier I represents major components such 

as blades and towers, and Tier II components are sub-components, such as inverters and 

electrical equipment, to make the Tier I equipment.

Table 20. Maryland Wind-Related Manufacturing Overview

Name City State Component Tier

LAI International Westminster MD Bearing cages II

8.5 Nebraska

Nebraska had 890 MW of installed wind capacity at the end of 2015 (WINDExchange 2016). A 

vast majority of this clean generation comes from the 16 wind projects that have been installed 

across the state. This amount of development equates to a $1.5 billion capital investment and 

provides approximately $2.4 million in annual land lease payments (American Wind Energy 

Association 2015f). The state has four projects with signed power purchase agreements under 

construction totaling more than 500 MW (Nebraska Energy Office 2016). When the last of these 

installations come online at the end of 2016, the state will have 1,325 MW in operation.

 52 http://apps2.eere.energy.gov/wind/windexchange/schools/
65

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

Lincoln Electric System has committed to adding two wind projects, one of which will be 

located in-state, totaling 173 MW along with one 5-MW solar project. These developments are 

expected to save Lincoln Electric System customers more than $420 million over the next 25 

years (Laukaitis 2014). 

Additional commitments by local utilities are beginning to shape Nebraska’s energy future. 

Nebraska Public Power District is working to achieve its goal of 10% energy from renewable 

resources by 2020. In 2015, it announced the final route for its $361 million R-Project. The 220-

plus-mile project will provide new transmission capacity to address future renewable generation

(Nebraska Public Power District 2015). 2015 also saw the Omaha Public Power District board 

approve work to support the Midwest Transmission Project, a 180-mile transmission line that 

will run from Nebraska City to Sibley, Missouri. Scheduled to be in service by late 2016, the 

project will help advance renewable energy and increase system reliability (Omaha Public Power 

District 2015a). The Omaha Public Power District also confirmed its plan to have more than 30%

of future retail generation provided by renewable resources (Omaha Public Power District 

2015b).

Figure 15. Map of school wind turbine projects, educational programs, and locations with both 

wind turbines and educational programs in Nebraska

The Nebraska Farmers Union and the American Corn Growers Foundation Wealth from the 

Wind program have performed a lot of public outreach to communities and found that customers 

and landowners are very supportive of wind energy. In addition, since 2008, volunteers from 

farmer and rancher organizations, state agencies, public power utilities, and higher education 

institutions have organized the annual Nebraska Wind and Solar Conference and Exhibition to 

advance these industries in the state.53

 53 http://nebraskawindandsolarconference.com/
66

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

Nebraska does not have an RPS or a renewable energy goal. A 2015 proposal to stimulate wind 

energy in the state was filibustered and removed from the 2015 legislative agenda (Walton 

2015). Given the level of wind energy support from many of Nebraska’s state senators, new 

legislation to facilitate wind development is anticipated in the 2016 legislative session (personal 

communication, Dan McGuire).

Nebraska participated in the original Wind for Schools project through the engagement of the 

University of Nebraska-Lincoln, with the installation of 25 K-12 partner school systems in the 

state. The University of Nebraska Wind Applications Center is actively working with those 

partner schools to enhance their curriculum, career development, and the overall operation of 

their existing small-scale wind turbines in 2016. Visit the WINDExchange website for 

information about school wind projects and educational programs in Nebraska and other states.54

Nebraska has no wind-related manufacturing.

8.6 Oklahoma

By the end of 2015, Oklahoma had installed a wind capacity of 5,184 MW (WINDExchange 

2016). A vast majority of this clean generation comes from the 34 wind projects that have been 

installed across the state. This amount of development equates to a $7 billion capital investment 

and provides approximately $11.4 million in annual land lease payments (American Wind 

Energy Association 2015j). In 2010, Oklahoma set a renewable energy target for 15% of total 

installed generation capacity for operating electric utilities to be renewable sources by 2015

(American Wind Energy Association 2015j).

Barriers to wind development in the state include legislation for decommissioning requirements

(Justia 2010), siting requirements (setbacks from schools, hospitals, and airports), as well as 

notification requirements (Monies 2015a). In May 2015, Oklahoma’s Governor Mary Fallin 

signed Senate Bill 498, which is designed to end property tax exemptions for new wind 

developments in 2017 (Green 2015).

Oklahoma wind energy developments export clean energy to multiple states, including Alabama, 

Nebraska, Arkansas, and Colorado (Teague 2015). Oklahoma also is home to a national example 

of the private sector working with wind projects, an Oklahoma wind project that provides power 

to a Google data center located in the northeastern part of the state (Google 2012).

Visit the WINDExchange website for information about school wind projects and educational 

programs in Oklahoma and other states.55

 54 http://apps2.eere.energy.gov/wind/windexchange/schools/ 55 http://apps2.eere.energy.gov/wind/windexchange/schools/
67

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

Figure 16. Map of school wind educational programs in Oklahoma

NREL researchers compiled the following Oklahoma wind energy manufacturing data as part of 

DOE’s annual wind market report effort (DOE 2015c). Tier I represents major components such 

as blades and towers.

Table 21. Oklahoma Wind-Related Manufacturing Overview

Name City State Component Tier

Bergey Windpwer Norman OK Distributed Turbines I

Trinity Structural Towers Tulsa OK Towers I

8.7 Texas

By the end of 2015, Texas had an installed wind capacity of 17,713 MW, more than any other 

state in the nation (WINDExchange 2016). Texas established an RPS in 1999 and amended it in 

2005. The current RPS requires 5,880 MW of renewable energy by 2015. The state also has a 

target of 10,000 MW of renewable capacity by 2025 (which the wind energy industry met in 

2010) (American Wind Energy Association 2015l). New transmission has helped spur recent 

wind development in the state. Completed in late 2013, the Competitive Renewable Energy Zone 

transmission lines have helped increase wind energy in the state while lowering curtailment for 

already established projects. The 1,811 MW of new capacity installed in 2014 is said to be 

directly tied to this transmission expansion (American Wind Energy Association 2015m). 

New Mexico, Texas, and California led the United States in new distributed wind power capacity 

additions in 2014 across all turbine sizes (U.S. Department of Energy 2015a). 

Some cities in Texas have their own renewable energy goals that stretch beyond the state RPS. 

For example, Georgetown, Texas announced that its municipal utility, Georgetown Utility 

Systems, could soon get 100% of its electricity from renewable (Gross 2015).
68

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

In 2015, Texas produced more wind power in a given amount of time than ever in history. The 

state reached “peak wind” at 8:48 p.m. on March 26, when the state’s wind farms produced

10,296 MW of electricity, or 29% of the total electricity load of the state’s main power grid

(Magill 2014). 

Texas has several educational programs that focus on wind energy: Texas Tech University; the 

University of Houston; and Texas State Technical College, West Texas. Visit the 

WINDExchange website for information about school wind projects and educational programs in 

Texas and other states.56

Figure 17. Map of school wind turbine projects, educational programs, and locations with both 

wind turbines and educational programs in Texas

NREL researchers compiled the following Texas wind energy manufacturing data as part of 

DOE’s annual wind market report effort (DOE 2015c). Tier I represents major components such 

as blades and towers, and Tier II components are sub-components, such as inverters and 

electrical equipment, to make the Tier I equipment.

 56 http://apps2.eere.energy.gov/wind/windexchange/schools/
69

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

Table 22. Texas Wind-Related Manufacturing Overview

Name City State Component Tier

Molded Fiber Glass Gainesville TX Blades I

CB Gear and Machine Houston TX Gears II

CAB Inc. Nacogdoches TX Flanges II

Diab Inc. Desoto TX Blade cores II

Barr Fabrication Brownwood TX Tower internals II

All-Pro Fasteners Arlington TX Bolts II

RBC Bearings Houston TX Bearings II

EMA Electromecanica Sweetwater TX Electronics II

Broadwind Abilene TX Towers I

Alstom Power Amarillo TX Turbines I

8.8 West Virginia

At the end of 2015, West Virginia had 583 MW of installed wind capacity (WINDExchange 

2016). A vast majority of this clean generation comes from five wind projects that have been 

installed across the state. This amount of development equates to a $1.2 billion capital 

investment and provides approximately $1.8 million in annual land lease payments (American 

Wind Energy Association 2015q). A sixth wind farm, the 103-MW New Wind Creek project, is 

scheduled to be placed in service in December 2016 (Reuters 2015).

In 2009, West Virginia passed an Alternative and Renewable Energy Portfolio Standard that 

requires certain utilities to derive 25% of their sales from alternative and renewable energy 

resources by 2025 (American Wind Energy Association 2015q). In early 2015, West Virginia 

lawmakers repealed this measure (Sadasivam 2015).

Projects in the state continue to experience wildlife concerns, primarily related to bats. Land use 

issues regarding mountain top mining impacts in the southern part of the state have also created 

challenges (Dutton et al. 2014). 
70

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

Figure 18. Map of sole school wind educational program in West Virginia

Visit the WINDExchange website57 for information about school wind projects and educational 

programs in West Virginia and other states.

 57 http://apps2.eere.energy.gov/wind/windexchange/schools/
71

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

9 References

American Wind Energy Association. 2015a. “Arizona Wind Energy.” Accessed February 16, 

2016. http://awea.files.cms-plus.com/FileDownloads/pdfs/Arizona.pdf

American Wind Energy Association. 2015b. “California Wind Energy.” Accessed February 11, 

2016. http://awea.files.cms-plus.com/FileDownloads/pdfs/California.pdf

American Wind Energy Association. 2015c. “Colorado Wind Energy.” Accessed February 16, 

2016. http://awea.files.cms-plus.com/FileDownloads/pdfs/Colorado.pdf

American Wind Energy Association. 2015d. “Kansas Wind Energy.” Accessed February 11, 

2016. http://awea.files.cms-plus.com/FileDownloads/pdfs/Kansas.pdf

American Wind Energy Association. 2015e. “Massachusetts Wind Energy.” Accessed February 

7, 2016. http://awea.files.cms-plus.com/FileDownloads/pdfs/Massachusetts.pdf

American Wind Energy Association. 2015f. “Nebraska Wind Energy.” Accessed February 11, 

2016. http://awea.files.cms-plus.com/FileDownloads/pdfs/Nebraska.pdf

American Wind Energy Association. 2015g. “Nevada Wind Energy.”Accessed February 16, 

2016. http://awea.files.cms-plus.com/FileDownloads/pdfs/Nevada.pdf

American Wind Energy Association. 2015h. “New Mexico Wind Energy.” Accessed February 

16, 2016. http://awea.files.cms-plus.com/FileDownloads/pdfs/New%20Mexico.pdf

American Wind Energy Association. 2015i. “New York Wind Energy.” Accessed February 7, 

2016. http://awea.files.cms-plus.com/FileDownloads/pdfs/New%20York.pdf

American Wind Energy Association. 2015j. “Oklahoma Wind Energy.” Accessed February 11, 

2016. http://awea.files.cms-plus.com/FileDownloads/pdfs/Oklahoma.pdf

American Wind Energy Association. 2015k. “Pennsylvania Wind Energy.” Accessed February 8, 

2016. http://awea.files.cms-plus.com/FileDownloads/pdfs/Pennsylvania.pdf

American Wind Energy Association. 2015l. “Texas Wind Energy.” Accessed February 11, 

2016. http://awea.files.cms-plus.com/FileDownloads/pdfs/Texas.pdf

American Wind Energy Association. 2015m. U.S Wind Industry Annual Market Report

2014. http://www.awea.org/AMR2014

American Wind Energy Association. 2015n. U.S Wind Industry Third Quarter 2015 Market 

Report. http://awea.files.cmsplus.com/FileDownloads/pdfs/3Q2015%20AWEA%20Market%20Report%20Public%20Versio

n.pdf
72

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

American Wind Energy Association. 2015o. “Utah Wind Energy.” Accessed February 16, 

2016. http://awea.files.cms-plus.com/FileDownloads/pdfs/Utah.pdf

American Wind Energy Association. 2015p. “Vermont Wind Energy.” Accessed February 7, 

2016. http://awea.files.cms-plus.com/FileDownloads/pdfs/vermont.pdf

American Wind Energy Association. 2015q. “West Virginia Wind Energy.” Accessed February 

10, 2015. http://awea.files.cms-plus.com/FileDownloads/pdfs/West%20Virginia.pdf

American Wind Energy Association. 2015r. “Wyoming Wind Energy.” Accessed February 10, 

2016. http://awea.files.cms-plus.com/FileDownloads/pdfs/Wyoming.pdf

Boughton, Kathryn. 2015. “Wind Energy Turbines Rising.” Republican-American, August 

4. http://rep-am.com/articles/2015/08/04/news/local/899126.txt

Brean, Henry. 2015. “Second Golden Eagle Found Dead at Nevada Wind Farm.” Las Vegas 

Review Journal, February 24. http://www.reviewjournal.com/news/water-environment/secondgolden-eagle-found-dead-nevada-wind-farm 

Bunch, Joey. 2015. “Colorado House Kills Senate Bill to Rollback Renewable Energy Standard.” 

Denver Post, March 2. http://www.denverpost.com/news/ci_27627209/colorado-house-killsenate-bill-rollback-renewable-energy

California Energy Commission. Wind Energy in California. Accessed February 11, 

2016. http://www.energy.ca.gov/wind/

Congressional Research Service. (December 29, 2014). Federal Land Ownership: Overview and 

Data. https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R42346.pdf

DSIRE. Renewable Energy Standard Program Overview, last modified June 16, 

2015. http://programs.dsireusa.org/system/program/detail/5786

Dumat-ol Daleno, Gaynor. 2016. “Guam Power Authority Testing First Wind Turbine.” Pacific 

Islands Report, January 12. http://pidp.eastwestcenter.org/pireport/2016/January/01-13-12.htm

Dutton, James; King, Adam; and Catrina Sedgwick. 2014. “Renewable Energy Source for West 

Virginia is Blowing in the Wind.” Mountaineer News Service, February 

13. http://mountaineernewsservice.com/renewable-energy-source-for-west-virginia-is-blowingin-the-wind/

Edison International. “Renewable Transmission.” Accessed February 11, 

2016. https://www.sce.com/NR/rdonlyres/7A4E0141-E3F7-4092-8E14-

3DF6189D211D/0/090318_SCE_Backgrounder_RAP.pdf
73

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

Emmerich, Kevin. 2015. “Conservationists Ask for New Decision on the Searchlight Wind 

Project.” The Ely Times, March 20. http://www.elynews.com/2015/03/20/conservationists-askfor-new-decision-on-the-searchlight-wind-project/

Funk, John. 2015. “Drilling for Wind: LEEDCo Fields International Geotechnical Team 10 

Miles Offshore.” Cleveland Plain Dealer, September 

3. http://www.cleveland.com/business/index.ssf/2015/09/drilling_for_wind_leedco_field.html

Google Blog. 2012. “More Renewable Energy for Our Data Centers.” September 

26, https://googleblog.blogspot.com/2012/09/more-renewable-energy-for-our-data.html

Green, Rick. 2015. “Gov. Mary Fallin Signs Oklahoma Wind Energy Bill.” The Oklahoman, 

May 21. http://newsok.com/article/5420996

Gross, Daniel. 2015. “The Texas Town that Just Quit Fossil Fuels.” Slate, March 

23. http://www.slate.com/articles/business/the_juice/2015/03/georgetown_texas_goes_renewable

_why_the_town_is_dropping_fossil_fuels_for.html

Hawaii Clean Energy Initiative. “Governor signs bill setting Hawaii’s renewable energy goal at 

100%.” Last modified June 9, 2015. http://www.hawaiicleanenergyinitiative.org/governor-signsbill-setting-hawaiis-renewable-energy-goal-at-100/

Justia. (2010). Oklahoma Statute 17 O.S. § 

160.14. http://law.justia.com/codes/oklahoma/2014/title-17/section-17-160.14

KOB4. 2015. “Senate Panel Tables renewable Energy Standards Bill.” Associated Press, March 

17. http://www.kob.com/article/stories/s3738311.shtml#.VgQhM8tVhBd 

Kuffner, Alex. 2015. “Opponents File Challenge to Block Island Wind Farm in Federal Court.” 

Providence Journal, August 

17. http://www.providencejournal.com/article/20150817/NEWS/150819383

Laukaitis, Algis J. 2014. “LES Adds Wind, Solar Farms in Major Push to Renewable Energy.” 

Lincoln Journal Star, December 19. http://journalstar.com/news/local/les-adds-wind-solar-farmsin-major-push-to-renewable/article_26876bc7-a083-5747-a6bb-30c8c8044bd3.html

Magill, Bobby. (2014). “Texas Breaks Wind Power Production Record.” Climate Central, June 

25. http://www.climatecentral.org/news/texas-wind-power-record-17650

Massachusetts Clean Energy Center. (March 26, 2014). “Energy Officials Approve Relief 

Funding for Falmouth Community Wind Project.” http://www.masscec.com/aboutmasscec/news/energy-officials-approve-relief-funding-falmouth-community-wind-project

Mass Energy Consumers Alliance. “Local Wind Turbines, Sources of Green Power for Our 

Members.” Accessed February 7, 2016. https://www.massenergy.org/renewable-energy/wind
74

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

Monies, Paul. 2015a. “Oklahoma Bill Puts Siting Restrictions and Reporting Requirements on 

Wind Farms.” The Oklahoman, April 1. http://newsok.com/article/5406313

Monies, Paul. 2015b. “Plains and Eastern Clean Line Plans 720-Mile Run through Oklahoma.” 

The Oklahoman, September 13. http://newsok.com/article/5446438

Montoya Bryan, Susan. 2015. “House Votes to Roll Back 2020 Renewable Energy Standard.” 

Associated Press, March 13. http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/mar/13/house-votesto-rollback-2020-renewable-energy-stan/?page=all

Morris, Allie. 2014. “Iberdrola Abandons Wild Meadows Wind Farm, Raising Questions about 

Future of Wind Power in New Hampshire.” Concord Monitor, May 

28. http://www.concordmonitor.com/news/nation/world/12150881-95/ibredrola-abandons-wildmeadows-wind-farm-raising-questions-about-future-of-wind-power-in

National Renewable Energy Laboratory. (June 2013). Wind Powering America’s Regional 

Stakeholder Meetings and Priority State Reports. http://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy13osti/56289.pdf

Navigant Consulting, Inc. 2014. Offshore Wind Market and Economic Analysis 2014: Annual 

Market Assessment. Prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy. DEEE0005360. http://energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2014/09/f18/2014%20Navigant%20Offshore%20

Wind%20Market%20%26%20Economic%20Analysis.pdf

Nebraska Energy Office. Wind Energy Generation in Nebraska. Last modified February 4, 

2016. http://www.neo.ne.gov/statshtml/89.htm

Nebraska Public Power District. NPPD Announces Final R-Project Transmission Line Route. 

Last modified January 26, 2015. http://www.nppd.com/2015/nppd-announces-final-r-projecttransmission-line-route/

New Mexico Energy, Minerals and Natural Resources Department. (February 2015.) Economic 

Analysis of the New Mexico Renewable Energy Production Tax 

Credit. http://www.emnrd.state.nm.us/ECMD/CleanEnergyTaxIncentives/documents/REPTCFin

alReportFeb2015.pdf

New York State Energy Research and Development Authority. New York Renewable Portfolio 

Standard. Accessed February 11, 2016. http://www.nyserda.ny.gov/About/Renewable-PortfolioStandard

Omaha Public Power District. (2015a). “OPPD Board Approves Work to Support Midwest 

Transmission Project,” August 14. http://www.oppd.com/news-resources/newsreleases/2015/august/oppd-board-approves-work-to-support-midwest-transmission-project/

Omaha Public Power District. (2015b). “OPPD to Work with New Developer on Largest Wind 

Development in Nebraska,” April 30. http://www.oppd.com/news-resources/news-
75

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

releases/2015/april/oppd-to-work-with-new-developer-on-largest-wind-development-innebraska/

Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection. Budget Testimony of Acting Secretary 

Quigley, Governor’s Proposed 2015-2016 General Fund Budget House Appropriations Budget 

Hearing: March 11, 

2015. http://www.pabudget.com/Display/SiteFiles/154/Documents/FY%202015-

16%20GF%20Budget/Hearings/Written%20Submitted%20Testimony/DEP%20Testimony.pdf

Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission 2016. Pennsylvania Alternative Energy Portfolio 

Standard Program. Accessed February 7, 2016. http://www.pennaeps.com/aboutaeps/

Preedom, Matthew. 2015. “Wind Turbines: Do Property Values Fall?” Milton Independent,

August 27. http://www.miltonindependent.com/wind-turbines-do-property-values-fall/

Proctor, Cathy. 2015. “Federal Judges Rule on Colorado's Renewable Energy Mandate.” Denver 

Business Journal, July 

14. http://www.bizjournals.com/denver/blog/earth_to_power/2015/07/federal-judges-rule-oncolorados-renewable-energy.html?surround=etf&ana=e_article

Reuters. 2015. “Enbridge Acquires 103-Megawatt West Virginia Wind Project.” November 

25. http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSnCCN6wb1mp+1c0+MKW20151125

Ring, Wilson. 2015. “Vermont Taking Breather from Wind Power.” Burlington Free Press, 

April 13. http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/story/news/2015/04/13/vermont-taking-breatherfrom-wind-power/25700545/

Roth, Sammy. 2014. “Wind Energy Faces Turbulent Future in Desert.” The Desert Sun, 

November 25. http://www.desertsun.com/story/money/2014/11/24/drecp-hurt-windmilldevelopments/70059056/

Sadasivam, Naveena. 2015. “In W.Va., New GOP Majority Defangs Renewable Energy Law 

That Never Had a Bite.” Inside Climate News, February 

5. http://insideclimatenews.org/news/20150205/wva-new-gop-majority-defangs-renewableenergy-law-never-had-bite

San Diego Gas & Electric. “SDG&E Energizes the Sunrise Powerlink.” Last modified June 8, 

2012. http://www.sdge.com/newsroom/press-releases/2012-06-18/sdge-energizes-sunrisepowerlink

Seufert, Dan. 2014. “Plug Pulled on $150M Wind Farm over Unfriendly Political, Regulatory 

Climate.” New Hampshire Union Leader, May 

27. http://www.unionleader.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20140527/NEWS05/140529161
76

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

Siders, David. 2015. “Brown Signs Renewable Energy Bill.” The Sacramento Bee, October 

7. http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article38089830.html

Southern California Edison. Tehachapi Renewable Transmission Project – Construction Update. 

Last modified December 2014. https://www.sce.com/wps/wcm/connect/0d5c70db-d283-4f5d8a98-89ee7f2ecde2/TRTP_NewsletterQ42014_NLAK_mobile.pdf?MOD=AJPERES

State of Delaware Public Service Commission. 2011. In the Matter of the Application of 

Delmarva Power and Light Company for Approval of PSC Docket No. 11-362 Qualified Fuel 

Cell Provider Project Tariffs. http://depsc.delaware.gov/orders/8079.pdf

Teague, Michael. 2015. “Fossil-Fuel-Rich Oklahoma Digs into Wind Energy.” North American 

Windpower, January. http://nawindpower.com/online/issues/NAW1501/FEAT_03_Fossil-FuelRich-Oklahoma-Digs-Into-Wind-Energy.html

U.S. Department of Energy. 2015a. 2014 Distributed Wind Market Report. PNNL-24460. Pacific 

Northwest National Laboratory (PNNL), Richland, WA 

(US). http://energy.gov/eere/wind/downloads/2014-distributed-wind-market-report

U.S. Department of Energy. 2015b. Enabling Wind Power Nationwide. DOE/EE1218. http://energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2015/05/f22/Enabling%20Wind%20Power%20Nationwi

de_18MAY2015_FINAL.pdf

U.S. Department of Energy. 2015c. 2014 Wind Technologies Market Report. DOE/GO-102015-

4702. http://energy.gov/eere/wind/downloads/2014-wind-technologies-market-report

U.S. Department of Energy. 2015d. Wind Vision: A New Era for Wind Power in the United 

States. DOE/GO-102015-4557. http://energy.gov/eere/wind/wind-vision

U.S. Energy Information Administration. June 23, 2014. “Texas Hits New Peak Wind 

Output.” http://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.cfm?id=16811

Walton, Dan. 2015. “Wind Energy Development Bill Blocked.” Lincoln Journal Star, July 

16. http://journalstar.com/legislature/wind-energy-development-bill-blocked/article_85f92b83-

7179-52af-8e37-b489d4de3a5a.html

WINDExchange. (2016). Installed Wind Capacity. U.S. Department of Energy. Accessed 

February 16, 

2016. http://apps2.eere.energy.gov/wind/windexchange/wind_installed_capacity.asp

WINDExchange. (2015). Potential Wind Capacity. U.S. Department of Energy. Accessed 

February 10, 

2016. http://apps2.eere.energy.gov/wind/windexchange/windmaps/resource_potential.asp
77

This report is available at no cost from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) at www.nrel.gov/publications.

Xcel Energy. 2015. 2014 Renewable Energy Standard Compliance 

Report. http://www.xcelenergy.com/staticfiles/xe/Regulatory/Regulatory%20PDFs/2014-

Renewable-Energy-Standard-Compliance-Report.pdf

Van Dam, C.P. “California Offshore Wind Energy: A Personal Vision.” BOEM Offshore 

Renewable Energy Workshop, July 29-30, 2014.

Virginia Offshore Wind Coalition. 2014. An Evolution 

Revolution. http://wind.jmu.edu/offshore/documents/VOWDA%20Presentation%20091614.pdf

Wheeler, Timothy B. 2015a. “Planning for Maryland Offshore Wind Project Gets Underway.” 

Baltimore Sun, June 20. http://www.baltimoresun.com/features/green/blog/bs-md-offshore-wind20150619-story.html

Wheeler, Timothy B. 2015b. “Shore Wind Project Scrapped amid Political Roadblocks.” 

Baltimore Sun, April 6. http://www.baltimoresun.com/features/green/blog/bs-md-wind-energyhurdles-20150406-story.html