A national laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy 

Office of Energy Efficiency & Renewable Energy 

National Renewable Energy Laboratory 

Innovation for Our Energy Future 

Wind Energy Applications for Conference Paper

NREL/CP-500-39178 Municipal Water Services: January 2006 

Opportunities, Situation Analyses, 

and Case Studies 

Preprint 

L. Flowers 

National Renewable Energy Laboratory 

L. Miner-Nordstrom 

U.S. Department of Energy

To be presented at AWWA/WEF Joint Management Conference �

Salt Lake City, Utah �

February 19–22, 2006 �

NREL is operated by Midwest Research Institute ● Battelle Contract No. DE-AC36-99-GO10337 
NOTICE 

The submitted manuscript has been offered by an employee of the Midwest Research Institute (MRI), a 

contractor of the US Government under Contract No. DE-AC36-99GO10337. Accordingly, the US 

Government and MRI retain a nonexclusive royalty-free license to publish or reproduce the published form of 

this contribution, or allow others to do so, for US Government purposes. 

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. 

Available electronically at http://www.osti.gov/bridge 

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 

phone: 865.576.8401 

fax: 865.576.5728 

email: mailto:reports@adonis.osti.gov 

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

U.S. Department of Commerce 

National Technical Information Service 

5285 Port Royal Road 

Springfield, VA 22161 

phone: 800.553.6847 

fax: 703.605.6900 

email: orders@ntis.fedworld.gov 

online ordering: http://www.ntis.gov/ordering.htm 

Printed on paper containing at least 50% wastepaper, including 20% postconsumer waste 
WIND ENERGY APPLICATIONS FOR MUNICIPAL WATER SERVICES: 

OPPORTUNITIES, SITUATION ANALYSES, AND CASE STUDIES 

Lawrence Flowers, National Renewable Energy Laboratory 

1617 Cole Blvd, MS 3811 

Golden, CO 80401 

Laura Miner-Nordstrom, U.S. Department of Energy 

Mailcode EE-2B, 1000 Independence Ave., S.W. 

Washington, DC 20585 

ABSTRACT 

As communities grow, greater demands are placed on water supplies, wastewater services, and 

the electricity needed to power the growing water services infrastructure. Water is also a critical 

resource for thermoelectric power plants. Future population growth in the United States is 

therefore expected to heighten competition for water resources. Especially in arid U.S. regions, 

communities may soon face hard choices with respect to water and electric power. 

Many parts of the United States with increasing water stresses also have significant wind energy 

resources. Wind power is the fastest-growing electric generation source in the United States and 

is decreasing in cost to be competitive with thermoelectric generation. Wind energy can 

potentially offer communities in water-stressed areas the option of economically meeting 

increasing energy needs without increasing demands on valuable water resources. Wind energy 

can also provide targeted energy production to serve critical local water-system needs. The U.S. 

Department of Energy (DOE) Wind Energy Technologies Program has been exploring the 

potential for wind power to meet growing challenges for water supply and treatment. The DOE is 

currently characterizing the U.S. regions that are most likely to benefit from wind-water 

applications and is also exploring the associated technical and policy issues associated with 

bringing wind energy to bear on water resource challenges. 

Municipal water service providers face several challenges, including providing clean, reliable 

water supplies at low cost, wastewater treatment, and managing environmental risks. Water 

supply salinity, contaminant concentrations, surface water quality and groundwater withdrawal 

rates all play a role in these challenges. Opportunities for matching wind potential and water 

needs are being modeled through Geographical Information Systems (GIS) modeling. Results of 

the modeling will quantitatively describe the range of potential wind energy applications where 

various water needs exist and point out utility areas that may be good candidates for selected 

wind-water applications. Urban, agricultural, and industrial water services that may be served by 

wind generation are included. In subsequent studies, the results of the first phase—identifying 

promising opportunities and initial case studies—will be combined with the identification of 

technical and other issues, to develop detailed situation analyses to more fully characterize the 

application of wind generation for pumping and transporting water in the municipal sector. 

1�
KEYWORDS 

Energy, wind energy, water conservation, municipal water, energy-water nexus 

INTRODUCTION 

Municipal water and wastewater operations are energy intensive. Energy used by water systems 

account for more than 3 percent of total electric demand (Burton, 1996). Additionally, thermoelectric 

power generation places considerable demand on water resources in terms of water withdrawals and 

consumption. Typical rates of water withdrawals for generating electricity in the United States now 

roughly equal withdrawals by agriculture, about 195 billion gallons per day (Hutson et al., 2004) or 

25 gallons per kWh (Feeley and Ramezan, 2003). 

Energy inputs to water systems occur at different locations in the system, from initial extraction 

of water from surface or groundwater sources, through conveyance, storage, treatment, 

distribution, end-use, wastewater collection and treatment, and discharge or reuse. Some of these 

inputs, in some important systems, are located hundreds of miles from the urban centers being 

served. For example, water is pumped from the Colorado River over a mountain range to 

Southern California in the Colorado River Aqueduct (CRA). These important energy inputs to 

water systems are sometimes located in places with significant wind energy potential. Indeed, 

parts of the CRA, for example, are approximate to areas of high wind energy density and in fact 

to existing major wind installations. However, the wind resource does not necessarily need to be 

proximate to urban centers to be of value to the water supply systems serving them; there is also 

potential for wind energy to supply some of the energy required to get water to municipal 

systems. 

Although the focus of this analysis is municipal systems, analysts recognize that many water 

supply systems provide service to all types of users. It should be noted that many of the same 

features discussed with regard to wind energy opportunities for the municipal end-users apply to 

agriculture as well. For example, pumping is the largest energy use for water systems. Lifting 

water from groundwater aquifers and out of surface systems is the same whether the water is 

destined for irrigation or the city. The point is that where wind energy systems can contribute to 

energy inputs, and particularly to the energy required to lift and move water around, there are 

important overlaps in benefits between municipal and other uses. These potential benefits should 

be appreciated when considering this analysis. 

The genesis of this report is the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) Wind Program’s interest in 

studying relationships between wind energy and water provision. In 2004, the Program began 

investing in this area with three activities: scoping six potential wind-water opportunities (irrigation, 

municipal, thermoelectric generation, produced water, pumped hydro, desalination); participating in 

the Sustainable Water Resources Roundtable; and funding a concept design study for wind-powered 

desalination. These activities continue in 2005, but the opportunities have been reduced to three 

areas of study: irrigation, municipal, and desalination (for more information, refer to 

www.nrel.gov/wind_meetings/wind_water/). 

2�
The Wind Program is not the only organization to examine energy-water issues in recent years. 

Several reports on water have considered energy a research priority (National Research Council, 

2004). Further, 11 National Laboratories have formed the Energy-Water Nexus, which highlights the 

importance of research into relationships between energy and water; this group is currently 

developing – with DOE funding - a roadmap to address these research needs 

(www.sandia.gov/energy-water/). 

The U.S. Congress has also begun to support this research area; in addition to several legislation 

drafts on establishing an energy-water supply program and providing financial incentives to 

desalination facility operators to cover energy costs, two pieces of legislation now provide support 

for energy-water research. The Energy Policy Act of 2005 authorized the DOE to “research, 

develop, demonstrate, and commercially apply” energy-related water issues, water-related energy 

issues, and federal coordination on arsenic treatment, desalination, and policy analysis (U.S. 

Congress, 2005). To fund this initiative in Fiscal Year 2006, Congress appropriated $12.5 million for 

the DOE to study energy and water resource management, including advanced concept desalination 

and arsenic treatment (in partnership with the American Water Works Research Foundation and 

WERC: A Consortium for Environmental Education and Technology Development), water supply 

technology development, and water management decision support, including demonstration 

programs in partnership with New Mexico and international water partnerships (U.S. House Rules 

Committee, 2005). 

The research presented in this report describes a systematic assessment of the potential for wind 

power to support water utility operation, with the objective to identify promising technical 

applications and water utility case study opportunities. The first section describes the current 

situation that municipal providers face with respect to energy and water. The second section 

describes the progress that wind technologies have made in recent years to become a cost-effective 

electricity source. The third section describes the analysis employed to assess potential for wind 

power in support of water service providers, as well as two case studies. The report concludes with 

results and recommendations. 

The authors would like to acknowledge the investigators for this report: Sentech, Inc., University of 

California-Santa Barbara, and Western Resources Advocates (WRA). Patrick Quinlan lead a team at 

Sentech including Sissi Liu, Nicole Rentz, and Sharon Brown who provided the bulk of the 

information presented here. Dr. Robert Wilkinson from UC-Santa Barbara provided some of the 

introductory material, and Bart Miller at WRA, along with Brian Murphy, provided case study 

material. Additionally, Ruth Baranowski from the National Renewable Energy Laboratory provided 

invaluable editorial support. 

1. GROWING CHALLENGES FOR U.S. WATER SUPPLY AND WASTEWATER 

TREATMENT 

The U.S. population currently stands at approximately 297.5 million (U.S. Census Bureau, 2005b) 

and continues to grow at a nominal rate of over 1 percent per year (U.S. Census Bureau, 2005a). 

Figure 1 shows expected population density for the year 2025 (Roy et al., 2003). 

3�
Figure 1 – County Population Density Projected for 2025 

Population growth is especially significant in the Southwest where freshwater resources are not as 

abundant. Figure 2 shows the extent of freshwater withdrawals versus available precipitation of each 

of the counties in the contiguous United States (Roy et al., 2003). 

Figure 2 – County Total Freshwater Withdrawal, 1995, Divided by Available Precipitation 

4�
Figure 3 - Link Between Water Resources and Population Growth (Feeley, 2004) 

As growth in arid areas spurs demand for water, it will create commensurate additional electric 

demand. In recent years, increasing demand has been met primarily with new thermoelectric 

generation. In a water-constrained region, it will be difficult for new thermoelectric plants to gain 

access to water for traditional cooling needs while sustaining agriculture and other water needs. Dry 

cooling of thermoelectric power plants is an option, but it increases capital and operating costs and 

lowers efficiency in comparison to wet cooling. Figure 4 shows areas in which new generation is 

likely needed to meet growing demand, based on census division forecasts. 

Figure 4 – County Projected Thermoelectric Generation Needs for 2025 (Roy et al., 2003) 

5�
Sustainable water resources also traditionally provide environmental services to the community. 

Lakeside, coastal and riparian communities make use of local surface water systems for wastewater 

services, thermal sinks for power plants, and returns for agricultural runoff. As the capabilities of 

these natural systems become saturated or water is withdrawn to serve new power plant 

requirements, these currently low-cost services will likely shift to more expensive engineered 

systems. 

These systems will place added pressures on farmers to accelerate fallowing of irrigated lands as 

water rights are sold to power plant developers, and the need for increased supplies for urban users 

will also create a demand for processed forms of wastewater, including the use of recycled water for 

landscape irrigation, greywater use, and aquifer re-injection with processed surface waters. 

According to the U.S. Geological Survey, freshwater withdrawals in the United States were 

estimated in 2000 to be about 345,000 million gallons per day (Mgal/day) (Hutson et al., 2004). 

Figure 5 (based on 1995 data) illustrates the various sectors’ relative water withdrawals. 

Figure 5 - Estimated U.S. Freshwater Use in 1995 (Total ~341,000 Mgal/Day) (Lawrence 

Livermore National Laboratory, 2003) 

2. STRESSES ON MUNICIPAL WATER SERVICE PROVIDERS 

As implied above, municipal water providers will need to devote greater attention to balancing 

competitive demands on water resources resulting from human consumption, power generation, 

agriculture, and environmental needs. Already, several U.S. regions have experienced a confluence 

of water-use issues. The Everglades management plan, Cal-Fed Bay Delta process, and Salton Sea 

salinity mitigation strategies are examples of the often contentious negotiations over the use of 

6�
water. Although the issues of concern in these areas have mainly been the competitive claims for 

water across the urban, agricultural, and environmental sectors, costs for operating water utilities 

will become an added concern as energy becomes more expensive, with resulting increases in tariffs 

expected to be met with criticism from customers. Furthermore, U.S. water utilities are dealing with 

growth and new supply needs. At the same time, more stringent water quality requirements are 

placing greater demand on treatment and resulting energy needs. Arsenic, argon, MTBE, and a long 

list of biological contaminants are becoming more of a concern as municipalities seek out marginal 

resources. 

With all of these stresses, due to the high initial cost of capital-intensive waterworks projects, water 

and wastewater utilities typically manage considerable debt. Fluctuations in energy costs create both 

additional risks for meeting debt-service requirements and the additional need to continually adjust 

rates. For many utilities, an increased pace for ratemaking can be a significant administrative burden. 

2.1 Energy Requirements 

Energy needed is fundamentally tied to the physical layout of the water supply system. The power 

needed to lift ground water can be expressed as W = Q x ρ x H where w is the power needed, Q is 

the water flow rate, ρ is water density and H is the “head”. For pumping water through pipes, the 

equation is the same, except that the total head, H, is the sum of the both the gravity head and the 

head loss due to pipe friction. 

Dr. Robert Wilkinson defines the energy intensity of water as “the embodied energy, the total 

amount of energy, calculated on a whole-system basis, required for the use of a given amount of 

water in a specific location” (2000). Based on this definition, he has estimated the average energy 

requirement for blended (local and imported) supplies for a municipal utility in California to be as 

high as 2,439 kWh per acre-foot (AF). At one AF per 325,851 gallons, this translates into about 1 

kWh for each 134 gallons produced. A 1996 study by the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) 

by Franklin Burton estimates the national energy use by water systems at 75 billion kWh, which at 

the time represented three percent of total national electricity demand (Burton 1996). 

As would be expected, energy use by municipal water providers varies widely among the 

services provided. For example, the CEC provides several case studies that describe energy 

usage for a variety of water services. Figure 6 lists energy use per acre-ft (kWh/AF) of delivered 

water for the Inland Empire Utilities Agency in Chino, California (Wilkinson, 2000). Overall, 

the average energy use for water treatment in Southern California is about 652 kWh/AF 

(Hoffman, 2004). 

As demonstrated in Figure 6, desalination is extremely energy intensive. Nevertheless, desalination 

water is produced all over the world, mostly in the Middle East where energy is less costly and other 

sources of water are more expensive. Two technologies are used: reverse osmosis (RO) and multistage flash (MSF) distillation. Energy requirements for RO range from 4,400 (Chaudhry, 2005) to 

12,000 kWh/AF and 28,500 to 33,000 kWh/AF for MSF (Hoffman, 2004). 

7�
Figure 6 - Energy Use per Acre-Ft (kWh/AF) of Delivered Water from a CA Municipal Utility 

Figure 7 - Comparison of U.S. Annual Freshwater Withdrawals and Consumption, 1995 

(Hoffman, 2004) 

Withdrawals Consumption 

Aquaculture, 1% Mining, 1%

Industrial, 3% Commercial, 1% Public Supply, 13% Domestic, 1% Livestock, 3% Domestic, 7% 

Mining, 1% Thermoelectric, 3% 

Industrial, 5% 

Livestock, 1% Irrigation, 40% 

Thermoelectric, 39% �

Irrigation, 81%�

Table 1 shows the relative cooling water needs of fossil and nuclear generation, broken out by 

once-through (typically ocean or river-based) or wet-tower (evaporative cooling) systems 

(Feeley et al., 2004). It is important to note that current estimates include a shift from oncethrough to wet-tower systems. This shift will reduce the amount of total water withdrawals, but it 

will concurrently increase the amount of total water consumption by thermoelectric generation. 

Table 1 - Cooling Water Needs of Fossil and Nuclear Generation (Feeley et al., 2004) 

8 
3. WIND ENERGY TECHNOLOGY PROGRESS 

The U.S. has a rich history of employing wind energy to mechanically pump water. Without the 

water-pumping windmill, for example, it would have been much more difficult to establish rail 

transportation across the Great Plains. At the end of the nineteenth century, there was a boom in 

water pumping across the big cattle ranches and farms of the West, further facilitating westward 

expansion. Today, led by manufacturers such as General Electric, wind energy is a $3 billion annual 

industry in the U.S. 

3.1 Wind Energy Market 

Wind energy is the fastest-growing bulk energy source in the world (Figure 8) and has become a 

significant commercial enterprise. At the end of 2004, the United States had about 6.4 gigawatts 

(GW) of installed capacity. By the end of 2005, with a) more than 50,000 megawatts (MW) installed 

worldwide (Global Wind Energy Council, 2005), b) more than 9 GW installed in the United States 

(U.S. Department of Energy, 2005b), and c) more than 30% annualized growth over the past 5 years, 

wind power worldwide generates enough energy to supply the needs of more than 9 million U.S. 

homes (American Wind Energy Association, 2005). Twenty-four states have significant operating 

utility-scale wind projects, and 16 of those states have more than 100 MW installed (Figure 9). 

Figure 8 – Installed Wind Power Capacity Worldwide (end of 2004) 

9 
Figure 9 – Installed Wind Power Capacity U.S. by State (September 30, 2005) 

The technology for utility-scale applications has come a long way since its commercial beginnings in 

the early 1980s in California. The average utility-scale turbine is now 1.5-2.0 MW in capacity 

(compared to 50 kW in 1980) and operates more than 98% of the time when the wind is blowing (the 

availability factor), compared to less than 60% of the time in 1980. These two factors, along with the 

strong growth in market demand, have resulted in a drastic decline in the cost of utility-scale wind 

energy (from more than 20 cents/kWh in the early 1980s to 4-6 cents/kWh in good U.S. wind 

regimes today. As the cost of wind energy for bulk power applications has decreased, the number of 

installations has increased. (Refer to Figure 10.) 

Figure 10 - U.S. Overall Growth and Cost Reduction since 1980 (Flowers, 2005) 

10 
3.2 Market Drivers 

The drivers for this rapid expansion of wind energy include declining wind costs, fossil fuel price 

increases and uncertainty, federal and state policies, economic development impacts, the growth of 

the green power market driven by customer preference for clean energy, and energy/economic 

security. While costs of wind energy have declined over the years, so have prices. Figure 11 shows 

the range of wind resources across the country. Currently, wind energy in good wind regimes is the 

lowest-cost form of new sources of bulk generation, in part because of the recent sharp increase in 

the cost of natural gas. Additionally, wind is a stable-priced product because it is not subject to fuel 

price variations and uncertainty. No other energy or commodity can be predicted 20 years in 

advance. The uncertainty associated with the future costs of other bulk electricity sources (natural 

gas, coal, nuclear) makes wind particularly attractive to institutional electricity buyers and selfgenerators. 

Figure 11 - Annual Average Wind Resource Estimates in the U.S. (U.S. Department of 

Energy, 2005a) 

The federal production tax credit (PTC), an incentive of 1.5 to 1.9 cents per kWh, and accelerated 

depreciation for wholesale wind energy facilities are important financial enticements to wind 

developers and investors. The Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPAct) extended the PTC until the end of 

2007. For entities without federal tax liability, EPAct established a bonding instrument, Clean 

Renewable Energy Bonds (CREBs), for co-ops, municipalities, and a number of other non-profit 

institutions. 

On the market demand side, 20 states and the District of Columbia have established Renewable 

Portfolio Standards (RPSs) (Figure 12) to require the utilities to include a predetermined amount of 

renewables in their future generation portfolios. For example, Texas passed an RPS that mandates 

2.28 GW by January 1, 2007, and 5.88 GW by January 1, 2015. 

11 
Figure 12 - States with Renewable Portfolio Standards 

A number of states have also established a Systems Benefit Charge (SBC) fund, based on a small 

per-kWh charge, to (for example) buy-down the first cost of small renewable energy projects that 

are otherwise non-competitive (see www.dsireusa.org for more information). 

The economic development benefits of wind energy development to rural economies are 

substantial. For conventionally developed, third-party-financed projects, the local and state 

economic development benefits include lease payments to landowners, county and state property 

and sales tax revenues, and construction and operations and maintenance job income. The large 

majority of these income streams remain in the rural community that hosts the wind project, with 

multipliers that include indirect and induced income on the order of 2 to 2.5. 

For example, 40 MW of wind development in Hyde County, South Dakota, resulted in $400,000 

- $450,000/yr (not including the multiplier effect), including: 

–� More than $100,000/yr in annual lease payments to farmers ($3,000 - 

$4,000/turbine/yr) 

–� $250,000/yr in property taxes (25% of Highmore’s education budget) 

–� 75 -100 construction jobs for 6 months 

–� 5 permanent O&M jobs 

–� Increased sales taxes of more than 40%. 

The 8000-plus MW of wind installed in the rural United States represent more than $9 billion in 

invested capital which – with the multiplier effect – will have results on the order of $4.5 - $9 

billion in rural economic development over the 20-year project life. If the 2020 installed capacity 

goals (200 GW) of the American Wind Energy Association are met, the result will be $100 - 

$200 billion of rural economic development. When the projects are locally owned, the resulting 

economic development is even greater— hence the emerging interest in community wind 

concepts. According to David Benson, farmer and county commissioner of Nobles County, 

Minnesota, “Wind is a homegrown energy that we can harvest right along side our corn or 

soybeans or other crops. We can use the energy in our local communities or we can export it to 

12�
other markets. We need to look carefully at wind energy as a source of economic growth for our 

region” (personal communication, 2002). 

In a number of surveys, electricity consumers have overwhelmingly supported an increased 

amount of renewables in their electricity providers’ portfolios to reduce the environmental 

impacts of conventional generation, and they have stated that they are willing to pay a modest 

premium for clean energy. Approximately 600 U.S. utilities now offer green power products, 

which include 2050 MW of wind energy. Originally, green pricing programs were offered to 

provide an opportunity for customers to pay a small premium to purchase renewable energy. 

Reflecting the cost advances of wind turbines and recently increasing costs for fossil-powered 

generation, customers enrolled in “green pricing” programs in some utility service areas are 

paying less than “traditional” customers. After the Denver Post reported in October 2005 that 

subscribers to Xcel Energy's Windsource program were paying less for energy, the number of 

new applications for the program soared. Xcel reports that Windsource is fully subscribed with 

33,265 Colorado customers and a waiting list of 1,100 (Raabe, 2005). 

The concept of energy and economic security is currently in national and global discussions. 

Wind energy represents an important player in this field because it is an inexhaustible, stably 

priced, economically competitive, environmentally preferred, indigenous resource that often 

provides greater economic development impacts to rural communities than conventional 

generation alternatives. 

3.3 Market Economics 

In the United States, most investment decisions in electricity generation are based on the 

comparative economics of generation options and fuel costs and projected demand. A basic 

understanding of the key elements that determine the cost of wind power is important. The four 

major drivers for the economics of wind are wind resource, project size, financing, and policy 

incentives (Figure 13). 

Figure 13 – Major Drivers for Wind Economics 

13 
Because the energy in the wind is proportional to the cube of the wind’s velocity, the wind 

resource is the most important parameter in the cost of wind. For example, a 1-mph difference in 

the average wind velocity can have a 1 cent/kWh impact on the delivered wind energy cost. The 

sensitivity and importance of this variable make it crucial to measure the wind speed for at least 

1 year at the site (preferably at hub height). 

There are important economies of scale in the development, manufacturing, construction, and 

operation of wind projects. Thus, a 100-MW project will have significantly lower capital 

cost/MW, and for the same wind resource, a lower cost of energy (the critical parameter in 

competitively bid projects) than a 1-MW to 10-MW project. The third important element is the 

financing parameters; since wind projects use no fuel, they are more capital intensive (not 

necessarily more costly per installed kilowatt) than conventional generation. Thus, the project 

cost of capital is important; e.g., a conventional loan of 8%-10% for 10 years will have a 

significantly higher per/kWh cost than a 5% U.S. Department of Agriculture Rural Utility 

Services loan for 20 years, for the same project; this aspect will highlight the energy cost benefit 

of the newly enacted CREBs (which will lower the interest rate on renewable energy projects to 

near zero). The fourth parameter is policy incentives. The current federal PTC is 1.9 cents/kWh 

for the first 10 years of the project; in an excellent wind resource, this incentive could exceed 

35% of the net worth of the project. Some states have instituted their own state PTC. Some have 

instituted production-based payments, some have reduced property and sales taxes, and some 

have designed power purchase agreements (PPAs) to be front-end loaded. It should be noted that 

all forms of electricity generation have incentives/subsidies, often not directly reflected in the 

energy cost. The PTC was instituted by Congress to somewhat level the “subsidy playing field” 

with conventional electricity generation sources. 

Additionally, several studies have characterized the cost of utility ancillary services needed to 

integrate intermittent wind power into major utility grids (Interwest Energy Alliance, 2004). Wind 

Power Impacts on Electric Power Systems Costs: Summary and Perspective on Work Done to Date 

summarizes various studies of incremental cost, with results varying from 0.147 cents to 0.550 cents 

per kWh. Included in the report is an Xcel Energy ancillary cost of 0.185 cents/kWh in Minnesota, 

and a Bonneville Power Authority (BPA) ancillary cost at 7% wind penetration of 0.147 cents/kWh 

to .227 cents/kWh. These results indicate that the additional costs for today’s level of wind 

penetration in utility grids is in the range of .25 cent/kWh to .50 cent/ kWh. The 

November/December 2005 issue of IEEE Power and Energy Magazine (refer to www.uwig.org) is 

devoted to the integration of wind energy into the electric power system and addresses ancillary 

services among other integration issues. 

A final note on the economics of wind relates to what it is compared to: as previously noted, in 

good wind regimes new wind energy projects are usually lower (energy) cost than new 

conventional sources, as demonstrated by recent Integrated Resource Planning (IRP) processes in 

Minnesota and Colorado. According to Mark Kapner, manager of conservation and renewable 

energy at Austin Energy, “We at Austin Energy found that large wind energy projects are the 

least expensive new electric generation source. Not only is the price lower than other renewable 

sources, it's even lower than the fuel cost of our natural-gas-fired units. We're learning how to 

handle the non-dispatchable and somewhat unpredictable nature of wind energy” (personal 

communication, 2002). 

14�
In minimal-load-growth, energy-export markets (e.g., the Dakotas), new wind projects compete 

with older coal plants that have been fully amortized and whose marginal cost only includes the 

variable cost of the next shovel of coal; this “avoided cost” of the next kilowatt-hour of energy 

that the wind project would offset is often less than 1.5 cents/kWh. Therefore, new wind costs 

more than old coal. However, once the wind plant is fully depreciated and the loan is repaid, its 

O&M cost is less than 1 cent/kWh, and since there is no fuel, it costs less and is more 

economically certain than old coal. 

The bottom line: new wind is less expensive than new coal (or natural gas), old wind is less 

expensive than old coal (or natural gas), but new wind is more expensive than old coal. Also, 

beware of comparisons of new wind projects to average generation portfolio avoided costs, 

which often include substantial amounts of fully amortized, older facilities (Figure 14). 

Figure 14 - Wind Cost of Energy 

3.4 Implementation Issues 

The modern wind energy industry is slightly more than 25 years old, and during that time it has 

addressed many issues associated with integrating wind onto the grid. Modern wind turbines have 

evolved to be highly reliable, grid-friendly, remotely operated and monitored, serviceable, and 

environmentally preferred electricity generators. Because the output of wind generators is not 

dispatched by the utility control center, they are different from conventional generators. Until 

penetrations of wind power exceed 10% to 15% of the utilities’ instantaneous load, the utility 

dispatcher sees wind energy much like a negative load, varying in time. While wind energy is not 

perfectly predictable, there have been significant technical advancements in both 24-hour and 1-hour 

ahead forecasts, thus minimizing the cost of integration, mostly in the areas of load following and 

unit commitment. 

Another utility concern has been limited transmission availability. Certainly if AWEA is to 

achieve its goal of 200 GW by 2020, significant investments in transmission will be required. A 

number of regional groups are investigating strategic transmission upgrades and additions, 

15�
depending on load growth and future generation portfolio scenarios. However, in the meantime, 

the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), which oversees interstate electricity 

transmission rules, is investigating means of using the existing grid more efficiently, including 

tariffs to allow wind to supply during unconstrained periods (a large fraction of the time, even on 

constrained paths). Additionally a number of regional transmission organizations have relieved 

wind projects from the punitive imbalance penalties of FERC Order 888 that were designed to 

discourage energy market manipulation. Often, especially in community-sized projects (less than 

10 MW), utility-scale turbines can be interconnected to the distribution system, thus minimizing 

the need for transmission upgrades. A number of such projects have been implemented in 

Minnesota and Iowa with low-cost, safe, reliable, and code-compliant interconnection 

procedures. 

Siting of wind energy projects requires permits from local authorities, and in some cases, state and 

federal agencies. Working with the local community to fully disclose the project impacts and 

benefits early and often has proven useful in getting community support and permitting authority 

approval (National Wind Coordinating Committee, 2005). Often, issues of wildlife interactions, 

noise, and visual impacts arise during the permitting process. All are important issues, and with 

established guidelines and practices, can be addressed effectively. The National Wind Coordinating 

Committee (NWCC) is a multi-stakeholder group that has studied both wildlife and other siting 

practices. It has published case studies and held workshops on these aspects. One of the findings is 

that, of the 100 million to 1 billion birds killed in collisions with manmade structures every year, 

researchers estimate that 10,000 to 40,000 fatalities can be attributed to collisions with wind turbines 

(Erickson et al., 2001). Noise from wind turbines has been dramatically reduced in modern wind 

turbines, and at 1000 ft (normal minimum setback), the noise is less than 40 dB (American Wind 

Energy Association, 2004), which is equivalent to refrigerator noise from an adjoining room. 

Computer simulations are routinely done to demonstrate the visual impacts from various vantage 

points in the community. Ultimately, however, permitting authorities need to weigh the benefits and 

the impacts of wind energy. 

3.5 Wind-Powered Water Service Applications 

Wind turbines are interconnected to the grid at the transmission and distribution levels or are offgrid. Transmission-level interconnections are designed for bulk-power generation involving up to 

several hundred-MW-scale facilities connected to utility substations feeding long-distance 

transmission operating at over 100 kiloVolts (kV). Distribution-level interconnections involve a 

smaller number of turbines feeding a local distribution feeder operating at less than 100 kV. Off-grid 

systems range from dedicated electric water pumping for home or livestock use, to battery-based 

residential systems, to sophisticated wind-diesel hybrid village power systems. 

The top five potential applications for water utilities using wind energy generation have been 

identified as: 

1.�Transmission or distribution-connected wind generation providing low-cost, price-stable bulk 

power to water utilities, 

2.�Customer-side interconnected wind generation providing demand-side energy cost reductions 

to water utilities 

3.�Distribution-connected rural wind installations meeting both wind electric pumping for 

agricultural irrigation and other local loads. 

16�
17

4. Wind-electric heating for supplanting propane (and in coming years, natural-gas) fired 

thermal applications. 

5. Wind-powered off-grid power for water utility operations where loads and distance to 

conventional electric service is uneconomic. 

4. PROJECT OBJECTIVES 

The main objective of this research is to characterize general opportunities in the municipal 

water sector for wind energy; specifically, to identify locations that may be constrained in water 

services due to several parameters. These parameters are presented in a matrix (Table 2) that is 

intended for use by energy and water analysts and providers. Though for this report, case studies 

were pre-selected, completion of the matrix has identified new locations for wind-water 

applications. The overall approach for this research is represented by Figure 15. 

Figure 15 - Wind-Water Matrix and GIS Approaches Leading to Screening for Promising 

Case Study Candidates 

Demand 

Growth

Electric Electric 

Rates

Water 

Needs

Wind 

Resources Resources

Low Moderate High

1

1.1

2

2.1

2.2

2.3

2.4

3

3.1

3.2

4

4.1

4.2

5

5.1

5.2 Other Factors

Demand Growth and Demonstrated Community Interest

Population Growth 

Demonstrated Community Interest

Geographic and Other Factors

Geographic Factors

Electricity Costs and Energy Mix

Electricity Cost

Energy Mix and Availability of Ancillary Services

Water Scarcity

Water Salinity

Pumping, Treatment, and Wastewater Support

Ability to Integrate Intermittent Power

WIND-WATER MATRIX

Wind Energy Potential

Wind Power Classes

Water Supply and Wastewater Treatment

Wind-Water 

Potential Potential

Applications

Wind Energy and Water Use Supply-Side Applications

DISTRIBUTED WIND 

GENERATION

Bulk Power

Off-Grid

Water Pumping

Water Treatment

Water Distribution

Wastewater Treatment

Transmission-Connected Distribution-Connected

UTILITY-SCALE WIND 

GENERATION

Customer-Owned

Water Pumping

Local Grid-Connected

UTILITY-SCALE OR 

DISTRIBUTED WIND 

GENERATION

Water Pumping

Water Treatment

Water Distribution

Wastewater Treatment

Wind Energy and Water Use Supply-Side Applications

DISTRIBUTED WIND 

GENERATION

Bulk Power

Off-Grid

Water Pumping

Water Treatment

Water Distribution

Wastewater Treatment

Transmission-Connected Distribution-Connected

UTILITY-SCALE WIND 

GENERATION

Customer-Owned

Water Pumping

Local Grid-Connected

UTILITY-SCALE OR 

DISTRIBUTED WIND 

GENERATION

Water Pumping

Water Treatment

Water Distribution

Wastewater Treatment

GIS

Energy Use Energy Use

Matrix Costs

Case

Studies

Applications, costs, and energy use Applications, costs, and energy use 

combined to identify combined to identify what the windwater opportunities are. water opportunities are. 

GIS data layers combined to identify GIS data layers combined to identify 

where those opportunities may exist. those opportunities may exist.

Demand 

Growth

Electric Electric 

Rates

Water 

Needs

Wind 

Resources Resources

Low Moderate High

1

1.1

2

2.1

2.2

2.3

2.4

3

3.1

3.2

4

4.1

4.2

5

5.1

5.2 Other Factors

Demand Growth and Demonstrated Community Interest

Population Growth 

Demonstrated Community Interest

Geographic and Other Factors

Geographic Factors

Electricity Costs and Energy Mix

Electricity Cost

Energy Mix and Availability of Ancillary Services

Water Scarcity

Water Salinity

Pumping, Treatment, and Wastewater Support

Ability to Integrate Intermittent Power

WIND-WATER MATRIX

Wind Energy Potential

Wind Power Classes

Water Supply and Wastewater Treatment

Wind-Water 

Potential Potential

Wind-Water 

Potential Potential

Applications

Wind Energy and Water Use Supply-Side Applications

DISTRIBUTED WIND 

GENERATION

Bulk Power

Off-Grid

Water Pumping

Water Treatment

Water Distribution

Wastewater Treatment

Transmission-Connected Distribution-Connected

UTILITY-SCALE WIND 

GENERATION

Customer-Owned

Water Pumping

Local Grid-Connected

UTILITY-SCALE OR 

DISTRIBUTED WIND 

GENERATION

Water Pumping

Water Treatment

Water Distribution

Wastewater Treatment

Wind Energy and Water Use Supply-Side Applications

DISTRIBUTED WIND 

GENERATION

Bulk Power

Off-Grid

Water Pumping

Water Treatment

Water Distribution

Wastewater Treatment

Transmission-Connected Distribution-Connected

UTILITY-SCALE WIND 

GENERATION

Customer-Owned

Water Pumping

Local Grid-Connected

UTILITY-SCALE OR 

DISTRIBUTED WIND 

GENERATION

Water Pumping

Water Treatment

Water Distribution

Wastewater Treatment

GIS

Energy Use Energy Use

Matrix Costs

Case

Studies

Applications, costs, and energy use Applications, costs, and energy use 

combined to identify combined to identify what the windwater opportunities are. water opportunities are. 

GIS data layers combined to identify GIS data layers combined to identify 

where those opportunities may exist. those opportunities may exist.
Table 2. Matrix of Wind-Water Opportunities 

High 

1.0 1.1.1 1.1.2 1.1.3 

1.1 Wi

1.1.1 Wi ) 

1.1.2 Wi

1.1.3 Wi

2.0 2.1.1 2.1.2 2.1.3 

2.1 

2.1.1 i

2.1.2 

2.1.3 2.2.1 2.2.2 2.2.3 

2.2 

2.2.1 (

2.2.2 i

2.2.3 2.3.2 2.3.3 

2.3 

2.3.1 

2.3.2 

2.3.3 2.4.1 2.4.2 2.4.3 

2.4 

2.4.1 

2.4.2 

2.4.3 

3.0 3.1.1 3.1.2 3.1.3 

3.1 

3.1.1 

3.1.2 

3.1.3 l 3.2.1 3.2.3 

3.2 

3.2.1 i

3.2.2 i

3.2.3 

4.0 4.1.1 4.1.2 4.1.3 

4.1 

4.1.1 

4.1.2 

4.1.3 High 4.2.1 4.2.2 4.2.3 

4.2 i

4.2.1 ity Interest 

4.2.2 

4.2.3 

5.0 5.1.1 5.1.2 5.1.3 

5.1 

5.2.1 5.2.2 5.2.3 

5.2 

WIND-WATER MATRIX Low Moderate 

Wind Energy Potential 

nd Power Classes 

nd Class 1-2 (Low

nd Class 3-4 (Moderate) 

nd Class 5-7 (High) 

Water Supply and Wastewater Treatment 

Water Scarcity 

Low Scarc ty 

Moderate Scarcity 

High Scarcity

Water Salinity 

High Salinity 30,000 - 45,000 ppm tds) 

Moderate Salin ty (15,000 - 30,000 ppm tds) 

Low Salinity (5,000 - 15,000 ppm tds) 2.3.1 

Pumping, Treatment, and Wastewater Support 

Little Need for Support 

Moderate Need for Support 

High Need for Support 

Ability to Integrate Intermittent Power 

Low Ability to Integrate Intermittent Power 

Moderate Ability to Integrate Intermittent 

Power 

High Ability to Integrate Intermittent Power 

Electricity Costs and Energy Mix 

Electricity Cost 

Low Retail Rates 

Moderate Retail Rates 

High Retai Rates 3.2.2 

Energy Mix and Availability of Ancillary Services 

Low Availabil ty of Ancillary Services 

Moderate Availabil ty of Ancillary Services 

High Availability of Ancillary Services 

Demand Growth and Demonstrated Community Interest 

Population Growth 

Low Population Growth 

Moderate Population Growth 

Population Growth

Demonstrated Commun ty Interest 

Low Commun

Moderate Community Interest 

High Community Interest 

Geographic and Other Factors 

Geographic Factors 

Other Factors 

18 
4.1 Screening for Water Service Opportunities in Windy U.S. Areas 

To identify locations well suited for both wind energy and clean water supply, a matrix was 

developed. Nine major sets of parameters are characterized in the matrix, plus several sub-level 

descriptive parameters (Table 2). For each of the major parameters (described in more detail 

below), one of three levels is assigned, running from least- to most-attractive for wind-water 

opportunities. 

Wind Energy Potential 

For this study, wind power potential is divided into three major categories of recognized U.S. wind 

speed/power classes that define wind resources in the United States: Low (Classes 1 and 2), 

Moderate (Classes 3 and 4, often associated with small, distributed-application wind turbines or 

larger utility-scale turbines built to Low Wind Speed Turbine design parameters), and High (Classes 

5 and higher, which are excellent wind resources). 

Refer back to Figure 11 for the map of U.S. wind energy potential; however, for more detailed data 

in the matrix, state-based maps were downloaded and reviewed. An example of a state wind map is 

the Nevada map in the case study below (Figure 21). Validated, high-resolution wind resource maps 

for 34 states and the District of Columbia can be found at 

http://www.eere.energy.gov/windandhydro/windpoweringamerica/state_activities.asp. 

Water Supply and Wastewater Treatment 

Water issues have been divided into water scarcity; salinity; pumping, treatment, and wastewater 

support; and ability to integrate intermittent power sources. Water scarcity is defined as the ratio of 

2004 withdrawals divided by long-term annual average precipitation (refer back to Figure 2). Water 

salinity is disaggregated into three classes that can be addressed by wind energy; for salinity, the 

order of salinity categories follows from highest to lowest. For pumping, treatment, and wastewater 

support, the levels simply address the need for electric power supplies from new sources. The ability 

of the water supply and wastewater treatment provider to integrate intermittent power is important in 

estimating the likelihood of successful adoption of wind generation support by the provider. 

Electricity Costs and Energy Mix 

Along with wind resources and water needs, the cost and mix of electricity are critical factors in 

estimating the success of a wind-water application. The principal determining factor is the cost 

of electricity; in this study, costs are represented by the residential rate. Figure 16 presents 

statewide average electric utility costs, gathered from the EIA October 2005 utility rate report, in 

three categories: less than $.07/kWh (low), $.07-$.10/kWh (medium), and over $.10/kWh (high). 

The mix of energy resources also comes into play; if the mix can comfortably accommodate 

wind added for water applications, or the electric system can provide ancillary services that 

enable wind interconnections, then a significant hurdle has been overcome. 

Demand Growth and Demonstrated Community Interest 

Figure 17 shows population growth centers, with calculated county population growth rates from 

2003-2004, based on U.S. Census estimates. The map highlights the current and future 

population pressure zones within three growth categories: 0% or less (no or negative growth), 0-

2.5% (normal growth), and over 2.5% (high growth). 

19�
Demonstrated community interest is scored based on membership in a regional, national, or an 

international environmental organization. Some examples include the International Council for 

Local Environmental Initiatives (ICLEI), Federal Clean Cities, National League of Cities, and U.S. 

Mayors Climate Protection Agreement. 

Figure 16 - Statewide Average Electric Utility Costs 

Figure 17 – County Population Growth Pressure Centers 

Geographic and Other Factors 

In particular cases, there may be unique factors that should be highlighted. 

20 
4.2. Analysis 

The results of this research will be used in subsequent reports to highlight locations with conditions 

favorable to wind energy use by water providers. Initial findings show promising areas scattered 

around the U.S (refer to Figure 18). In the meantime, energy and water analysts and providers are 

invited to consider the parameters outlined above in their respective municipalities. Two case 

studies are outlined below as examples. 

Figure 18 – Initial findings for U.S. locations with wind-water potential 

5. CASE STUDIES 

5.1 Austin, Texas 

5.1.1 Wind Energy Potential 

Austin is located in a relatively low wind energy potential area (Class 2) and lies 

approximately 250 miles from good land-based wind sources in western Texas and the Texas 

panhandle to the north. However, if recent proposals for off-shore wind development near 

Galveston come to fruition, this resource would be 150 miles distant. 

5.1.2 Water Supply and Treatment 

Water is currently used in and around the Austin area for municipal uses (residential, nonresidential, and urban irrigation) and industrial uses (cooling, turf, and other uses). The Austin 

Water Utility (AWU) supplies water to customers within and outside the corporate city limits of 

Austin, as well as the communities of Rollingwood, Sunset Valley, Pflugerville, and Round 

Rock, one water control and improvement district, five water supply corporations, seven 

municipal utility districts, and three private utilities. 

The total utility service area is 457 square miles. The water demand for each of these sectors in 

2004 was calculated using information from the AWU. In 2004, AWU served almost 800,000 

people, with 93% being retail population. The total demand for 2004 was 41.4 billion gallons 

21�
(127,000 AF), distributed among different water use sectors (Figure 19). This reflects a systemwide water demand of approximately 140 gallons/person/day. Residential is the most significant 

water use, followed by commercial/industrial demands. 

5.1.3 Electricity Costs and Energy Mix 

One hundred percent of Austin’s water is derived from local surface sources: the Colorado River, 

including Lake Austin and Town Lake. As a result, there is very little pumping (or electricity 

use) prior to treatment. 

AWU operates three raw water treatment plants (WTPs): Green, Ullrich, and Davis. Two of the 

WTPs (Green and Davis) are located on the Colorado River, while water is pumped 2,800 feet 

horizontally to the Ullrich WTP. The city maintains 34 distribution reservoirs with an effective 

storage capacity of 250 million gallons (768 AF). The city also maintains 47 pump stations and 

local booster stations. 

Figure 19 - Austin Water Utility Normal Year Supplies 

idential, 

56% ial, 8%

36% 

Res Commercial/ Wholesale, 

Industr

Costs are listed in Table 3. 

Table 3 - Austin Energy Residential Service Rates (over 500 kWh) 

Billings 

Months 

Energy Rate 

) 

May - Oct 7.82 

Nov - April 6.02 

Fiscal year 

2004 energy use data includes: 

• 

• 

• 

Total energy use related to treatment, distribution, and post-use treatment was 185,600 

megawatt-hours (MWh) in fiscal year 2004. This equates to an average hourly demand of 21 

MW/hr. 

(cents/kWh

A breakdown of electricity usage by water system segment is shown in Figure 20. 

Treatment: 86,300 MWh (1780 kWh/million gallons for treatment of 48.5 billion gallons) 

[The demand for capturing water and getting water to treatment is included with water 

treatment.] 

Distribution: 23,000 MWh (557 kWh/MG for distribution of 41.4 billion gallons) 

Post-treatment (wastewater collection and treatment use): 76,300 MWh (2,439 

KWh/Mgal for 31.3 billion gallons wastewater effluent treated). 

22 
Figure 20 - Austin Water System Energy Requirements, 2004 

Di i ion Posttreatment 

MWh, 

76,300 

str but

MWh, 

23,000 

Pretreatment 

MWh, 

86,300 

5.1.4 Demand Growth and Demonstrated Community Interest 

Texas is growing at a rapid pace; the U.S. Census Bureau reports that it added 4 million residents 

state-wide from 1990-2000. Austin’s projected 2030 service area population is 1.3 million, 

which is more than a 50% increase from the 2004 population. At current per-capita use rates, 

projected water demand will be 64.7 billion gallons/year (~200,000 AF). Austin projects meeting 

future water demand through its existing supply, the locally named Colorado River, where it has 

a water right to use 325,000 AF/year. Based on the answer to our survey, the AWU does not 

know all of its future needs at this time. Furthermore, it reports that all facilities in the water 

system need a constant and reliable source of power and that there is not enough wind in the 

local area to provide a reliable supply. 

As for community interest, Austin Energy, the city’s electrical utility, has contracts with wind 

generation fields in other parts of the state to provide a portion of the city’s power needs. In fact, 

the utility just entered a 12-year contract for 128 MW from wind sources in western Texas. 

Furthermore, the City of Austin has its own renewable portfolio standard: 20% by 2020, with 

potentially 6.5% of this coming from wind power. 

5.1.5 Geographic and Other Factors 

Despite being located at a fair distance from good wind resources, several other factors may 

contribute to greater wind development related to municipal water needs such as: the 

transmission “bottleneck” related to wind sources from western Texas is improving, and there 

may be an opportunity for a pumped-hydro project, making use of the elevation difference 

between Lake Austin and Town Lake. 

In summary, Austin is a fairly good prospect for applying wind to water-related energy demands. 

Although wind resources are not close by (and not close to the load), rapid growth, high rates for 

electricity from other fuel sources, and strong local support suggest that wind may have a good 

opportunity. 

23�
5.2 Las Vegas, Nevada 

5.2.1 Wind Energy Potential 

Although not pictured here (Figure 21), some of the good wind resource immediately around Las 

Vegas may be wind west of the city in California, or south of the city. 

Figure 21 – Wind Energy Potential in Nevada 

5.2.2. Water Supply and Treatment 

Water is currently used in and around the Las Vegas area for irrigation, municipal uses 

(residential, non-residential, and urban irrigation), and industrial uses (cooling, turf, and other 

uses). Southern Nevada Water Authority (SNWA) is the water wholesaler for member agencies, 

which include the Cities of Las Vegas, Henderson, Boulder City, North Las Vegas, and portions 

of Unincorporated Clark County, Nevada. The water demand for each of these sectors in 2003 

was calculated using information from the SNWA. 

The SNWA provides wholesale water service to its member agencies. The SNWA’s member 

agencies provide retail water and wastewater service to customers in their service areas. The 

population residing in their service areas was estimated to be about 1.58 million in 2003. 

24�
The SNWA’s member agency normalized 2003 water use, including potable and non-potable 

water use, was about 169.5 billion gallons (520,000 AF) distributed among three sectors. 

Residential was the most significant water use, followed by commercial and industrial demands. 

The SNWA and its member agencies currently obtain about 90 percent of its water from the 

Colorado River. In addition, the SNWA members use groundwater resources to meet the 

remaining roughly 10 percent of their water needs. 

The SNWA owns and operates the Southern Nevada Water System (SNWS), which provides a 

majority of the water to the SNWA’s member agencies. The SNWS consists of two intake 

structures, two water treatment plants, and a transmission system with a current combined 

delivery and treatment capacity of about 750 million gallons/day. The source water for SNWS is 

the Colorado River at Lake Mead. There is a limited distance between the SNWS intakes and its 

water treatment facilities. The farther of the two water treatment facilities is less than 5 miles 

from Lake Mead. 

5.2.3 Electricity Costs and Energy Mix 

SNWA’s wholesale delivery of water includes pumping from the treatment facilities to several 

storage reservoirs prior to delivery to its member agencies. The SNWA’s member agencies are 

responsible for distribution of water, since they are retail water providers. Total SNWA 

electricity usage for delivering water to the SNWA member agencies during 2003 was about 

646,000 MWh. This equates to an average hourly demand of about 70 MW/hr. 

5.2.4 Demand Growth and Demonstrated Community Interest 

The SNWA anticipates that the Colorado River will continue to provide a majority of its water 

resource for meeting water needs of its member agencies. The SNWA is currently planning to 

develop surface and groundwater resources to deliver water to its member agencies and diversify 

its water resource portfolio. This plan is intended to result in a greater share of water needs being 

met from non-Colorado River sources in the long term. 

The SNWA is pursuing a host of conservation programs. An advisory committee report 

summarizing a series of recommendations, including recommendations on water conservation, 

was presented to the SNWA Board in November 2005. The conservation recommendations 

included reducing the SNWA’s system-wide per capita water use to 245 gallons by the year 2035 

from a current per capita use of 294 gallons. 

In July 2005, the University of Nevada Las Vegas - Center for Business and Economic Research 

forecast that Clark County, Nevada would grow from an estimated population of 1.64 million in 

2003 to a forecast population of about 3.41 million in the year 2030. A majority of this forecast 

population is expected to reside in the SNWA’s member service areas. 

The SNWA is currently working on plans to develop surface and groundwater resources to 

deliver water to its member agencies and diversify its water resource portfolio. These projects 

together are anticipated to have an average hourly demand of between about 80 to 90 MW/hr. 

SNWA is currently meeting approximately 13% of its needs using hydropower from Hoover 

Dam. 

25�
5.2.5 Geographic and Other Factors 

Wind power may be a future option to supply a portion of the SNWA’s power needs. However, the 

intermittent nature of wind power must be considered. For example, SNWA has plans to build a 

solar generating facility and trade the non-firm power to Nevada Power Company for firm power to 

use for SNWA load. Perhaps wind energy could be used to offset peak power times to produce clean 

energy for the region. 

6. RESULTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 

The growth in the U.S. population and the related economic growth will require additional 

energy and water. There are a number of regions and communities in the United States, 

especially in the West, that there are already non-sustainable withdrawals and consumptions of 

water resources. As water and energy demands grow with time, these areas will grow in number 

and intensity; additional, but uncertain, stress on the water systems will result from extended 

drought cycles. Therefore, growth in water demand (from all sources) combined with a finite, 

and possibly diminishing, resource creates a compelling need for consideration of alternatives to 

business as usual, especially for growing urban areas in the West. While not a focus of this 

paper, wind energy offers an energy source that uses limited water compared to thermoelectric 

generation (Clean Air Task Force and The Land and Water Fund of the Rockies 2003). 

Wind energy can play a role in this context by supplying energy for municipal water supplies and 

processes. This can be in the form of pumping energy, water treatment, desalination, and, in 

some cases irrigation pumping. Because wind energy has low and predictable costs and is nonpolluting, indigenous, renewable, and a minimal water user, it is an attractive alternative to 

conventional energy sources for supplying municipal water needs. However, the ability to apply 

wind energy to municipal water needs may be limited by the proximity of the wind resource to 

the load and the intermittent nature of the wind resource. At the same time, in certain cases the 

municipal water system storage capabilities and opportunities may somewhat mitigate wind’s 

intermittency. 

The DOE Wind program is in the process of characterizing the opportunity for wind energy in 

supplying energy for municipal water supplies. The opportunity will depend on each 

municipality’s characteristics of wind resource, water supply and treatment requirements, energy 

costs and types, demand growth, community interest, and other geographic factors. Case study 

opportunities are being developed for a variety of municipalities based on these parameters. 

Following the development of the case studies, the opportunity for pilot projects will be explored 

with municipalities that have both a good opportunity and reasonable replicability of the 

application to other communities. 

26�
7. REFERENCES 

American Wind Energy Association. (2004). Facts about Wind Energy and Noise. Available 

online at http://www.awea.org/pubs/factsheets/WE_Noise.pdf 

American Wind Energy Association. (2005). Wind Power Outlook 2005. Available online at 

http://www.awea.org/pubs/documents/Outlook%202005.pdf 

Bonneville Power Administration. (2004). BPA Wind Integration Services. Accessed November 

30, 2005 at http://www.bpa.gov/Power/PGC/wind/BPA_Wind_Integration_Services.pdf 

Burton, F. L. (1996). Water and Wastewater Industries: Characteristics and Energy Management 

Opportunities. (Burton Engineering) Los Altos, CA , Report CR-106941, Electric Power 

Research Institute Report, p. ES-1. 

Clean Air Task Force and The Land and Water Fund of the Rockies. (2003). The Last Straw: 

Water Use by Power Plants in the Arid West. (Hewlett Foundation Energy Series) April 2003. 

Available on line at http://www.westernresourceadvocates.org/media/pdf/WaterBklet-Final3-

W.pdf 

Chaudhry, S. Utility Strategies for Shifting Peak Demand Period Water and Energy Use. 

California Energy Commission, August 2005. Available online at 

http://www.energy.ca.gov/process/water/water_pubs/2005-08-

25_CHAUDHRY_DWR_WORKSHOP.PDF 

Erickson, W.P.; Johnson, G.D.; Strickland, M.D.; Young, D.P. Jr.; Sernka, K.J.; Good, R.E. 

(2001). Avian Collisions with Wind Turbines: A Summary of Existing Studies and Comparisons 

to Other Sources of Avian Collision Mortality in the United States. National Wind Coordinating 

Committee, available online at 

http://www.nationalwind.org/publications/avian/avian_collisions.pdf 

Feeley, T.J. III. National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL). “Responding to Emerging 

Power Plant-Water Issues – DOE/NETL’s R&D Program,” May 17-19, 2004, available online at 

http://www.netl.doe.gov/coal/E&WR/pubs/ACC%20Water%20Presentation.pdf 

Feeley. T. J.; Hoffmann, J.; Forbes, S. Estimating Freshwater Needs to Meet 2025 Electricity 

Generating Capacity Forecasts, U.S. Department of Energy/National Energy Technology 

Laboratory, June 2004, available online at 

http://www.netl.doe.gov/coal/E&WR/pubs/Estimating%20Freshwater%20Needs%20to%202025 

.pdf 

Feeley, T. J.; Ramezan, M. Electric Utilities and Water: Emerging Issues and R&D Needs. 

Presented at the Water Environment Federation, 9th Annual Industrial Wastes Technical and 

Regulatory Conference, San Antonio, Texas. April 13-16, 2003, available online at 

http://www.netl.doe.gov/coal/E&WR/pubs/wefFINAL2.pdf 

27 
Flowers, L. (2005). Wind Energy Update. National Renewable Energy Laboratory. Presentation 

available online at 

http://www.eere.energy.gov/windandhydro/windpoweringamerica/pdfs/wpa/wpa_update.pdf 

Global Wind Energy Council. (September 2005). Wind Industry Has Achieved 50 GW of 

Capacity Installed Worldwide in 2005. Press release available online at 

http://www.gwec.net/fileadmin/documents/PressReleases/0922-Husum-GWEC.pdf 

Hoffman, A. U.S. DOE. Energy Security, Institute for the Analysis of Global Security, August 

13, 2004, available online at http://www.iags.org/n0813043.htm 

Hull Wind.org. (2005). http://www.hullwind.org/ 

Hutson, S.S.; Barber, N.L.; Kenny, J.F.; Linsey, K.S.; Lumia, D.S.; Maupin, M.A. “Estimated 

Use of Water in the United States in 2000.” U.S. Geological Survey Circular 1268 (released 

March 2004, revised April 2004, May 2004, February 2005), available online at 

http://pubs.usgs.gov/circ/2004/circ1268/ 

Interwest Energy Alliance. (2002-2004). Take a Closer Look: Is Wind Energy CostCompetitive? Accessed November 30, 2005 at http://www.interwestenergy.org/cost.htm 

Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. (April 2003). Estimated U.S. Freshwater Withdrawals 

in 1995: ~341,000 Mgal/Day. Available online at http://eed.llnl.gov/flow/pdf/US_water1995.pdf 

National Renewable Energy Laboratory. (2005). Utah Wind Resource Map. Available at 

http://www.eere.energy.gov/windandhydro/windpoweringamerica/maps_template.asp?stateab=U 

T 

National Research Council. (2004). “Confronting the Nation’s Water Problems: The Role of 

Research.” Water Science and Technology Board Division on Earth and Life Studies. Laura 

Ehlers, Study Director. National Academies Press. 

National Wind Coordinating Committee. (2005). Wind Power Facility Siting Case Studies: 

Community Response. Available online at 

http://www.nationalwind.org/publications/permit/Wind_Power_Facility_Siting_Case_Studies.pd 

f 

Pacific Northwest National Laboratory. (1986). Wind Energy Resource Atlas of the United 

States. Available online at http://rredc.nrel.gov/wind/pubs/atlas/ 

Raabe, S. (November 25, 2005). “Xcel’s Windsource goes full tilt.” The Denver Post. Accessed 

November 30, 2005 at http://www.denverpost.com/search/ci_3249508 

28�
Roy, S.B.; Summers, K.V.; Goldstein, R.A. “Water Sustainability in the United States and 

Cooling Water Requirements for Power Generation,” Universities Council on Water Resources 

Water Resources Update, p 94-99, November 2003, available online at 

http://www.ucowr.siu.edu/updates/127/Roy%20and%20Summers.pdf 

U.S. Census Bureau. (2005a). National and State Population Estimates. Available online at 

http://www.census.gov/popest/states/NST-ratecmpchg.html 

U.S. Census Bureau. (2005b). U.S. and World Population Clocks. Available online at 

http://www.census.gov/main/www/popclock.html 

U.S. Congress. (2005). “Energy Policy Act of 2005: Subtitle G Science Section 979 Energy and 

Water Supplies,” September 2005, available online at http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgibin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=109_cong_bills&docid=f:h6enr.txt.pdf 

U.S. Department of Energy. (2005a). United States Wind Resource Map. Accessed November 

30, 2005 at 

http://www.eere.energy.gov/windandhydro/windpoweringamerica/wind_maps_none.asp 

U.S. Department of Energy. (2005b). Wind Energy Program Multi-Year Program Plan for 2007-

2011 revision 3.09 (draft), p.4. 

U.S. House Rules Committee. (2005). “Energy & Water Development Appropriations 2006 

Conference Report 109-275,” November 2005, available online at 

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgibin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=109_cong_bills&docid=f:h6enr.txt.pdf

Wilkinson, R. (2000). Methodology for Analysis of the Energy Intensity of California’s Water 

Systems, and Assessment of Multiple Potential Benefits Through Integrated Water-Energy 

Efficiency Measures, Exploratory Research Project, Ernest Orlando Lawrence Berkeley 

Laboratory, California Institute for Energy Efficiency. 

Wind Powering America. (2004). Wind Power for Browning, Montana Waste Water Treatment 

Facility. Accessed November 30, 2005 at 

http://www.eere.energy.gov/windandhydro/windpoweringamerica/na_montana.asp 

29 
REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE Form Approved 

OMB No. 0704-0188 

The public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, 

gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this 

collection of information, including suggestions for reducing the burden, to Department of Defense, Executive Services and Communications Directorate (0704-0188). Respondents 

should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a 

currently valid OMB control number. 

PLEASE DO NOT RETURN YOUR FORM TO THE ABOVE ORGANIZATION. 

1. REPORT DATE (DD-MM-YYYY) 

January 2006 

2. REPORT TYPE 

Conference Paper 

3. DATES COVERED (From - To) 

4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE 

Wind Energy Applications for Municipal Water Services: 

Opportunities, Situation Analyses, and Case Studies; Preprint 

5a. CONTRACT NUMBER 

DE-AC36-99-GO10337 

5b. GRANT NUMBER 

5c. PROGRAM ELEMENT NUMBER 

6. AUTHOR(S) 

L. Flowers and L. Miner-Nordstrom 

5d. PROJECT NUMBER 

NREL/CP-500-39178 

5e. TASK NUMBER 

WER6 6006 

5f. WORK UNIT NUMBER 

7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 

National Renewable Energy Laboratory 

1617 Cole Blvd. 

Golden, CO 80401-3393 

8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION 

REPORT NUMBER 

NREL/CP-500-39178 

9. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 10. SPONSOR/MONITOR'S ACRONYM(S) 

NREL 

11. SPONSORING/MONITORING 

AGENCY REPORT NUMBER 

12. DISTRIBUTION AVAILABILITY STATEMENT 

National Technical Information Service 

U.S. Department of Commerce 

5285 Port Royal Road 

Springfield, VA 22161 

13. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES 

14. ABSTRACT (Maximum 200 Words) 

As communities grow, greater demands are placed on water supplies, wastewater services, and the electricity 

needed to power the growing water services infrastructure. Water is also a critical resource for thermoelectric power 

plants. Future population growth in the United States is therefore expected to heighten competition for water 

resources. Many parts of the United States with increasing water stresses also have significant wind energy 

resources. Wind power is the fastest-growing electric generation source in the United States and is decreasing in 

cost to be competitive with thermoelectric generation. Wind energy can offer communities in water-stressed areas the 

option of economically meeting increasing energy needs without increasing demands on valuable water resources. 

Wind energy can also provide targeted energy production to serve critical local water-system needs. The research 

presented in this report describes a systematic assessment of the potential for wind power to support water utility 

operation, with the objective to identify promising technical applications and water utility case study opportunities. 

The first section describes the current situation that municipal providers face with respect to energy and water. The 

second section describes the progress that wind technologies have made in recent years to become a cost-effective 

electricity source. The third section describes the analysis employed to assess potential for wind power in support of 

water service providers, as well as two case studies. The report concludes with results and recommendations. 

15. SUBJECT TERMS 

wind energy; wind turbines; water; municipal water supplies; water conservation; municipal water; energy-water 

nexus 

16. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF: 17. LIMITATION 

OF ABSTRACT 

UL 

18. NUMBER 

OF PAGES 

19a. NAME OF RESPONSIBLE PERSON 

a. REPORT 

Unclassified 

b. ABSTRACT 

Unclassified 

c. THIS PAGE 

Unclassified 19b. TELEPHONE NUMBER (Include area code) 

Standard Form 298 (Rev. 8/98) 

Prescribed by ANSI Std. Z39.18 

F1147-E(12/2004)