1

ENERGIZING APPALACHIA: 

GLOBAL CHALLENGES AND THE 

PROSPECT OF A RENEWABLE FUTURE 

Prepared for the Appalachian Regional Commission 

By 

Dr. Amy Glasmeier, Ron Feingold, Amanda Guers, Gillian Hay, Teresa Lawler, 

Alissa Meyer, Ratchan Sangpenchan, Matthew Stern, Wesley Stroh, Polycarp Tam, 

Ricardo Torres, Romare Truly, Amy Welch. 

The Pennsylvania State University 

Department of Geography 

Finalized: September 2007 
2

CONTENTS 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .......................................................................................................................... 3

INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................ 7

RENEWABLE ENERGY INDUSTRY ANALYSES .............................................................................. 10

WIND ........................................................................................................................................................ 10

SOLAR ...................................................................................................................................................... 20

BIOMASS .................................................................................................................................................. 26

SOURCES & METHODOLOGY ............................................................................................................. 34

POTENTIAL MANUFACTURING CAPACITY IN APPALACHIA .................................................. 36

RESOURCE SECTOR ANALYSES ................................................................................................................. 36

Wind .................................................................................................................................................... 37

Solar .................................................................................................................................................... 39

Biomass ............................................................................................................................................... 41

APPALACHIAN REGIONAL TOTALS ........................................................................................................... 43

STATE ANALYSES ..................................................................................................................................... 46

RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................................................................................... 49

CONCLUSION ........................................................................................................................................... 52

APPENDICES ............................................................................................................................................ 54

APPENDIX A – RENEWABLE ENERGY MANUFACTURERS .......................................................................... 54

APPENDIX B – CONCENTRATED RENEWABLE MANUFACTURING ............................................................. 76

APPENDIX C - STATE MANUFACTURING POTENTIAL TOTALS ................................................................... 99
3

Executive Summary 

The global demand for energy is increasing at a staggering rate, particularly as growing 

countries such as India and China develop at an unprecedented pace. The capacity of 

conventional resources to meet this growing demand for energy is in serious question. 

The composition of future energy supplies now dominates the international energy 

discussion, as it is formative of economic security and development. The influence of 

energy supply on global relations cannot be overemphasized, and the addition of billions 

of new energy consumers to already strained conventional energy supplies will further 

exacerbate energy related tensions. Increasing demand for energy is operating in tandem 

with increasing global concerns over the impact of conventional energy on our 

environment, particularly referring to greenhouse gas emissions. As this new energy 

paradigm continues to reveal itself, actions are underway to establish and grow new 

energy sources. New sources will not only provide additional opportunities to satisfy 

growing demand, but non-fossil fuel sources can provide climate friendly alternatives to 

conventional fossil based resources. Renewable energy sources such as wind, solar and 

biomass power are growing in importance as resources to address growing energy 

demand and the requirement to control externalities from fossil fuel consumption. 

Over the last three decades, the roles of renewable resources have evolved from 

experimental afterthoughts to viable means of energy supply. Having evolved over the 

last thirty years, much of the technology of wind, solar and even biofuels have reached a 

level of maturity where production has achieved economies of scale and large producers 

have taken over several of the market niches. An almost singular reliance on fossil fuels 

has stunted the growth of renewable energy industries in the US. The US now lags behind 

its global competitors in these strategic industries. Only 20 years ago, the US was an 

innovator and recognized leader in this emergent sector. Today, while known in the 

industry group simply based on the size of the national economy, the US is a distant 

fourth or fifth player in an industrial group that collectively and consistently is growing 

by at least 25 percent per year for the last five years and is expected to continue or exceed 

this rate of growth in the foreseeable future. Wind energy is primarily dominated by 

European companies, with only one of the top ten manufacturers based in the US. India is 

already a significant global player in the wind industry and China is positioned to enter 

into this industry in force over the next few years. The Solar energy market is less 

concentrated than wind and biofuels, with both retail and wholesale markets, than the 

wind industry, but it also is demonstrating similar trends to wind in that the US is now a 

net importer of solar photovoltaic (PV) modules. 

What the evolving nature of manufacturing within these industries reveals is that the US 

is allowing itself to be shut out of one of the fasted growing industries in the world. As a 

nation with increasing annual energy demands itself, left unchecked, the US may well be 

reestablishing its future energy dependence on the manufacturing of energy equipment 

from beyond its own borders. Energy security issues aside, this means the US may not be 

positioning itself to capitalize on an energy sector it was foundational in creating. In 

particular, areas of the country that may have significant capacity to manufacture 
4

equipment for these industries may lose out on a tremendous opportunity for economic 

growth from the development of renewable energy technologies. It is from this 

perspective that this report reviews the renewable energy manufacturing potential of the 

Appalachian region. Experienced in equipment and components manufacturing, and with 

substantial infrastructure on the ground, Appalachia may be in a position to engage this 

growing energy sector and provide local growth in jobs and investment. 

This report investigates the status and behavior of the wind, solar and biomass industries 

in order to better understand how domestically-based manufacturers might best engage 

this sector. It was revealed that significant consolidation has occurred in the wind 

industry and is beginning to occur in the solar industry. It is becoming increasingly 

difficult for small companies to gain a foothold and secure adequate market share in both 

of these industries. However, the growing demand for these resources has opened up 

opportunities for the manufacturers of equipment in the supply chain of the finished 

products to emerge. 

To understand what opportunities exist for Appalachia to engage the renewable energy 

sector, this report analyzed the region’s potential capacity to manufacture components for 

the wind, solar and biomass industries. This was accomplished by a comprehensive 

review of North American Industry Classification System codes and 2002 County 

Business Pattern Data collected by Bureau of the Census. Industry codes were selected 

based upon their degree of similarity to parts utilized by the wind, solar and biomass 

industries. Analysis reveals not only the degree of potential capacity, but also how it is 

distributed across the region. As a whole, Appalachian counties’ possess almost 200,000 

jobs in manufacturing parts and components that could, with modification, be suited for 

production of renewable energy components. This also includes almost 3,000 existing 

manufacturers within the region that possess similar potential to engage the renewable 

energy industry. More specifically, analysis reveals where highly concentrated 

manufacturing potential exists, either as a result of significant jobs, high numbers of 

manufacturing establishments or where several industry-specific components are 

manufactured. The concentrated nature of sub-components manufacturing potential 

within a given area offers a distinct opportunity for industries siting local manufacturing 

facilities. Each of the 13 Appalachian member states have counties with concentrated 

manufacturing potential of over 100 jobs or over five components in each of the three 

industries considered. 

Furthermore, several areas of concentrated employment potential exist for each of the 

three sectors in excess of 1,000 jobs in a single county, including: 

Greenville County, South Carolina, with over 3,700 jobs and 19 establishments 

producing components similar to those needed by the wind industry; 

Wood County, West Virginia, with 2,710 jobs and three establishments producing 

components similar to those needed by the solar PV industry; 

Erie County, Pennsylvania, with over 6,835 jobs and 40 establishments producing 

components similar to those needed by the biomass electric generation industry; 

Regionally, over 28,000 potential manufacturing jobs exist within economically 

distressed or at-risk Appalachian counties. 
5

Manufacturing potential is not immediately available for component production for each 

of these industries. Yet, tools exist that could enable or encourage manufacturing for 

renewable energy components ranging from educational programs and industry incubator 

programs to financial incentives and renewable energy policies. In particular, some states 

have developed and passed legislation providing tax credits for manufacturers producing 

equipment for renewable energy as well as for consumers who purchase equipment 

manufactured within their states. Even more, policies have been passed that provide 

incentives for manufacturers that site renewable facilities within economically depressed 

regions. Opportunities to pursue similar initiatives exist for Appalachian member states. 

Recommendations to facilitate growth in renewable energy manufacturing and 

production in the region include the following: 

Renewable Energy Manufacturers Tax Credits

Renewable Energy Portfolio (RPS) and Tax Credit Multipliers for In-State 

Manufacturing

Tax Credits or Multipliers for Manufacturing in Distressed Regions

Incubator Programs for Renewable Energy Industries

Renewable Energy Manufacturing Business Outreach Program

Bridging Local Manufacturing with Industry Suppliers and Vendors

Regional Renewable Energy Industry Consortiums 

Production Tax Credits, Grants and Loans for Cellulosic Ethanol 

In addition to the opportunity for manufacturing components for these industries, 

Appalachia may have the capacity to produce energy from renewable sources. In 

particular, beyond current uses of biomass in electrical energy cogeneration, the future of 

biomass energy extends beyond electricity generation and is growing most rapidly in the 

area of biofuel production. Ethanol production in the US is significant, and the 

development of new technologies to utilize cellulosic ethanol is rapidly progressing. It is 

widely held within the biofuel arena that cellulosic ethanol production will become a 

mainstream fuel source in the coming decade. Where wind and solar energy production 

capacity is highly variable across the Appalachian region, it is likely that substantial 

cellulosic ethanol resources exist throughout the region that can be harvested for this 

industry. This provides a distinct opportunity for Appalachia above and beyond 

equipment manufacturing. This report briefly explores the economic potential for this 

resource to be pursued in Appalachia. 

In summary, the results of this report indicate that there is substantial potential to produce 

components for the rapidly growing renewable industries of wind, solar and biomass 

energy. The nature of the industry suggests that sub-component manufacturing may be an 

achievable near-term goal for the economic growth in the region. Medium-term potential 

for growing locally-based renewable firms exists as well, although the consolidating 

nature of the industry suggests this requires substantially more support from agencies 

such as State government and the Appalachian Regional Commission. Finally, long-term 

potential to become a significant biofuel energy producer may exist. Each of these 
6

opportunities will deliver much-needed growth to the region, from a set of industries that 

show the potential to continue rapid growth into the future. 
7

Introduction 

Over the last decade the global wind, solar and biomass industries have grown 

substantially. In the US alone, generation of wind energy has grown from 10 megawatts 

(MW) of installed capacity in 1981 to over 10,000 MW today. The solar industry has also 

experienced record growth: in 2005 a record level of PV was installed globally and the 

US ranked third in installed solar energy capacity with approximately 450 MW of 

installed PV capacity. Biomass energy generation has also grown steadily over the last 

decade and currently provides over 10,000 MW of heat and electrical energy for the US.1

 

Growing most quickly in the biomass sector, however, is the production of ethanol and 

bio-diesel fuels, posing an opportunity of distinct importance for the Appalachian region. 

More specifically, there is a significant and growing emphasis on the development of 

cellulose-based ethanol production, derived from the woody and fibrous components of 

plants rather than the starchy seeds, fruits and roots. The development of such 

technology will enable the biofuel industry to capture a greater amount of existing 

biomass resources - resources believed to exist in substantial volumes in the Appalachian 

region. 

For a variety of reasons, demand for 

all three of these energy sources is 

predicted to increase in the coming 

decades. The passage of various 

energy policies to address energy 

needs and diversification has proven 

to be a significant driver behind 

industry growth. For example, statelevel renewable energy requirements 

detail specified amounts of generation 

from clean energy sources that must 

be provided. Renewable fuel 

requirements have also been instituted 

in some states, as well as by the 

nation-at-large with the passage of the 

Energy Policy Act (EPACT) of 2005.

Tax incentives are also critical drivers 

for growth, and federal incentives 

augment new and existing incentives 

for renewable energy in an everincreasing number of states. 

The desire for low-emissions energy, 

relative to conventional energy 

 

1

 National Renewable Energy Laboratory: Renewable Energy Poised to Realize Long Term Potential, June 

2006: http://www.nrel.gov/director/pdfs/40768.pdf 

Note on Units 

We talk about energy in terms of the amount of 

power over a period of time, for example 1 

watt=joule/second. A 60-watt light bulb requires 

60 joules of electricity every second, or 60 watts of 

electricity. 

Kilowatts (kW) and megawatts (MW) are units of 

measurements used in association with large 

energy producers or users. 

1 kW=1,000 watts, 1 MW=1,000 kW=1 

million watts 

MWs are the standard measure of the generation 

capability, or capacity, of a power plant. Power 

plants do not always produce as much power as 

they are fully capable (peak capacity) all the time, 

the average amount of power they produce 

compared to their full potential is referred to as 

their capacity factor. 

For instance, wind power capacity is 

approximately 35%, and is reported as the average 

MW (MWa). 

1MWa is enough to power approximately 

1000 homes. 

Source: NM Public Interest Research Group Education 

Fund Clean Energy Solutions 
8

sources, is also driving demand for these clean energy resources. Finally, steadily 

increasing and sometimes volatile prices for conventional fuels such as oil and natural 

gas are driving demand for relatively untapped alternatives that will likely have greater 

degrees of stability into the future. 

There is a growing disconnect, however, between the increasing demand for energy from 

these sources and a diverse base within the US capable of producing the equipment to 

meet that demand. Of the record amount of wind installed in the US in 2005, only one 

US-based turbine manufacturer supplies a significant number of turbines – GE Wind, the 

only US company in the top ten global wind equipment suppliers.2

 Though GE has 

dominated the US market for the past three years, all of the remaining suppliers of turnkey products are internationally-based companies including Vestas (Denmark), 

Mitsubishi (Japan), Suzlon (India) and Gamesa (Spain). 

The disparity between local demand and local supply forces a choice between either 

long-term industry dominance from a small handful of large international companies, 

largely based in Europe and Asia, or increasing domestic capacity to produce this 

equipment. The US is in a position to define its role in this growing market, particularly 

while the opportunity costs of developing manufacturing infrastructure are lower than 

they will be in the future. The US can pursue opportunities to carve out niches in these 

arenas, or it can relegate itself to the position of a mere consumer with regard to some of 

the fastest-growing industries across the globe. 

How this opportunity relates to the Appalachian region is the subsequent focus of this 

report. It focuses primarily on two opportunities to engage Appalachia in the growing 

renewable energy sectors. The first focuses on the manufacturing of renewable energy 

equipment domestically. This can come in the form of growing and supporting additional 

domestic ‘turn-key’ product manufacturers within these industries to compete within the 

domestic and international arenas. The second involves establishing partnerships between 

Appalachian manufacturers of components in the supply chain for renewable 

technologies and equipment and existing manufacturers and renewable developers. 

Substantial increases in demand for renewable generation equipment have created 

significant shortfalls in components and materials for the wind and solar industry alike. 

This opportunity will be particularly important as internationally-based companies build 

US-based facilities to meet domestic demand. This opportunity is exemplified by the 

manufacturing facility in Pennsylvania being established by Gamesa, the world’s fourth 

largest company in terms of market share (as of 2005).3

 

Initial analysis suggests that the region served by ARC may be well-positioned to 

capitalize on these growing markets, as presented by the results from analyses of the 

capacity of the Appalachian region to supply major components for renewable energy 

industries. Information has been compiled on existing manufacturing establishments, 

 

2

 BTM Consult ApS: International Wind Energy Development World Market Update 2005 Forecast 2006- 

2010, Press Release: http://www.btm.dk/Pages/wmu.htm 3

 BTM Consult ApS: International Wind Energy Development World Market Update 2005 Forecast 2006- 

2010, Press Release: http://www.btm.dk/Pages/wmu.htm
9

employment totals, locations and sector concentrations within the region. Six-digit North 

American Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes were analyzed for all counties 

within the Appalachian region and reflect industry-specific manufactured components 

that are similar to, or substitutable for, the major manufactured components in the 

biomass, solar, and wind energy industries. 

This analysis reflects not only the potential capacity to manufacture renewable 

components from existing establishments within the region, but also represents the 

potential distribution of increased manufacturing that might accompany continued growth 

in the renewable energy sector. The analysis reveals distribution of existing 

establishments within states as well as potential clusters of manufacturers with the 

potential to produce parts for individual energy sectors. 

The ability of Appalachian-based manufacturers to compete within this global industry is 

the fundamental question. This report also addresses salient characteristics of three 

primary renewable industries, both domestically and internationally. Understanding such 

characteristics will be critical in plans to promote and develop manufacturing capacity 

within the Appalachian region. 

Of particular interest in this report is the capacity of ARC’s member states and counties 

to produce components for the biomass, solar and wind industry sectors. This report will 

convey that the region may be well-suited to produce components for these rapidly 

growing renewable energy sectors, beyond the opportunities that exist to produce energy 

from them. Finally, in addition to equipment or components manufacturing, this report 

explores opportunities for the Appalachian region to be at the forefront of the next wave 

of biomass energy production: cellulosic ethanol. 
10

Renewable Energy Industry Analyses 

The ability of Appalachian-based manufacturers to compete within the global wind, solar 

and biomass industries is an important question. This section of this report addresses 

characteristics of these three industries, both domestically and internationally. 

Understanding such characteristics will provide a 

basis for strategizing and planning the promotion 

and development of manufacturing capacity within 

the Appalachian region. 

In 2005, the renewable energy sector experienced a 

record level of investment, with $38 billion dollars 

put to expanding renewable energy capacity across 

the globe.4 This level of investment is likely to 

continue, and provides the justification for 

increasing efforts to expand this industry 

domestically, as well as in areas with the technical 

capacity to benefit from further growth in this 

sector. 

Wind 

Using the kinetic energy of wind to generate electricity has become very common today. 

Historically, mankind has used wind for purposes far beyond this – from running mills to 

propelling seaborne ships. Generally, wind energy generation uses the uneven heating of 

the earth’s surface (convection and advection currents) to transfer the kinetic energy of 

wind into electricity via turbines or generators. Wind turbines utilize this air as it flows 

past the rotor of a wind turbine and the rotor spins and drives the shaft of an electric 

generator.5

The benefits of wind energy range from its lack of fuel cost to 

its low-emissions capacity to produce electricity in addition to 

relatively low maintenance and operations needs. Also, wind 

energy is clean and abundant. However, due to the nature of 

the resource, the primary limit of wind power is that it does 

not produce 100 percent of its generating capacity all of the 

time. On average, a wind turbine produces at its nameplate 

capacity roughly 20 percent to 40 percent of the time, termed 

the ‘capacity factor’ of the resource. This is in comparison to 

other conventional resources and biomass energy generation 

 

4

 Renewable Energy Policy Network for the 21st Century: Renewable Energy Global Status Report, 2006 

Update. http://www.renewableenergyaccess.com/rea/news/story?id=41508 5

 American Wind Energy Association: 

http://www.awea.org/pubs/factsheets/Wind_Energy_How_does_it_Work.pdf

Figure 1. Annual Investment in 

Renewable Energy, 1995 to 2005

Source: REN21: Renewable Global Status 

Report 2006 
11

that have capacity factors typically between 70-80 percent of the time (gas typically 

around 60 percent and nuclear as high as 90 percent)6. 

Growth, Demand and the Future 

As evidenced by increasing deployment across the globe, wind power generation is 

growing and investments in this industry 

are increasing at both a national and 

international level. Over the course of 

the last 25 years, the wind energy 

industry has grown significantly with 

59,264 MW of installed wind energy 

generation across the globe at the end of 

2005.7

 Wind is currently one of the 

fastest-growing energy sources globally, 

with a cumulative annual growth rate of 

approximately 26 percent in 2005, and 

sustained growth of over 20 percent over 

the last five years.8

 

Installations in 2006 are expected to be 

higher than the record level of installations 

in 2005 (11,407 MW in 2005 globally).9 

Projected growth rates remain high, with 

some analysts forecasting annual rates of 

installation around 16.4 percent through 

2010.10,11 Projections through 2010 suggest 

the US will add another 18,000 MW 

installed capacity building upon our current 

capacity of approximately 10,000 MW. 

Areas of highest growth will be centered in 

the US, India and China with sustained 

growth throughout Europe.12

 

6

 Renewable Energy Research Laboratory, University of Massachusetts, Amherst 

http://www.ceere.org/rerl/about_wind/RERL_Fact_Sheet_2a_Capacity_Factor.pdf 7

 http://www.renewableenergyaccess.com/rea/news/story?id=41304 8

 Chua, G. (2006) Wind Power 2005 in Review, Outlook for 2006 and Beyond. Article based on 

US/Canada Wind Power Markets and Strategies 2005-2010. Emerging Energy Research. 

www.emerging-energy.com

9

 /ibid, pg 1. 

10 BTM Consult ApS: International Wind Energy Development World Market Update 2005 Forecast 2006- 

2010, Press Release: http://www.btm.dk/Pages/wmu.htm 11 Chua, G. (2006) Wind Power 2005 in Review, Outlook for 2006 and Beyond. Article based on 

US/Canada Wind Power Markets and Strategies 2005-2010. Emerging Energy Research. 

www.emerging-energy.com

12 BTM Consult ApS: International Wind Energy Development World Market Update 2005 Forecast 2006- 

2010, Press Release: http://www.btm.dk/Pages/wmu.htm

Figure 2. Projected Growth in Wind Power 

Figure 3. Key Wind Markets 2005 - 2010 
12

Driving these rates of growth of demand both nationally and globally are several factors. 

Wind power is continuing to come down in cost, providing a viable alternative to the 

increasing costs of oil and natural gas. For example, severe ups and downs in the cost per 

unit of natural gas have motivated utilities to seek forms of energy with greater price 

stability, particularly as 70 percent of the costs of a natural gas-powered facility stems 

from its fuel supply costs.13 Capital costs for wind power are concentrated up-front 

during the manufacturing and construction phases of a project, with virtually no fuel costs 

and comparably low operation and maintenance costs. These factors enable utilities to 

purchase wind energy at a stable price over long periods of time, reducing uncertainty for 

consumers and utilities, alike. 

The price for wind power has come down over the course of the last few decades not only 

due to demand growth in the industry, but also as a result of financial incentives offered 

to developers of wind power projects. The Federal Renewable Energy Production Tax 

Credit (providing $0.018/kWh of wind energy produced) has been a significant 

component of the cost reduction of wind power spurring development in wind energy 

over the last decade.14 Favorable accelerated depreciation rates also are a major incentive 

for developing power projects. In addition, many states across the country offer special 

incentives for wind energy, from research & development grants, to pilot project funding 

to state-based production tax credits. Section 9006 of the Federal Farm Bill also provides 

substantial funding for renewable energy projects for rural and agricultural residents and 

businesses, enabling many small-scale wind projects to receive support. 

Standard prices for the purchase of power 

for wind (‘feed-in-tariffs’) have been a 

primary driver for the development in 

wind energy facilities globally, 

particularly in Europe (i.e. Germany and 

Denmark). Standard offers, or feed-intariffs, guarantee a set price for the 

purchase of wind energy sold to a utility 

or end user. The ability of wind power 

generators to sign long-term contracts at a 

guaranteed price has greatly reduced the 

risk to investors, encouraging 

development of renewable facilities. 

Also, many states and nations have passed 

public policies encouraging or requiring 

specified amounts of renewable energy to 

be supplied to electric consumers. These 

policies, often in the form of renewable 

 

13 Sterzinger, G. and J. Stevens. (2006) Renewable Energy Potential A Case Study of Pennsylvania.

Renewable Energy Policy Project p. 

14 American Wind Energy Association, Policy, Transmission and Regulation website: 

http://www.awea.org/policy/ptc.html 

Growth in the Wind Industry 

Wind has expanded from 10 MW in 

1981 to over 10,000 MW in 2006. 

Wind had a cumulative annual 

growth rate of 26 percent in 2005. 

Growth is projected to remain above 

15 percent through 2010. 

A record level of 11,407 MW of 

wind was installed across the globe 

in 2005 

28,000 MW of wind are projected 

by industry analysts to be installed 

in the US by 2010. 
13

portfolio standards or renewable electricity standards, have been used to set a baseline 

amount of energy from clean or climate friendly power sources. In theory, these 

standards are created to enable infant renewable energy technologies to get a foothold in 

the market place, eventually becoming competitive with conventional fuel sources over 

the course of a few years. Figure 4 shows the installed capacity in the United States. 

Figure 4. Installed MW of Wind Wnergy in the United States, 2005. 

(Source: American Wind Energy Association15)

Of importance to note here are opportunities for states with relatively low wind energy 

resource production potential to participate in this industry’s growth. Namely, there is 

great demand for manufactured wind components for this industry, demand that may 

offer a significant opportunity for states in the Appalachian region which may have 

significant manufacturing capacity rather than high wind resource potential. 

Industry Activity: Strategy and Competitiveness 

One of the key aspects of the wind industry is the substantial number of large, global 

companies that currently dominate market share in all of the major areas of high demand 

for wind energy. As the demand for wind energy has increased over the last several years, 

an increasing number of large, heavily diversified entities have entered into the market. 

Examples include GE, Siemens and Mitsubishi. Many of the largest companies either 

entered into the wind market or grew to prominence through the acquisition of existing 

wind companies and competitors. GE Wind entered into the arena through the acquisition 

of Enron Wind16, Siemens grew its market share through the acquisition of Bonus Wind, 

 

15 American Wind Energy Association: http://www.awea.org/projects/index.html 16 Of its many assets at the time of collapse in late 2001, Enron possessed Enron Wind -its wind 

equipment manufacturing subsidiary. They were global in the sense that they had sold turbines into the US, 

German, and Spanish markets, with manufacturing facilities in all of these countries plus the Netherlands. 

As part of the unloading of assets to pay off creditors, Enron Wind was sold to GE's Power Systems 
14

and Vestas grew larger through the acquisition of NEG Micon, a previously significant 

competitor. 

These examples reflect a growing development in the wind industry of larger companies 

actively acquiring or merging with other competitors, smaller manufacturers and 

component makers. A company that has grown to prominence serving the Indian market, 

Suzlon, has actively focused on acquiring and/or merging with components manufacturers such as Hansen Transmissions, the largest European gearbox manufacturer. 

Mergers with foreign-based entities and opening satellite manufacturing facilities in areas 

of increasing market demand are growing in prominence, as well. A sign of the relative 

maturity of the industry, companies like GE are forming partnerships with foreign 

companies such as Chinese-based Nanjing High Speed & Accurate Gear Company 

(NGC) to jointly develop gearboxes for GE's 1.5 MW wind turbines. NGC is now one of 

GE's leading component suppliers in the wind energy business.17 Growth through 

acquisition is enabling the ‘big’ players to get even bigger while becoming more 

vertically integrated and thus able to raise entry barriers to keep out new entrants while 

limiting the growth of small companies. Even as recently as the late 1990s, it was 

possible for a company to grow through the ability to serve domestic demand, as 

demonstrated by India-based Suzlon. That window of opportunity, however, seems to be 

closing as large global players further extend their global reach. 

 subsidiary in 2002 in its bankruptcy auction for $358 million. They also took over maintenance of Enron's 

wind farms. It was a profitable arena for Enron, making real money for the company. According to the New 

York Times, it grew from $50 m in 1997 to approximately $800 m by 2001

http://www.enron.com/corp/pressroom/releases/2002/ene/022002ReleaseWindLtr.html; 

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9F07E0D6173CF931A25757C0A9649C8B63. 

17 GE Wind, Press Release Aug. 30, 2006: GE, China's NGC to Jointly Develop Wind Turbine Gearbox. 

http://www.gepower.com/about/press/en/2006_press/083006.htm 

Suzlon Energy Limited: Profile of an Industry Leader from the Ground Up

Growth in the wind industry in India had been tremendous and in 2005, India overtook 

Denmark in total installed capacity. In the middle of this rapid growth has risen Suzlon 

Energy, Asia’s leading wind manufacturer and fifth largest supplier of turbines 

worldwide. Suzlon has been India’s leading turbine producer for the past eight years, 

installing 53 percent of the country’s capacity in 2005. 

Suzlon: Founded in 1995 

Headquartered in Pune, India 

Revenues of $854,000 in 2006 

8,600 employees, 1,900 overseas 

Source: Suzlon Energy Ltd. Press Resease 2006, 

Suzlon Energy Ltd. continues record 

performance in Q1, FY07

Suzlon is an example of a fully-integrated company, producing equipment exclusively 

for the wind industry. Facilities in Germany, India and the Netherlands are engaged in 

cutting-edge R&D. Manufacturing facilities are located in India, Belgium, China and 

the US. Suzlon now supplies turbines for projects from as far as the US, to Brazil to 

Australia, Europe and across Asia. Source: Suzlon Annual Report 2005 

Suzlon’s founder, Tulsi Tanti, was a textile 

manufacturer in the early 1990s. Faced with 

escalating energy costs, Tanti installed wind turbines 

at his facility. From this experience, Tanti decided 

to buy bankrupt Sunwind, founding Suzlon wind in 

1995. Source: Venture Intelligence Blog: 

http://ventureintelligence.blogspot.com/2006/03/what-makes-suzlons-tantitick html
15

Thus far, the window is not yet completely closed. Clipper Wind is an example of a USbased company that is working to accomplish a successful shift from small to middle to 

large industry player. In the near term, and perhaps of most widespread significance for 

American manufacturers, is the opportunity to supply components to an industry that is 

struggling to meet market demand. 

According to energy industry analyst Emerging 

Energy Research, wind energy market share in 

2005 was a factor of manufacturing capacity 

rather than competitive strategy: 

“. . .scale continues to drive competitive 

advantage. Attributes such as a good 

track record, capability to deliver largescale projects, and market reach that is 

able to span multiple markets, are now 

par for the course. Building an edge in 

the competition for power purchase 

agreements entails taking these 

attributes to an even higher level and, at 

least for the near-term supply and 

demand scenario, simply having the 

wind turbines with which to build wind 

plants.” 18

Market share in 2005 was ultimately 

determined by how many turbines a company 

could manufacture and supply. This situation 

has favored large, consolidated companies such 

as GE and Vestas, which possess the greatest market shares in the US and Canada, 

respectively. Emerging Energy Research has identified primary points along the supply 

chain acting as constraints, including gearboxes, castings and blades. Market share is 

protected or achieved by in-house manufacturing and ownership or close relationships 

with manufacturers of wind energy components. Growing wind companies such as 

Gamesa, Suzlon and Clipper have opened additional manufacturing facilities in the US 

for this reason.19 

Suppliers of wind energy components have been reluctant to increase capacity due to the 

unstable market created by the Federal Production Tax Credit’s (PTC) biannual 

expiration. Yet sustained demand over the last two years and into next year have 

encouraged increases, largely based upon this planning. However, analysts have pointed 

out that entities willing to take risks by jumping into the market have thus far been 

rewarded. Many vendors are sold out through the next expiration date of the PTC in 

 

18 Sterzinger, G. and J. Stevens. (2006) Renewable Energy Potential A Case Study of Pennsylvania.

Renewable Energy Policy Project p. 

19 Ibid.

Characteristics of the Wind Industry 

Dominated by highly consolidated 

and vertically integrated 

manufacturing firms 

The top 10 wind manufacturers 

supply over 95 percent of the global 

wind capacity 

The top 5 wind manufacturers 

supply over 80 percent of the global 

wind capacity 

One of the top ten is a US-based 

firm – GE wind 

The capacity to manufacture 

turbines determined market share in 

2005 

Turbine suppliers are increasing 

their reliance on outsourced 

components 
16

2007. The following year, 2008, will be important for the sustained momentum of the 

wind industry if the PTC expires again.20

In attempts to alleviate near-term supply constraints, wind industry vendors are 

increasing their reliance on outsourced component manufacturing – pushing original 

equipment manufacturers previously 100 percent vertically integrated to outsource much, 

if not all, of their supply. Restructuring the supply chain will enable the industry to 

become less subject to and reliant upon government support and interaction. Wind energy 

system and component manufacturers are addressing constraints by “moving production 

of non-essential components to low cost centers and increasing the number of venders 

supplying components”, spreading risk outward from original equipment 

manufacturers.21

Also important to the ability of new players to enter and grow in this arena is the 

influence of project financing, and the requirements and preference of the lending 

institutions for project backing. The relationship between wind equipment suppliers, 

project developers, project financiers and project owners reinforces top manufacturers in 

the industry. Project developers not only contract with suppliers but seek funding for the 

project as a whole. This is important in two ways. First, developers often establish longterm relationships with suppliers in order to reduce project costs. Second, financiers are 

often only able to assess assets of the specific project they are financing, reinforcing their 

preference for large, established players in the industry. These ‘proven’ industries 

typically have no less than 100 installed turbines. Project developers, in response to 

project financing, are therefore unlikely to contract with companies that are not one of the 

top international players.22 

 

The nature of project financing may determine the kind of arrangements developers have 

with wind technology suppliers. Private finance companies tend to fund projects on a 

non-recourse basis, a form of financing that preserves a proponent's other assets and 

makes available to creditors only the assets of the project itself, should any difficulties 

arise. As a result, investment companies tend to procure turbines from firms with strong 

financial and technological records. This usually means proven suppliers that have at 

least 100 turbines installed and operating in wind farms around the world. Companies 

that operate under these arrangements are therefore unlikely to engage a supplier outside 

the top six international companies. 

 

20 Ibid.

21 Newswire Today (7/20/2006). ‘Outsourcing to Help Wind Industry Avoid Supply Constraints.’ Frost & 

Sullivan www.newswire.com 22 International Market Research Reports, Industry Sector Analysis – Wind Energy: 

http://strategis.ic.gc.ca/epic/internet/inimr-ri.nsf/en/gr109984e.html 
17

Top Wind Energy Manufacturers 

Over the course of the last five years, 

cumulative annual growth in the 

industry has been 26.3 percent. The 

US, Germany, Spain and India lead 

the world in installed MW, with the 

top ten manufacturers supplying over 

95 percent of global capacity.23

Furthermore, the top five 

manufacturers represent over 80 

percent of the total installed global 

capacity for wind energy.24

Table 1. Top Five Global Wind Energy Manufacturers (Headquarters, Installed Wind Energy Capacity 

in MW, Number of Employees, Manufacturing Facilities) 

Company HQ Installed 

MW Employees Manufacturing Facilities 

Vestas25 Denmark 20,818 10,618 Denmark, Germany, India, Italy, Scotland, England, 

Spain, Sweden, Norway, and Australia 

GE26 USA 5,600 1,700 USA, Germany, Spain 

Enercon27 Germany 10,200 8,000 Germany, Sweden, Brazil, India, Turkey 

Gamesa28 Spain 7,547 8,186 Spain, USA (pending facilities in China, Portugal) 

Suzlon29 India 4,253 5,300 India, Belgium (China and US FY06/07) 

 

23 BTM Consult ApS: International Wind Energy Development World Market Update 2005 Forecast 2006- 

2010, Press Release: http://www.btm.dk/Pages/wmu.htm 24 Ibid. 

25 Vestas Website: Key Figures for Vestas: 

http://www.vestas.com/uk/profile/profile/main_figures/main_figures_uk.htm 26 GE Wind Energy Website: http://www.gepower.com/businesses/ge_wind_energy/en/comp_snapshot.htm 27 Enercom Website: At a Glance: http://www.enercon.de/en/_home.htm Capacity Installed: 

http://www.enercon.de/en/_home.htm 28 Gamesa Annual Report 2005: 

http://www.gamesa.es/gamesa/modules/idealportal/uploadlink/memoria2005ing.pdf 29 Suzlon Energy, LTD Suzlon Energy Ltd. continues record performance in Q1, FY07, Press Release: 

http://www.suzlon.com/images/you/SEL%20FY07%20Q1%20Release.pdf 

Figure 5. Top Wind Turbine Suppliers
18

Domestic Wind Market 

As of December, 2005, the US had an installed wind capacity of 9,149 MW.30 This 

number has grown to over 10,000 MW as of August, 2006. According to the American 

Wind Energy Association (AWEA), by the end of 2006 the US installed 3,000 new MWs 

of wind energy — more than the total capacity of the US in the year 2000. New 

manufacturing facilities have opened in Iowa, Pennsylvania and Minnesota, building on 

existing wind manufacturing facilities in Georgia, Florida, California and Oregon (not 

including components subcontracts).31 Significant component manufacturing for the 

wind industry is occurring in California, Texas, Florida, Wisconsin, and Michigan. For a 

more detailed list of these manufacturers, including those located in Appalachian states, 

please see Appendix A. 

Table 2. Wind Energy Manufacturers’ Share of Installed Wind Energy Capacity in the US. 

 (Note: GE acquired Enron Wind, Vestas acquired NEG Micon Wind.) 

(Source: US Wind Energy Industry Rankings, AWEA) 

As discussed previously, the American wind industry is faced with the challenge of 

establishing itself as a base of domestically-prominent wind equipment manufacturing. 

Given the strong demand for wind power generation in the US as well as Canada, the 

potential benefits of successfully entering the market are obvious. The question remains, 

however, as to how to best enter and sustain a company in this highly competitive 

market. The establishment of a viable ‘Industry Consortium’ to actively promote growth 

of the US wind industry, to help bridge the gap between small, middle and ultimately 

large players in the industry, is one suggestion. In order to promote successful research 

and development practices, it is important for US industry to penetrate existing R&D 

activity in Europe to further local industry growth in this arena. Finally, providing direct 

support for this mid-size ‘infant’ industry by providing a renewable energy 

 

30 American Wind Energy Association, US Wind Energy Industry Rankings: 

http://www.awea.org/pubs/factsheets/pdf/USwindindustryrankings2006.pdf 31 American Wind Energy Association, U.S. Wind Energy Installations Reach New Milestone, Press 

Release: http://www.awea.org/newsroom/releases/US_Wind_Energy_Installations_Milestone_081006.html 
19

manufacturers’ production tax credit for companies below a certain threshold would ease 

the market entry for both new and existing manufacturers. 

Challenges to Industry Growth 

As mentioned earlier, supply chain constraints exacerbated by the on-again, off-again 

PTC severely limited the number of turbines available for installation in both 2005 and 

2006, and will likely be severely limiting in 2007. Also mentioned earlier is the nature of 

financing for large projects, which can limit new entrants into the market. In addition to 

these challenges, the following issues will ultimately require attention before wind energy 

can be fully realized: 

 

Inconsistent national policy: Unstable support for the wind industry at the 

national level has produced an environment of uncertainty for manufacturers, 

investors and project developers. This is evidenced most directly with the biannual expiration of the Federal Renewable Energy Production Tax Credit 

(PTC).32 In the US, the single largest influence on consistent growth, as cited by 

the industry, is the impermanence of the Federal PTC, which provides 

$0.018/kWh for ten years for each facility. The credit has been available for twoyear segments since its inception, expiring three times in the last seven years, 

leading to a ‘boom and bust’ cycle for the industry.33 The PTC is currently set to 

expire again at the end of 2007. 

Figure 6. Annual Installed Wind Energy Capacity and Patterns of Production Tax Credit 

Availability 

 (Source: AWEA Wind Power Outlook 2006)34

 

32 Energy Information Administration: Electric Power Annual: 

http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/epa/epa_sum.html 33 Ibid.

34 AWEA Wind Power Outlook 2006: www.awea.org 
20

Transmission Capacity for Renewable Energy: Particularly relevant to longterm industry growth is the current lack of investment in transmission capacity 

across the US, which is flagging relative to demand growth and necessary 

capacity additions. Significant ‘bottlenecks’ exist in the current transmission grid, 

particularly between areas that possess large amounts of renewable energy 

generation capacity (i.e. Great Plains and Intermontane West) and the areas of 

highest growth in electricity demand, not to mention areas with the highest 

demand for renewable energy (i.e. California). Not only are there limits on 

existing capacity, but intermittent energy sources, such as wind, are significantly 

disadvantaged in Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) transmission 

interconnection procedures. Where the grid can operate as ‘back-up’ capacity for 

intermittent resources such as wind, utilities currently keep spinning reserves of 

energy waiting in the background, adding a layer of difficulty integrating wind 

into the existing energy mix. 

Competition from Conventional Energy Sources: Wind energy has come down 

in cost over 80 percent in the last 20 years. However, even with growth in 

capacity over the last decade second only to natural gas, installation of wind 

energy is still largely driven by public policy.35 Conventional power sources such 

as coal, natural gas and even nuclear energy are still largely favored by utilities 

across the country and receive substantial subsidies from state and federal 

governments. 

Solar 

One of the most significant global resources, solar energy can be utilized passively and 

actively. Passive solar energy is used in building design to maximize the natural lighting 

and heating benefits of the sun; active solar energy is captured to produce electricity via 

thermal or photovoltaic (PV) technologies. Solar thermal technology uses reflectors to 

focus light onto a central receiver that uses the gathered heat to power a turbine. This 

technology converts solar energy into mechanical energy, which is then converted into 

electricity. 

Solar electricity can also be produced using a PV 

cell. PV cells are composed of semiconductor 

materials that gather sunlight and directly convert it 

to electricity with no moving parts. Panels of these 

cells connect to form modules and arrays that have 

the capacity to produce enough power for several or 

more homes.36 For example, a PV array the size of 

a football field would create 1.2 million kWh of 

electricity per year, enough for approximately 122 

homes.37

 

35 American Wind Energy Association, Resources Cost: http://www.awea.org/faq/cost.html 36 New Mexico Public Interest Research Group Education Fund, Clean Energy Solutions. March 2002. 37 Department of Energy, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy website: www.eere.energy.gov

Photo courtesy of the New Mexico Solar Energy 

Association
21

The nature of the solar energy market creates several interesting dynamics in the industry. 

Demand for solar PV cells spans the spectrum from small residential PV systems to large 

commercial systems which generate electricity for entire corporate campuses or provide 

electricity generation for utility companies. Systems that provide energy to a grid system 

represent a portion of electricity 

generation in Italy, Spain, and the US 

under heavily subsidized markets. 

Growth, Demand and the Future 

In general, the industry is currently 

characterized by demand exceeding 

supply. In 2005, total global capacity 

reached 5,400 MW of installed solar PV, 

3,100 MW of which were connected to 

the grid.38 Installations in 2005 were a 

record 1,460 MW of new capacity, led by 

Germany and Japan. However, this figure 

is estimated to only meet approximately 

80 to 90 percent of solar PV demand.39 

The availability and distribution of silicon 

is a major determinate of MW output. Approximately 95 percent of all solar systems 

produced today are made using mono- or polycrystalline silicon wafers.40 This report 

will explore the influence that major international firms have on the market, the influence 

of raw material supply, and external factors such as regulation and subsidization. The 

main focus will be on US PV manufacturing firms and US subsidiaries of key 

international players. 

Industry Structure 

There are three general types of firms in the solar industry: independent solar power 

specialists, consolidated electronics and semiconductor manufacturers, and diversified 

energy companies. 

Independent solar power specialists concentrate on select components involved in the 

production of PV cells. Large international companies still dominate market share based 

on total megawatt production output per year. 

 

38 Renewable Energy Policy Network for the 21st Century: Renewable Energy Global Status Report, 2006 

Update. http://www.renewableenergyaccess.com/rea/news/story?id=41508 39 Renewable Energy Access News Story. website: 

http://www.renewableenergyaccess.com/rea/news/story?id=41508 40 Department of Energy, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy: Quick Solar Facts: 

http://www1.eere.energy.gov/solar/pv_quick_facts.html 

Growth in the Solar Industry 

Global solar PV installed capacity 

expanded from less than 500 MW in 

1990 to over 5,000 MW by 2006. 

Grid-tied solar PV experienced a 55% 

increase in installed capacity in 2005. 

The average annual growth rate over 

the last 10 years has been 25%. 

A record level of 1,460 MW of solar 

was installed across the globe in 2005
22

Consolidated electronics and semiconductor manufacturers such as Sharp, Kyocera, and 

Mitsubishi produce finished systems as well as many other electronic products. Many of 

the high-selling products manufactured by these electronic companies also use silicon as 

a raw material, and involve a comparable manufacturing process. Cell phone screens, flat 

panel televisions, and computer monitors, for example, all involve silicon and flat glass 

manufacturing processes. Companies that already produce electronics compatible with 

solar energy technologies have easily transitioned into solar PV manufacturing. Existing 

companies have the advantage of economies of scope and scale. These large 

multinational companies, while not specializing in solar energy, have advantages due to 

their preexisting infrastructures and greater availability of resources. 

A similar story applies to diversified energy companies such as BP and Shell Solar. 

Because of their size and market reach, moving into new areas through acquisition rather 

than development is an efficient and relatively low-risk endeavor. However, Shell Solar 

was acquired by the smaller, solar-specific SolarWorld, illustrating that even the largest 

of firms is not unassailable. Yet the upstream portion of the solar industry remains 

dominated by a few large players involved in the manufacturing of PV cells, modules and 

systems. 

Figure 7. Top Solar Cell Manufacturers in 2003. 

Note: Shell Solar sold 100% of all crystalline silicon production to SolarWorld 

The chart in Figure 7 displays the market distribution as of 2003. Within the past three 

years the characteristics of the market have shifted in several ways. The current market 

condition can be analyzed by using 2006 actual MW production output in conjunction 

with 2008 projected output41. 

 

41 We offer this comparison purely as a rough benchmark. In ideal circumstances we would prefer to 

compare same year data, but even these figures give a good snapshot. 
23

Total solar manufacturing capacity in 2005 was 1.1 gigawatts (GW) worldwide, with 

Japan accounting for 500 MW, Europe accounting for 300 MW, the US accounting for 

140 MW, and the rest of the world 140 MW. By the end of 2006, total worldwide 

manufacturing capacity was expected to double to well over 2.4 GW, and although many 

companies report upgrades/factory openings in quarterly results, many others only 

provide long-term production capacity plans. 

Table 3. Top Solar PV Manufacturers 

Ta 

Company Production Capacity 

Sharp 600MW; 2006 

SunPower 300 MW projected 2008 

Sanyo 260 MW projected 2008 

Conergy 250 MW projected 2008 

Q Cells 180 MW; 2006 

SolarWorld 175MW; 2006 350 projected 2008 

Suntech 150 MW; fiscal end 2005 

Mitsubishi 135 MW; April 2005 

Solar Company Production Capacity 

RWE Schott 130 MW; fiscal end 2005 

Kyocera 120 MW; 2004 

*BP Solar 75 MW; 2006 150MW projected 2008 

It is important to note that the difference in projected and current output will likely affect 

the ranking of firms in the industry. However, some conclusions can still be made with 

this data set. 

Sharp maintains a powerful lead in the market, with twice the production capacity of 

SunPower. While some companies have shifted in rankings, most of the big players 

remain dominate. This is an important characteristic of the solar industry. The large 

players listed above have significantly greater output than the next set of companies, 

making it difficult for small players to compete in the market. 

Furthermore, while the current output from BP Solar does not place it within the top ten 

in 2006, the projected 2008 value does. This is especially significant due to the expansion 

of its existing manufacturing plant in Frederick, Maryland. BP Solar, pending their 

projected output, will be the largest PV producer in the United States. 

Challenges and Opportunities 

Silicon Availability: The biggest present difficulty facing the solar industry is the 

shortage of silicon. Polysilicon accounts for 25 percent of polycrystalline silicon 

wafers’ input costs, and as previously noted, silicon wafers are considered the 

industry standard for PV technology. The current price (July 2007) of 
24

polycrystalline silicon is $60/kg which is double that of 2003.42 Market forecasts 

expect the price to continue to increase to $80/kg in the next couple of years. All 

contracted silicon supply agreements are filled through 2007, meaning increased 

purchases must be made at the on-the-spot price of $100/kg .43 

Companies currently holding contracts have the most power to increase output and 

subsequent revenues in the near future. 

While capacity is increasing, it is increasing less than global MW production output 

projections, which explains the increase in price. Coping with the shortage of silicon and 

increase in prices may be the most influential factor to future success. Silicon supply is 

predicted by some analysts to become more 

available in the coming years, however, as 

large markets such as Germany begin to 

reduce the level of electricity buy-back rates 

in conjunction with efforts to increase 

silicon production.45

Those companies that secure silicon 

supplies will have much more stable 

forecasts of production in the foreseeable 

future. Suntech Power Holdings, Co. the top 

Chinese solar cell producer and a top ten 

competing player globally, has two major 

silicon wafer agreements with SolarWorld 

and MEMC for ten-year supplies of wafers. 

Along with their recent purchase of MSK 

Corp. of Japan, Suntech Power Holdings, 

Co is in a position to grow substantially in 

the near future. 

Yet despite the threat of silicon’s non-

 

42 http://www.researchconnect.com/downloadreport.asp?RepID=20162 43 Renewable Energy Access: News Story, website: 

www.renwableenergyaccess.com/rea/news/story?id=41508 44 PJC estimates, Rare Metals News, Photon International 45 Renewable Energy Access: Price Decrease and Consolidation: The Solar PV Supply Chain, 

www.RenewableEnergyAccess.com 

Table 4. Total Forecasted Polysilicon Capacity (in Metric Tons).

44

Year 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 

Total 

Capacity 28,000 30,200 34,500 38,050 49,550 

Characteristics of the Solar Industry 

Vertically integrated companies 

dominate the solar PV 

manufacturing industry and 

consolidation is expected to 

increase. 

The top ten solar manufacturers 

supply the majority of the global 

solar PV capacity 

All of the top five solar PV 

manufacturers are based in Japan or 

Germany 

The ability to secure long term 

contracts for polysilicon through 

2005 was critical to a firm’s 

manufacturing capacity 
25

availability, the demand for solar energy continues to increase and the price for largescale solar energy-based supply has begun to decrease since the middle of 2006.46 

Renewable energy incentives and government subsidies provide a large opportunity for 

solar cell manufacturers. In the US, many of these programs are operated at a state level. 

For instance, the New Jersey Clean Energy Program initiated a $40 million per year 

incentive for solar, wind, and biomass projects. The program includes net metering, 

renewable energy credits and trading, and direct customer rebates. Direct rebates allow 

customers or businesses to apply for rebates of 50 to 70 percent of the system purchase 

cost, including installation and purchase price.47 Incentives such as these can be 

compared to Germany’s 100,000 rooftop program, or Japan’s similar program. 

Germany’s incentive program encourages consumers to purchase solar systems by 

offering 10-year low-interest loans to cover costs.48 Japan has allotted over $200 million 

every year to rebate solar panels. This investment pushed Japan to number one globally 

in both MW installed and MW production output.49 Increases in US renewable 

incentives should offset consumer costs and increase demand for PV, resulting in greater 

output among the domestic players. 

New Technology and Innovation 

Many companies are beginning to look beyond silicon wafer solar cells, and exploring 

new product technologies. InnovaLight, founded in 2001 and based in California, is one 

of several companies involved in PV film production. This technology involves silicon 

inking which uses much less silicon per cell. The finished product is thin and malleable 

and can even be placed in clothing. Moreover, the cells are able to capture more than just 

visible light waves resulting in a higher conversion rate. 

Research and development of new technology may be the thriving strategy for 

competition in the solar industry. ARC programs to encourage solar industry growth 

should go beyond the scope of component production and look ahead to the promise of 

emerging technologies 

Challenges to Industry Growth 

The mature nature of the solar industry is a positive in the sense that the technology has 

been in existence for many decades. Components used in PV cells are already 

manufactured in many regions of the US. Yet industry growth cannot be spurred solely 

from the supply end. US demand is crucial not only for energy independence, but for 

economic independence as well. While the majority of PV systems produced in the US 

are currently exported overseas, incentive programs could help to increase domestic 

demand. Looking to other countries as examples, Germany and Japan have both shown 

 

46 Ibid. 

47 Database of State Incentives for Renewables and Efficiency, New Jersey: 

http://www.dsireusa.org/library/includes/map2.cfm?CurrentPageID=1&State=NJ&RE=1&EE=1 48 Solar Integrated website: Germany: http://www.solarintegrated.com/germany.htm 49 SEIA, The Solar Photovoltaic Industry in 2006: 

http://www2.dupont.com/Photovoltaics/en_US/assets/downloads/pdf/SEIA_StateofSolarIndustry2006.pdf 
26

that offsetting costs through rebates can accelerate product penetration. Within the US, 

New Jersey’s Clean Energy Program has successfully rebated the consumer costs of the 

purchase and installation of solar systems. 

Demand can also be increased through increasing solar energy requirements for utility 

companies. Renewable Portfolio Standards require utility companies to have a percentage 

of their electricity come from renewable sources. However, only three states 

(Pennsylvania, New York, and Maryland) within the Appalachian Region currently have 

renewable portfolio standards. Pennsylvania’s Alternative Energy Portfolio Standard is 

two-tiered. First, renewables such as wind, biomass, and solar are set at 1.5 percent in 

2007 and should increase 0.5 percent every year until reaching 8 percent by 2020. Tier 

Two includes coal abatement and demand management which will contribute 10 percent 

by 2020. New York’s Public Service Commission will require 25 percent by 2013.50 

Even so, the US cannot make up the global market gap with current technology alone. 

Innovation is key to global competitiveness. Developing the US market for solar products 

requires more effective technology to reduce the problem of silicon shortages. 

Allocating tax dollars from utility revenues to support research and development in new 

technologies will have a direct impact on the competitiveness of US firms competing in 

the solar industry. 

Not to be ignored, Appalachia has a commanding supply of science doctorates, research 

programs, and leading universities. Pennsylvania ranks fifth in number of doctoral 

scientists and has four of the top 15 undergraduate engineering programs. Maryland ranks 

second in the amount of federal R&D funding. Georgia Tech is home to the US 

Department of Energy’s University Center of Excellence for Photovoltaics Research and 

Education (UCEP), one of two such centers.51 The resources are available and will be of 

considerable advantage to the solar industry. 

Biomass 

Energy from biomass resources is unique relative to both wind and solar power for the 

simple reason that energy production requires a feedstock that is itself a commodity. This 

characteristic sets it apart from renewable sources such as solar and wind power in 

important ways, both economically and environmentally. Biomass production, harvesting 

and transport introduces both economic costs as well as opportunities and carries with it 

environmental considerations that do not exist with other forms of renewable energy. 

This has created a controversial and uncertain future for biomass energy, to say the least, 

and will be discussed in greater detail below. 

Biomass can be derived from many sources and can be used in equally as many ways. 

Sources of biomass range from forest thinnings, to agricultural waste such as manure and 

 

50 Renewable Energy Policy Project website: www.repp.org/rps_map.html 51University Center of Excellence for Photovoltaics Research and Education: 

www.ece.gatech.edu/research/UCEP 
27

corn stover, to methane gas from landfills. Many of these sources are currently produced 

as waste products from other agricultural or industrial processes, yet there is an 

increasing degree of research and activity around biomass production exclusively for use 

as a fuel in the form of dedicated energy crops. Short rotation woody crops including 

fast-growing willow and poplar species, as well as agricultural commodities such as corn 

are currently being grown for use as fuel feedstocks in the energy sector. 

Biomass is burned directly to produce heat, to run a turbine, or to be converted into a 

biofuel or biogas, which is then used to produce electricity or transportation fuel. For the 

purposes of this report, biomass energy was divided into two categories. The first 

category deals with biomass electricity generation from dedicated steam facilities. The 

second category deals with biomass related fuel production, or biofuels. 

Biomass Electricity Generation 

Biomass experienced a 50-100 percent increase in production capacity in 2004 in several 

countries across the globe, bringing the total global biomass power capacity to over 

44,000 MW by the end of 2005.52 

There are four primary methods by which biomass can be used to produce electricity: 

direct-fired, co-fired, gasification and modular systems. Direct and co-fired facilities burn 

biomass fuel in a boiler to produce high pressure steam which is used to run a turbine. 

Direct-fired plants burn only biomass fuel, while co-fired facilities burn biomass in 

tandem with coal. Co-firing plants are the most economical, near-term opportunity for 

expanding biomass power generation. This process takes advantage of economies of scale 

associated with large coal burning facilities with only minor modifications to existing 

equipment with no fuel efficiency losses.53 Virtually any form of biomass can be burned 

to produce electricity, though the energy content of different forms of plant material vary 

based upon physical properties including moisture content, heat value, mass, and 

chemical properties. 

Currently, over 10,000 MW of biomass-derived energy is 

generated in the US: 5,000 MW from pulp and paper, 2,000 

MW from dedicated biomass and 3,000 MW from 

municipal solid waste and landfill gas sources.54 Biomass 

steam generation provides base load power from a clean 

energy source, and has been used to offset air emissions by 

many conventional energy producers. Yet, despite a large 

total installed capacity of biomass power generation in the 

US and across the globe, the average annual growth rate 

 

52 Renewable Energy Policy Network for the 21st Century: Renewable Energy Global Status Report, 2006 

Update. http://www.renewableenergyaccess.com/rea/news/story?id=41508 53 US Department of Energy, Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy: Technologies, Electric Power 

Generation, website: http://www1.eere.energy.gov/biomass/electrical_power.html 54 National Renewable Energy Laboratory: Renewable Energy Poised to Realize Long Term Potential, June 

2006: http://www.nrel.gov/director/pdfs/40768.pdf

Source: Energy Efficiency and 

Renewable Energy 
28

between 2000 and 2004 was less than 5 percent.55 This is significantly lower than the 

other renewable industries considered in this report. For this reason, this report also 

considers another arena of biomass energy utilization: biofuel energy production.

Biofuel Energy Production 

In contrast to the low levels of growth in the biomass electric industry, the biofuel 

industry is experiencing tremendous levels of growth. The two dominant biofuels in use 

today are biodiesel and ethanol. This report will focus exclusively on ethanol as a 

resource. 

Ethanol, in its current form, is primarily a simple sugar- or starch-based fuel refined from 

food crops such as corn, sorghum and sugar cane. Starch-based ethanol from corn is the 

primary biofuel produced in the US today, and involves the chemical conversion of 

sugar-based polysaccharides into an alcohol suitable for combustion in a conventional 

engine. Fuel blends containing ethanol are now relatively common, with over 30 percent 

of the gasoline in the US containing some level of starch-based ethanol.56 However, 

there are many serious and complicated economic and environmental issues surrounding 

the use of food crops such as corn for the production of energy. For example, the 

National Academy of Sciences estimated that converting 100 percent of the corn grown 

in the US in 2005 to ethanol would have offset approximately 12 percent of the nation’s 

gasoline demand. Furthermore, due to the net energy balance of corn ethanol of roughly 

25 percent over fossil gasoline, the net energy gain from devoting 100 percent of the US 

corn crop to ethanol would have been only 2.4 percent.57 The economics of devoting 

food crops to fuel production have been called into question due to the seemingly 

marginal gain. 

It is also necessary to consider the impact of using food-based crops for ethanol 

production and the market impacts and interactions between crops grown for food or for 

fuel. The market has already experienced price increases for downstream products from 

corn as the price paid for corn has increased, ranging from staple products such as bread 

and tortillas to products containing corn syrup. Meat and diary products have also 

increased in price as the cost of feed for livestock and poultry has increased. Finally, the 

cost of other agricultural commodities has increased as farmers convert land into corn 

production and out of production for soybeans, for example. The myriad policies and 

subsidies embedded within the agricultural sector at both the national and international 

level further complicates the economic viability of growing a crop such as corn for 

ethanol production. In 2005, production costs for ethanol were roughly $0.46 per energy 

equivalent liter compared to $0.44/ liter for gasoline. Crop subsidies that lower crop 

prices dramatically impact the cost of ethanol, where corn prices are roughly 50 percent 

of a production facility’s operating costs.58 Finally, market fluctuations in gasoline prices 

 

55 Ibid. 

56 Renewable Fuels Association. (2006) From Niche to Nation, Ethanol Industry Outlook 2006.

www.rfa.org 57 Hill, J., Nelson, E., Tilman, D., Polasky, S., and D. Tiffany (2006) Environmental, economic, and 

energetic costs and benefits of biodiesel and ethanol biofuels. PNAS 103:30, 11206-11210, 58 Ibid.
29

as well as efficiency gains in ethanol production improve the profitability of corn based 

ethanol, as do regulations promoting ethanol production. This economic picture changes 

further when crop growers consider converting less productive land into corn production 

to produce ethanol. In such situations, the net energy balance of ethanol decreases further 

as fossil inputs increase to attain productive crop yields. In sum, the economic reality of 

using corn to produce ethanol is both complicated and controversial. However, this is not 

the only challenge facing corn-based ethanol. 

Significant environmental concerns revolving around large-scale corn production exist in 

terms of its energy, chemical in water inputs, and emissions. Corn inputs and impacts are 

higher than many other agricultural crops, including those corn is currently displacing. 

Corn requires higher levels of chemical fertilizers such as nitrogen and phosphorous, as 

well as pesticides that leach into the water supply and contaminate drinking water, lakes, 

rivers and create environmentally devastating realities such as the ‘dead zone’ in the Gulf 

of Mexico.59 Also, where the National Academy of Sciences estimates that corn-based 

ethanol is roughly 12 percent less greenhouse gas-intensive as gasoline, there are growing 

concerns over ethanol’s relatively high emissions of air pollutants such as carbon 

monoxide, sulfur and nitrogen oxides, among others.60 

As is the case with each of the renewable resources considered in this report, the 

availability or supply of renewable fuel within the Appalachian region is important when 

considering the possible generation of energy using non-conventional sources. Viability 

for both wind and solar-powered projects will be highly site-specific. Only some regions 

within Appalachia will be suited for the development of projects given these two landdependent energy sources. Yet, due to the nature of biomass as a transportable feedstock 

for energy production, the capacity of Appalachia to produce energy from this resource 

will be governed by other factors. Namely, which biomass products and resources does 

the region currently produce or possess, what sources might it have the capacity to 

produce or possess, and under what circumstances might the region import fuel from 

elsewhere? As the answers to these questions are sought, particular opportunities for the 

Appalachian region may become immediately obvious. This report considers the 

manufacturing potential for Appalachia regarding many renewable energy sources; this 

opportunity may exist for ethanol as well. The region possesses considerable resources 

for research and development, in private, public and academic sectors, many of which are 

already employed in the biomass energy arena to some degree. Finally, the Appalachian 

region may bear considerable opportunities to develop biomass energy directly. 

Corn-based ethanol, however, is not the only biomass derived fuel available. 

Considerable efforts are underway to bring lignocellulosic ethanol technology (referred to 

as ‘cellulosic’ for the purpose of this paper) to maturity. Chemical hydrolysis, enzymatic 

hydrolysis and gasification are three current methods by which cellulosic ethanol is 

produced, yet each of these technologies is still in relatively nascent stages of 

development. 

 

59 Ibid. 60 Ibid. 
30

There is substantial justification for moving from a starch-based ethanol focus to a 

cellulose-based ethanol focus, potentially alleviating some of the concerns raised above. 

For example, burning ethanol in conventional combustion engines is less greenhouse gasintensive than burning petroleum. This is particularly important to consider since 

transportation fuel is responsible for roughly one-third of US-based greenhouse gas 

emissions.61 However, the US Department of Energy calculates that cellulosic ethanol 

generates as much as 75 percent less greenhouse gas than oil, as compared with cornbased ethanol.62 This differential is due, in large part, to the resource intensity of 

feedstock production in conventional starch and grain crops, mentioned above. 

Cellulosic feedstocks, though still in need of collection and delivery, can be composed of 

vegetative waste material as compared 

with the direct cultivation of resourceintense sugar and grain crops. 

As the name suggests, cellulosic ethanol 

is derived from plant-based cellulose, a 

polymer of the disaccharide molecule 

found in the cell walls of mosses, 

seaweeds, annual and perennial plants, 

and trees. This is compared with starcbased polysaccharides that come from 

the fruits, seeds and roots of plants, and 

constitute a much lower fraction of 

global vegetable matter.63 This speaks to the fact that cellulosic material is much more 

widely available than starch-based material, and can be derived from many more 

resources in many regions of the world. Additionally, better yield of energy per ton of 

feedstock from cellulosic biomass is possible, in the order of up to 10 tons versus 4 or 5 

tons for even the most efficient grain crop 

yields.64

As mentioned earlier, ethanol production from 

cellulosic resources is still in the development 

stage. There are few commercial operations in 

place across the globe, none of them in the US. 

The ethanol industry, domestically and abroad, is 

still largely focused on non-cellulosic biomass 

sources. 

 

61 Department of Energy, EERE www.eere.gov/biomass_news 62 Department of Energy, EERE www.eere.gov/biomass_news 63 McAloon, A., Taylor, F. and Yee, W. (2000) ‘Determining the Cost of Producing Ethanol from Corn 

Starch and Lignocellulosic Feedstocks’. A Joint Study Sponsored by: U.S. Department of Agriculture and 

U.S. Department of Energy 

64 Sims, R., Hastings, T., Schlamadinger, B. Taylor, G. and Smi, T. (2006) ‘Energy crops: current status 

and future prospects’ Global Change Biology. 12, 2054–2076. 

Figure 8. Global Ethanol Production, 2000 and 

2005 

Source: REN21 Renewables Global Status Report 2006 

Figure 9. U.S. Ethanol Production 1980 

– 2005.
31

Growth, Demand and the Future 

Brazil has historically led the world in ethanol production, producing over 4 billion 

gallons per year (mmgy) in 2005 from sugar cane. However, the US now exceeds Brazil 

in total production capacity, and has the capacity to produce 5.3 mmgy of ethanol, over 

80 percent from corn, in over 110 refineries across the country. Furthermore, 79 more 

refineries, adding 6 mmgy to that capacity, are in some stage of planning or 

construction.65 China, with capacity over 1,000 mmgy, is the closest to Brazil and the US, 

followed by India at 450 mmgy based on 2005 year end estimates. 

The Energy Policy Act 2005 (EPACT 2005) set a national Renewable Fuel Standard for 

the US, requiring that the domestic production of ethanol increase from 4 mmgy in 2006 

to 7.5 mmgy by 2012. This policy also established a provision that requires production of 

250 million gallons of cellulosic ethanol by the end of 2012. Tax credits for the 

installation of biofuel infrastructure were also included in the EPACT of 2005. 

Production-based incentives have also been created to spur further development in the 

ethanol industry, such as the Federal Volumetric Ethanol Excise Tax Credit (VEETC).66 

Passed in 2004, the VEETC provides a partial federal excise tax exemption of 51 cents 

per gallon for ethanol blended into gasoline. In 2005, the use of ethanol reduced the US 

trade deficit $8.7 billion by eliminating the need to import 170 million barrels of 

petroleum oil.67 

Global production of ethanol is increasing. In addition to growth in the US, at least eight 

countries now possess ethanol blending mandates.68 Most nations producing ethanol 

have done so to increase domestic consumption while reducing transportation costs. 

Countries like Brazil are now capitalizing on growing global demand by exporting fuel to 

countries such as the US and Japan. This is generating activity across the globe, inspiring 

many nations to develop incentives to grow their local industries for both domestic 

demand and export. To encourage domestic production, many nations’ impose import 

taxes on ethanol and biofuels. For example, the US imposes $0.54 per gallon tariffs on 

the import of ethyl alcohol for fuel production.69 These tariffs are sufficiently low to 

encourage imports and therefore act as significant barriers to market entry for domestic 

producers.70 Even with the $0.54 per gallon tariff, the US imported over 653.3 million 

gallons of ethanol from Central and South America in 2006, a 383 percent increase over 

 

65 Renewable Fuels Association Press Release December 2006: October Ethanol Production Ties All Time 

High: http://www.ethanolrfa.org/media/press/rfa/2006/view.php?id=918

66 Renewable Fuels Association, Biofuel Outlook 2006 

http://www.ethanolrfa.org/objects/pdf/outlook/outlook_2006.pdf

67 United States Department of Agriculture 

68 Renewable Energy Policy Network for the 21st Century: Renewable Energy Global Status Report, 2006 

Update. http://www.renewableenergyaccess.com/rea/news/story?id=41508 69 Ethanol subsidies (2007). Econbrowser. Retrieved 6/11/2007 from: 

http://www.econbrowser.com/archives/2007/02/ethanol_subsidi.html 70 Renewable Fuels Association, Biofuel Outlook 2006 

http://www.ethanolrfa.org/objects/pdf/outlook/outlook_2006.pdf
32

2005.71 It is necessary to stress that the rapid growth in global ethanol production is 

primarily sugar- and starch-based production from food crops. 

Industry Activity 

Unlike its renewable energy counterparts in the wind and solar industries, the ethanol 

industry has a large base of activity in the US. Though initially an industry dominated by 

farmer-owned production facilities, large chemical and energy companies like DuPont, 

BP, Archer Daniels Midland, Cargill, and Monsanto are becoming major players and are 

deeply engaged in this thriving market. Some of these companies are buying into 

cooperatively-owned ethanol plants while others, such as BP, are investing in research for 

cellulosic ethanol. Each of these different players has a varying degree of influence on an 

American bioeconomy. 

As the ethanol refinery map 

demonstrates, the US industry is 

based primarily in the Midwestern 

region of the country. Where the 

ethanol industry has historically 

been concentrated within the hands 

of only a few firms, new entrants 

into the market are increasing. 

Most notably, the Federal Trade 

Commission recently announced 

that, with 15 new firms entering 

the market in 2006 (raising the 

total in the industry to 90), ethanol 

production is no longer ‘highly’ 

concentrated.72 According to the 

FTC and the Renewable Fuels Association, the number of firms and the locations of 

biorefineries are expected to increase further through 2007. 

The first commercial cellulosic facility was scheduled to begin construction in the fall of 

2006 in Spain. Though only in its early stages of development, expectations are this 

technology will be widely deployed over the next decade and grow to become a dominant 

resource in the biofuel arena. 

Challenges to Industry Growth 

Absentee ownership structures alter the flow of resources into and out of the communities 

producing the feedstocks as well as the fuel. The current trajectory for development of 

ethanol suggests that large industry will continue to dominate this sector unless other 

priorities are considered. The shape of this emerging sector will depend on the social 

 

71 Renewable Fuels Association “Industry Statistics” 2005 Retrieved 5/16/07 from: 

http://www.ethanolrfa.org/industry/statistics/#F 

72 Renewable Fuels Association, Press Release December, 2006: New Producers Increase Competition in 

US Ethanol Market: http://www.ethanolrfa.org/media/press/rfa/2006/view.php?id=912 

Figure 10. US Ethanol Refinery Locations, 
33

organization of the involved corporations, regulatory bodies, federal initiatives, 

environmental organizations, farmers and commodity groups. 

The future bioeconomy will depend, to a great degree, on the resolution of social, 

environmental, and economic impacts of biofuel production. Given the growing 

recognition of environmental impacts of agriculture and concern about the effects of 

agricultural restructuring on rural livelihoods and communities, the landscape and social 

changes possible in a transition to increased production of energy feedstocks from 

agriculture deserve further examination. In particular, it is relevant to ask whether such 

production will support or undermine economic and environmental sustainability. 

 
34

Sources & Methodology

Six-digit North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) codes were analyzed 

for all counties within the Appalachian region. The NAICS codes, collected by the US 

Census Bureau and compiled into County Business Pattern (CBP) data, reflect industryspecific manufactured components that are similar to, or substitutable for, the major 

manufactured components in the biomass, solar, and wind energy industries, as identified 

by the Renewable Energy Policy Project.73 

Several NAICS codes are relevant to more than one renewable energy industry. Where 

establishments or jobs exist that may serve more than one industry, aggregated sector 

data is presented with shared sectors included in parentheses. 

Important socio-economic and population data is included for each sector and region as 

well, on a county by county basis. Five socio-economic status designations, determined 

and assigned annually by ARC, reflect county-level economic indicator thresholds based 

upon three-year average unemployment rates, per capita market incomes and poverty 

rates.74 The five classifications are as follows: 

1) Distressed: 150 percent or greater of US average unemployment rate; 67 percent 

or less of US average per capita market income; and 150 percent or greater of US 

average poverty rate; or twice the poverty rate and past one other threshold, 

2) At-Risk: 125 percent or greater of US average unemployment rate; 67 percent or 

less of US average per capita market income; and 125 percent or greater of US 

average poverty rate; past two of the distressed level thresholds, 

3) Transitional: any county that is worse than the US average for one or more of the 

above indicators but does not fully meet the criteria for distressed or at-risk 

designations, 

4) Competitive: 100 percent or less of US average unemployment rate; 80 percent 

or more of US average per capita market income; and 100 percent or less of US 

average poverty rate, and 

5) Attainment: 100 percent or less of US average unemployment rate; 100 percent 

or more of US average per capita market income; and 100 percent or less of US 

average poverty rate. 

Finally, population estimates and county level designations created by the Office of 

Management and Budget were included for each ARC county with renewable energy 

manufacturing potential. Metropolitan Statistical Areas (labeled ‘Metro’) reflect regions 

that have “at least one urbanized area of 50,000 or more population, plus adjacent 

territory that has a high degree of social and economic integration with the core as 

 

73 Sterzinger, G. and M. Svrcek. (2005) “Component Manufacturing: Ohio’s Future in the Renewable 

Energy Industry.” Renewable Energy Policy Project. 74 Appalachian Regional Commission; Online Resources: County Economic Status, Fiscal Year 2006: 

www.arc.gov/index.do?nodeId=56 
35

measured by commuting ties.”75 Micropolitan Statistical Areas (labeled ‘Micro’) reflect 

regions that have “at least one urban cluster of at least 10,000 but less than 50,000 

population, plus adjacent territory that has a high degree of social and economic 

integration with the core as measured by commuting ties.”76 Each of these designations 

is defined in terms of whole counties, or equivalent entities such as the independent cities 

in Virginia. Counties not meeting either criteria are labeled ‘Rural/ Other’ for the 

purposes of this report. 

Results of the analysis are presented in three major sections: 

1) Appalachian Regional Totals: presenting summaries of each states’ total 

manufacturing potential by resource and regional totals; 

2) Sector Specific Totals: presenting employment and firm totals for the biomass, 

solar and wind industries individually and across all ARC member states; 

3) State by State Totals: presenting counties for each state with substantial 

potential for renewable component manufacturing.

 

75 Office of Management and Budget Bulletin No. 06-01: Appendix – as corrected May 26, 2006. 

Metropolitan, Micropolitan, and Combined Statistical Areas and New England City and Town Area 

Definitions: www.whitehouse.gov/OMB 76 Ibid. 
36

Potential Manufacturing Capacity in Appalachia 

The Appalachian Regional Commission (ARC), tasked with the goal of promoting 

economic development within the greater Appalachian region, is composed of 

representatives from each of its 13 member states: Alabama, Georgia, Kentucky, 

Maryland, Mississippi, North Carolina, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, 

Tennessee, Virginia and West Virginia. This section of the report presents an analysis of 

the capacity of the Appalachian region to supply major components for the wind, solar 

and biomass renewable energy industries. This section provides information compiled on 

existing manufacturing establishments, employment totals, locations and sector 

concentrations within the region. 

The analyses that follow are aimed at demonstrating the relative capacity of Appalachia 

as a whole, of ARC individual member states, and then ARC counties, to manufacture 

components for the renewable energy sector. These analyses reflect not only the potential 

capacity to manufacture renewable components from existing establishments within the 

region, but also the potential distribution of increased manufacturing that might 

accompany continued growth in the renewable energy sector. Analysis in this section of 

the report reveals distribution of existing establishments within states, and potential 

clusters of manufacturers with the potential to produce parts for individual energy 

sectors. The results are presented for each major energy sector, the Appalachian region as 

a whole, as well as for each ARC member state. 

Resource Sector Analyses 

The first section of this analysis considers manufacturing potential specific to each of the 

renewable sources considered. 

Appalachian counties were categorized as having high concentrations of manufacturing 

potential by meeting one of the following four criteria: 

1) Employment of 100 or more in firms with the technical capacity to produce 

components for the wind industry; 

2) Ten or more establishments with the technical capacity to produce components 

for the wind industry; 

3) Five or more distinct components that could serve the industry; 

4) An average establishment size of 125 employees or more. 
37

Wind 

Results of the analysis revealed that there are 

currently almost 90,000 jobs and over 1,300 

establishments in Appalachia manufacturing 

components related to those needed by the 

wind industry. Each ARC member state has a 

wind manufacturing potential exceeding 800 

jobs. 

83,269 jobs/1,254 establishments in 

exclusive wind category 

89,579 jobs/1,318 establishments in 

aggregate wind category 

Of particular importance is the degree of 

concentrated manufacturing that exists in the 

region. Figure 11 shows by county where 

concentrations exist with over 100 jobs. These 

sites provide opportunities for industry to 

procure significant amounts of components or 

several component types from one 

consolidated area. 

Table 5. Counties with Concentrated Wind Manufacturing Potential. 

This table includes counties with job totals of 1,500 or greater. Jobs producing components relevant to 

other sectors are noted in parentheses in the first column, with each county listed in decreasing order 

based upon the number of jobs within each respective county. 

Sector State County 

# 

of 

Estabs 

# 

of 

Jobs 

# 

of 

Components 

SocioEconomic 

Status 

Population 

Class 

Primary 

City(s) 

Wind 

(Biomass/Solar) PA Erie 66 5,374 8 Transitional Metro Erie 

Wind 

 (Biomass) SC Greenville 23 4,595 8 Competitive Metro Greenville 

Wind PA Westmoreland 42 2,012 6 Competitive Metro Pittsburgh 

Wind 

(Biomass/Solar) GA Gwinnett 36 1,894 7 Attainment Metro 

Atlanta 

Sandy Springs 

Marietta

Wind 

(Biomass/Solar) NY Broome 18 1,889 8 Transitional Metro Binghamton 

Wind SC Anderson 27 1,865 4 Transitional Metro Anderson 

Wind 

(Biomass/Solar) PA Allegheny 59 1,809 9 Attainment Metro Pittsburgh 

Wind PA Lycoming 17 1,715 6 Transitional Metro Williamsport 

Wind 

(Biomass/Solar) TN Knox 36 1,570 8 Transitional Metro Knoxville 

Figure 11 
38

The major wind turbine components consist of: 

The rotor, which includes blades, hub and pitch drive, nacelle and tower; 

The nacelle, which includes frame, generator, power train, drive shaft and 

electronic equipment; 

The tower, which includes rolled steel, flanges and bolts, and concrete base. 

The following components, as identified by their NAICS codes, were considered in this 

report: 

Plastics product manufacturing 

Iron foundries 

Fabricated structural metal 

Printed circuits and electronics assemblies 

Measuring and controlling devices 

Motors and generators 

Electronic equipment and components 

Turbines, turbine generators and turbine generator sets 

 Industrial and commercial fans and blowers 

Currently, the most limited point in the supply chain involves the production of the wind 

turbine gearbox, a part of the nacelle. Manufacturing related to gearbox production 

includes: 

Ball and roller bearings 

Industrial speed chargers 

Power transmission equipment 

Analysis reveals that Appalachia produces over 17 percent of the nation’s ball and roller 

bearings and over 11 percent of the nation’s power drives. Both of these parts are 

fundamental components of the turbine gearbox, for which significant shortfalls in 

production exist. Ball bearing manufacturing is concentrated in South Carolina, 

Tennessee, Georgia and New York with almost 4,800 total jobs. Appalachia produces a 

substantial portion of the nation’s generator sets as well, with over 25 percent of the 

country’s manufacturing for this component. Finally, there are over 12,700 potential jobs 

and almost 150 establishments with the potential capacity to manufacture parts for this 

industry in counties designated ‘At-Risk’ or ‘Distressed’ by ARC. 

Based upon this analysis, the Appalachian region may have a significant opportunity to 

capitalize on this expanding industry. This is particularly the case as large firms expand 

production capacity within the US, with Gamesa’s new manufacturing facility in 

Pennsylvania a case in point. Regional components manufacturers can exploit an 

opportunity such as this, as Motors & Controls International of Hazelton, PA has. 
39

Solar 

Results of the analysis revealed that there are 

currently almost 41,000 jobs and over 650 

establishments in Appalachia manufacturing 

components related to those needed by the 

solar industry. Twelve of the thirteen ARC 

member states have a solar manufacturing 

potential exceeding 790 jobs. 

34,693 jobs/ 571 establishments in 

exclusive solar sector 

40,757 jobs/ 668 establishments in 

aggregate solar sector 

Figure 12 shows where regions of 

concentration with over 100 jobs exist by 

Appalachian county for potential solar 

equipment manufacturing. These sites provide 

opportunities for the industry to procure a 

significant amount of components or several 

component types from one consolidated area. 

Table 6. Counties with Concentrated Solar-Related Component Job Totals of 1,000 or Greater. 

Jobs that are relevant to other sectors are noted in parentheses in the first column, with each ARC 

county listed in decreasing order based upon the number of jobs within each respective county 

Sector State County 

# 

of 

Estabs 

# 

of 

Jobs 

# 

 of 

Components 

SocioEconomic 

Status 

Population 

Class 

Primary 

City(s) 

Solar WV Wood 3 2,710 2 Transitional Metro 

Parkersburg 

Marietta (OH) 

Vienna 

Solar 

(Biomass/Wind) PA Allegheny 40 2,612 8 Attainment Metro Pittsburgh 

Solar 

(Biomass/Wind) NC Watauga 31 1,923 6 Transitional Micro Boone 

Solar 

(Biomass) PA Westmoreland 19 1,487 7 Competitive Metro Pittsburgh 

Solar 

(Biomass) SC Greenville 15 1,485 5 Competitive Metro Greenville 

Solar 

(Biomass/Wind) SC Spartanburg 10 1,322 5 Transitional Metro Spartanburg 

Solar NC Forsyth 11 1,319 4 Attainment Metro Winston-Salem 

Solar NC Burke 2 1,277 2 Transitional Metro 

Hickory 

Lenoir 

Morganton 

Solar PA Luzerne 12 1,152 4 Transitional Metro Scranton 

Wilkes-Barre 

Figure 12 
40

PV cells consist of 10 different manufacturing components, all of which are already being 

manufactured in the ARC counties in some capacity. 

The following components, as identified by their NAICS codes, were considered in this 

report: 

Plastics Material and Resin Manufacturing 

Unlaminated Plastics Film and Sheet (Except Packaging) 

Flat Glass 

Sheetmetal Work Manufacturing 

Semiconductors and Related Devices 

Current-Carrying Wiring Device Manufacturing 

Instrument Manufacturing for Measuring and Testing 

Storage Batteries 

Electronic Equipment and Components, NEC 

Switchgear and Switchboard Apparatus Manufacturing 

Analysis reveals that the Appalachian region produces over 17 percent of the flat glass in 

the nation, mentioned as a major part of photovoltaic modules. Tennessee alone has 

almost 1,000 jobs producing flat glass. 

Appalachia also produces over 14 percent of the nation’s plastics material and resin 

manufacturing, another major part of a PV module. Finally, there are almost 3,000 

potential jobs and over 60 establishments with the potential capacity to manufacture parts 

for this industry in ARC designated ‘At-Risk’ or ‘Distressed’ counties. 
41

Biomass 

Manufacturing analysis was performed for 

the biomass steam generation industry 

exclusively, as a mature industry present 

in the region. Results of the analysis 

revealed that there are currently almost 

82,000 jobs and over 900 establishments 

in Appalachia manufacturing components 

related to those needed by the biomass 

industry. Twelve of the thirteen ARC 

member states have a biomass electric 

generation manufacturing potential 

exceeding 1,400 jobs. 

46,997 jobs/ 614 establishments in 

exclusive biomass category 

81,836 jobs/ 912 establishments in 

aggregate biomass category 

Figure 13 shows where regions of 

concentration with over 100 jobs exist by 

Appalachian county for potential biomass 

equipment manufacturing. These sites 

Table 7. Counties with Concentrated Biomass-Related Component Job Totals of 1,500 or Greater. 

Jobs that are relevant to other sectors are noted in parentheses in the first column, with each ARC 

county listed in decreasing order based upon the number of jobs within each respective county 

Sector State County # of 

Estabs 

# 

of 

Jobs 

# 

of 

Components 

SocioEconomic 

Status 

Pop. 

Class 

Primary 

City(s) 

Biomass 

(Solar Wind) PA Erie 40 6,835 15 Transitional Metro Erie 

Biomass 

(Solar Wind) PA Allegheny 63 6,202 15 Attainment Metro Pittsburgh 

Biomass 

(Solar Wind) SC Greenville 19 3,715 8 Competitive Metro Greenville 

Biomass 

 (Solar) TN Hamilton 29 3,322 12 Competitive Metro Chattanooga 

Biomass 

(Solar) VA Bristol City 5 3,112 4 Transitional Metro 

Kingsport, TN, 

Bristol, TN, 

Bristol, VA 

Biomass 

(Solar) PA Westmorelan

d 27 2,265 13 Competitive Metro Pittsburgh 

Biomass 

(Solar Wind) SC Spartanburg 17 1,944 13 Transitional Metro Spartanburg 

Biomass NY Steuben 8 1,905 5 Transitional Micro Corning 

Biomass PA Fulton 2 1,889 2 Transitional Rural/ 

Other 

Biomass 

(Solar) NC Buncombe 13 1,632 9 Competitive Metro Asheville 

Figure 13 
42

provide opportunities for the industry to procure significant amount of components or 

several component types from one consolidated area 

The following components, as identified by their NAICS codes, were considered in this 

report: 

Mineral Wool, 

Power Boiler and Heat Exchanger, 

Industrial Valve, 

Construction Machinery, 

Air Purification Equipment, 

Heating Equipment, 

Conveyor and Conveying Equipment, 

Fluid Power Cylinder and Actuators, 

Power, Distribution, Specialty Transformer, 

Railroad Rolling Stock, 

Heavy Gauge Metal Tank, 

Air Conditioning and Warm Air Heating Equipment, 

Pump and Pumping Equipment, 

Air and Gas Compressor, 

Overhead Traveling Crane, 

Hoist and Monorail System, 

Turbines, Turbine Generators and Turbine Generator Sets, 

Switchgear and Switchboard Apparatus, and 

Electronic Equipment and Components, and other general purpose machinery and 

instrument related equipment. 

Finally, our analysis shows that there are almost 6,000 jobs and over 90 establishments in 

ARC designated “At-Risk” or “Distressed” counties involved in the manufacturing of 

equipment suited for the biomass industry. 

As with the wind and solar industries, these components and their six-digit NAICS codes 

were identified as central to biomass steam generation facility manufacturing by the 

Renewable Energy Policy Project. 
43

Appalachian Regional Totals

This section of the analysis reflects potential renewable energy manufacturing totals for 

the region as a whole. Total potential employment and establishment figures for all 

counties within the regions’ member states and ARC counties’ are shown in Figures 14a 

and 14b, respectively. 

These figures reflect that 

approximately 30 percent of the 

potential jobs from renewable energy 

manufacturing within each ARC 

member state as a whole exist in ARC 

counties, while approximately 27 

percent of the establishments reside in 

ARC counties. ARC counties currently 

possess almost 200,000 jobs suited to 

produce renewable energy components 

and almost 3,000 existing 

manufacturers within the region 

possess the capacity to produce 

renewable energy components. 

However, the share of employment 

(Figure 15) and the location of 

establishments (Figure 16) are not 

equally distributed among all of the 

ARC member states or their respective 

counties. Pennsylvania possesses the 

largest job potential in the region, 

followed by Tennessee, North Carolina 

and South Carolina, respectively. 

Employment totals range from 1,438 

in Maryland, possessing 1 percent of 

the potential, up to 60,115 in 

Pennsylvania with 30 percent of the 

employment potential. Pennsylvania 

also leads in total number of 

establishments with renewable 

manufacturing potential. 

It is important to note that the number of counties encompassed within Appalachia varies 

greatly among member states, ranging from all of West Virginia’s 55 counties to 52 of 

Pennsylvania’s, to only six from South Carolina and three from Maryland. 

Figure 14a 

Potential Employment from Renewable Energy 

Component Manufacturing

677,863

199,798

0

100,000

200,000

300,000

400,000

500,000

600,000

700,000

800,000

Total Employment

Total

Employment

in ARC

Counties

Total

Employment

in ARC

Member

States

Figure 14b

Establishments with Potential to 

Manufacture Renewable Energy Components 

2,737

10,221

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

Total Establishments

Total Firms

in ARC

Counties

Total Firms

in ARC

Member

States
44

The proportion of jobs and potential establishments are also not equally shared among 

the renewable energy sectors considered. The ratio of jobs and establishments are 

shown in Figures 15 and 16, respectively. Wind, solar and biomass resource totals 

Figure 15. Percentage of potential employment for ARC member states, including totals for combined biomass, 

solar and wind facilities.

Potential Renewable Energy Manufacturing Employment in ARC Counties

Alabama, 9,064, 5% Georgia, 15,293, 8%

Kentucky, 7,206, 4%

Maryland, 1,436, 1%

New York, 12,526, 6%

North Carolina, 16,604,

8%

Ohio, 9,787, 5%

Pennsylvania, 60,115, 30%

South Carolina, 16,319,

8%

Tennessee, 26,244, 13%

West Virginia, 9,833, 5%

Mississippi, 6,681, 3%

Virginia, 8,690, 4%

Figure 16. Percentage of manufacturing establishments for ARC member states, including totals for combined 

biomass, solar and wind facilities 

Total Establishments with Renewable Manufacturing Potential in ARC Counties

Alabama, 135, 5%

Georgia, 258, 9%

Maryland, 33, 1%

New York, 138, 5%

North Carolina, 237, 9%

Ohio, 191, 7%

Pennsylvania, 866, 33%

South Carolina, 170, 6%

Tennessee, 355, 13%

West Virginia, 148, 5%

Mississippi, 72, 3%

Kentucky, 66, 2%

Virginia, 68, 2%
45

include jobs and facilities that may be capable of producing components for multiple 

renewable technologies. For example, totals for both wind and biomass include the 

manufacturing of turbines, turbine generators and turbine generator sets. As a result, the 

aggregate totals for each resource are higher than the non-resource-based totals proposed 

for the region and for each state or county. 

These figures demonstrate that the wind energy sector possesses the greatest 

manufacturing potential in ARC counties, with potential jobs totaling 89,579 and 

establishments totaling 1,318. Biomass follows closely, with potential job and 

establishment totals of 81,836 and 912 respectively. The solar energy sector possesses 

40,757 potential jobs and 668 potential manufacturers in the region. Again, these figures 

reflect aggregated totals for each sector 

The distribution of jobs and 

establishments between 

counties designated rural 

based on OMB’s populationbased classification scheme 

is shown in Figure 17. The 

concentration of 

manufacturing within 

metropolitan areas within the 

Appalachian region is 

roughly three times that of 

those in micropolitan regions 

and roughly five times that 

of areas classified as 

rural/other. 

The total potential jobs 

within economically 

depressed counties within the 

ARC are shown in Figure 18 

relative to job totals for all 

counties within the ARC. 

The next section of this 

analysis examines sector 

specific employment and 

manufacturing 

establishments by individual 

ARC states. These results 

reflect county level totals. 

Figure 17 

Potential Renewable Sector Manufacturing Jobs by County 

Population Classification

0

20,000

40,000

60,000

80,000

100,000

120,000

140,000

Metropolitan Micropolitan Rural/ Other Metro/ Micro

Figure 18

28,813

199,798

0

50,000

100,000

150,000

200,000

250,000

Jobs in

Distressed or

At-Risk Counties

Jobs in All ARC

Counties
46

State Analyses 

This section of the analysis contains employment and establishment totals for each 

Appalachian state, to the county level. State totals, combining all renewable employment 

and establishments are shown in Table 8, as well as the renewable industry with the 

highest employment totals for that state. Industries with close totals were included in 

parentheses. 

Each state in the Appalachian region possesses some degree of employment for each 

renewable energy sector reviewed. Summaries for each type of renewable resource are 

shown in Table 9. Appendix C contains detailed data on concentrated employment within 

each Appalachian state. 

Table 8. State Employment and Establishment Data

. 

State Total 

Employment 

Total 

Establishments 

Average 

Establishment 

Size 

Primary 

Renewable 

Industry 

Alabama 9,064 134 67.1 Biomass 

Georgia 15,293 258 59.3 Wind 

Kentucky 7,206 66 109.2 Wind 

Maryland 1,436 33 43.5 Wind 

Mississippi 6,681 72 92.8 Biomass 

North 

Carolina 16,604 237 90.8 

Wind 

(Solar, 

Biomass) 

New York 12,526 138 70.1 Biomass 

(Wind) 

Ohio 9,787 191 51.2 Wind 

Pennsylvania 60,115 866 69.4 Biomass 

(Wind) 

South 

Carolina 16,319 170 96.0 Wind 

(Biomass) 

Tennessee 26,244 355 73.9 Wind 

Virginia 8,690 68 127.8 Biomass 

West 

Virginia 9,833 148 66.4 Solar (Wind) 

TOTALS 199,798 2,737 73.0 
47

Table 9. 

Summary State Employment and Establishment Data by Renewable Resource* 

(*Dominant manufacturing component is in parentheses) 

ALABAMA Wind Solar Biomass 

Employment 2,180 1,408 6,428 

Establishments 29 34 94 

County with Greatest 

Employment Concentration 

Madison: 627 Jobs, 8 

Facilities, 3 Components 

Morgan: 444 Jobs, 2 

Facilities, 2 Components 

Jefferson: 1,280 Jobs, 25 

Facilities, 12 

Components 

Employment in 

At-Risk Counties 

424 (Ball and Roller 

Bearings) 

73 (Current Carrying 

Wiring Devices) 

895 (Conveyor and 

Conveying Equip) 

GEORGIA Wind Solar Biomass 

Employment 7,113 2,587 5,969 

Establishments 126 77 67 

County with Greatest 

Employment Concentration 

Gwinnett: 1,894 Jobs, 36 

Facilities, 7 Components 

Gwinnett: 336 Jobs, 18 

Facilities, 7 Components 

Gwinnett: 1,342 Jobs, 

25 Facilities, 11 

Components 

KENTUCKY Wind Solar Biomass 

Employment 4,499 1,545 1,482 

Establishments 38 14 15 

County with Greatest 

Employment Concentration 

Jackson: 1,051 Jobs, 5 

Facilities, 3 Components 

Madison: 749 Jobs, 2 

Facilities, 2 Components 

Whitley: 520 Jobs, 1 

Facility, 1 Component 

Employment in 

At-Risk Counties 

1,360 (Plastics 

Products) 357 (Sheetmetal) 320 (Switchgear and Switchboard) 

MARYLAND Wind Solar Biomass 

Employment 851 465 124 

Establishments 16 12 7 

County with Greatest 

Employment Concentration 

Washington: 676 Jobs, 13 

Facilities, 7 Components 

Washington: 391 Jobs, 10 

Facilities, 4 Components 

Washington: 88 Jobs, 6 

Facilities, 5 Components 

MISSISSIPPI Wind Solar Biomass 

Employment 3,517 1,042 2,346 

Establishments 24 16 36 

County with Greatest 

Employment Concentration 

Lowndes: 535 Jobs, 5 

Facilities, 3 Components 

Alcorn: 401 Jobs, 1 

Facility, 1 Components 

Lee: 1,160 Jobs, 3 

Facilities, 2 Components 

Employment in 

At-Risk Counties 

944 (Motors and 

Generators) 

723 (Plastics Film & Sheet, 

Plastics Material & Resin) 

373 (Power Boiler 

And Heat Exchanger) 

NEW YORK Wind Solar Biomass 

Employment 5,544 1,613 6,495 

Establishments 71 31 48 

County with Greatest 

Employment Concentration 

Broome: 1,889 Jobs, 18 

Facilities, 8 Components 

Steuben: 546 Jobs, 3 

Facilities, 1 Component 

Steuben: 1,905 Jobs, 8 

Facilities, 5 Components 

NORTH CAROLINA Wind Solar Biomass 

Employment 4,619 4,350 5,542 

Establishments 74 44 59 

County with Greatest 

Employment Concentration 

Watauga: 1,483 Jobs, 29 

Facilities, 7 Components 

Watauga: 1,923 Jobs, 31 

Facilities, 6 Components 

Buncombe: 1,632 Jobs, 

13 Facilities, 9 

Components 

Employment in 

At-Risk Counties 1,685 (Plastics Products) 40 (Sheetmetal) 583 (Industrial Valve) 

OHIO Wind Solar Biomass 

Employment 5,480 2,641 2,060 

Establishments 94 44 57 

County with Greatest 

Employment Concentration 

Columbiana: 837 Jobs, 13 

Facilities, 4 Components 

Washington: 803, 6 

Facilities, 2 Components 

Tuscarawas: 861 Jobs, 9 

Facilities, 7 Components 

Employment in 

At-Risk Counties 648 (Iron Foundries) 122 (Plastics Material and 

Resin) 

432 (Air Conditioning 

and Warm Air Heating 

Equip) 
48

PENNSYLVANIA Wind Solar Biomass 

Employment 23,649 10,789 32,309 

Establishments 396 205 346 

County with Greatest 

Employment Concentration 

Erie: 5,374 Jobs, 66 

Facilities, 8 Components 

Allegheny: 2,612 Jobs, 40 

Facilities, 8 Components 

Erie: 6,835 Jobs, 40 

Facilities, 15 

Components 

Employment in 

At-Risk Counties 314 (Power Transmissions) 211 (Unlaminated Plastics 

Film and Sheet) 94 (Heating Equip) 

SOUTH CAROLINA Wind Solar Biomass 

Employment 10,036 4,096 5,994 

Establishments 92 41 46 

County with Greatest 

Employment Concentration 

Greenville: 4,595 Jobs, 23 

Facilities, 8 Components 

Greenville: 1,485 Jobs, 15 

Facilities, 5 Components 

Greenville: 3,715 Jobs, 

19 Facilities, 8 

Components 

Employment in 

At-Risk Counties 

1,219 (Ball and Roller 

Bearings) 

40 (Plastics Material and 

Resin) 78 (Industrial Valves) 

TENNESSEE Wind Solar Biomass 

Employment 13,590 3,707 9,845 

Establishments 192 64 117 

County with Greatest 

Employment Concentration 

Knox: 1,570 Jobs, 36 

Facilities, 8 Components 

Hawkins: 723 Jobs, 2 

Facilities, 2 Components 

Hamilton: 3,322 Jobs, 

29 Facilities, 12 

Components 

Employment in 

At-Risk Counties 389 (Plastics Products) 184 (Plastics Material and 

Resin) 

42 (Air Conditioning 

and Warm Air Heating 

Equip) 

VIRGINIA Wind Solar Biomass 

Employment 3,453 793 4,931 

Establishments 29 14 29 

County with Greatest 

Employment Concentration 

Russell: 736 Jobs, 1 Facility, 

1 Component 

Bristol City: 295 Jobs, 2 

Facilities, 1 Component 

Bristol City: 3,112 Jobs, 

5 Facilities, 4 

Components 

Employment in 

At-Risk Counties 986 (Plastics Products) 81 (Semiconductors and 

Related Devices) 

159 (Mineral Wool, 

Conveyor Equip) 

WEST VIRGINIA Wind Solar Biomass 

Employment 3,688 4,414 2,055 

Establishments 75 40 48 

County with Greatest 

Employment Concentration 

Ritchie: 1,177 Jobs, 3 

Facilities, 1 Component 

Wood: 2,710 Jobs, 3 

Facilities, 2 Components 

Hancock: 588 Jobs, 2 

Facilities, 2 Components 

Employment in 

At-Risk Counties 649 (Plastics Products) 123 (Plastics Material and 

Resin) 

283 (Instruments and 

Related Products) 
49

Recommendations 

This report has identified where opportunities to manufacture components for the 

renewable energy sector exist for Appalachia. However, the establishments identified do 

not currently produce such components. In order to capitalize upon the growth within the 

renewable energy industries, given the particulars of their respective organizational 

characteristics, a shift from current production to renewable components production must 

occur. The best approach to transitioning to renewable components manufacturing is not 

immediately obvious, though several mechanisms are available that may successfully 

enable and encourage manufacturers to pursue opportunities within this arena. 

Several states have taken steps to encourage manufacturers of renewable energy 

equipment to site facilities within their borders. Efforts range from direct negotiations 

with manufacturers and offering tax abatements and financial packages, to tax credits and 

incentives to any firm or facility producing components specific to renewable energy 

industries. Currently, nine states offer ‘Industry Recruitment’ incentives for renewable 

energy.77 Industry Recruitment incentives consist of efforts and programs created to 

attract equipment manufacturers for renewable energy technologies. Such programs 

typically consist of tax credits and abatements, grants and negotiated commitments from 

the issuing entity to purchase a specified amount of production. Examples include 

Washington State’s tax abatement for solar energy manufacturers and wholesalers. Instate producers enjoy a 40 percent reduction in the state’s business and occupation tax. 

Washington’s policy also includes mechanisms to increase the tax incentive for facilities 

sited in economically depressed regions. Three ARC member states currently possess 

manufacturing recruitment incentives, including New York with its NYSERDA 

Renewable Energy Technology Manufacturing Incentive, Ohio with its Fuel Cell Grant 

and Loan Program, and Virginia with its Solar Manufacturing Incentive Grant program. 

Attempts to transition existing manufacturers to pursue markets in renewable energy will 

likely differ from outright courting of new manufacturing. Outreach and education 

programs for manufacturers with the technical capacity to produce renewable energy 

components, such as those identified in this report, may be an appropriate mechanism to 

employ. The following is a brief list of potential tools to encourage renewable energy 

manufacturing in the Appalachian region. 

Financial Incentives 

Renewable Energy Manufacturers Tax Credits: Such policies offer corporate 

tax incentives for companies engaged in renewable energy equipment 

manufacturing. Credits can be applied against gross receipts tax, manufacturers’ 

taxes and extraction taxes, among others, paid by manufacturers of renewable 

 

77 Database for State Incentives for Renewables and Efficiency, Washington Incentives for Renewable 

Energy: website: www.dsireusa.org
50

equipment. The breadth and scope of renewable equipment and technologies 

eligible under such incentives are at the discretion of the instituting body. 

Renewable Energy Portfolio Standards (RPS) and Tax Credit Multipliers for 

In-State Manufacturing: Such policies can be included in existing or pending 

renewable energy requirements and set asides such as RPS’s or Renewable 

Energy Standards (RES) that enable those entities subject to the requirement to 

receive extra credits toward their requirement by purchasing equipment 

manufactured in a designated area. Increasing the effective tax incentive for 

consumers of renewable energy equipment that purchase from an in-state 

manufacturer can also be offered, to both residential and commercial entities.

Tax Credits or Multipliers for Manufacturing in Distressed Regions: Similar 

to the previous policy, credit multipliers can be provided to entities subject to RPS 

if they purchase equipment manufactured from distressed regions. More 

immediately, tax credit multipliers can be offered to renewable manufactures that 

site facilities in regions designated as economically distressed.

Research and Development and ‘Advanced’ Technology Grants and Loans: 

Offering grants and low interest loans for entities engaged in innovative R&D or 

high tech technologies can encourage growth in the industry. 

Incubator Programs for Renewable Energy Industries: These programs 

provide support through education, business services and even space for 

entrepreneurs interested in renewable energy technologies in the Appalachian 

region.

Organizational or Educational Programs 

Renewable Energy Manufacturing Business Outreach Programs: These can 

establish or augment existing business and manufacturing education programs to 

provide education and information on opportunities to transition to or engage 

renewable energy industries.

Bridging Local Manufacturing with Industry Suppliers and Vendors: By 

providing a forum or infrastructure, programs can build bridges between the 

renewable energy industry and regional facilities capable or interested in 

producing equipment for that industry.

Regional Renewable Energy Industry Consortiums: Consortiums can provide 

an arena where active industries can enhance coordination in the region. Services 

to improve upon supply chain management and customer relationship 

management can also benefit the competitiveness of the region’s renewable 

energy industries.
51

Other 

Support for State and Federal Renewable Energy Policies: Providing or 

continuing support for state and federal incentives that drive demand or reduce the 

costs of renewable energy technology and energy production will be important to 

continue near and long-term growth in these new industries. Renewable Portfolio 

Standards offer certainty for all levels of the renewable energy industry, from 

equipment manufacturers, to project developers and financers, to utilities and 

consumers. Maintaining and supporting consistent tax credit policy, available 

over longer timeframes with established sunset clauses are also important, as 

evidenced by the cycling passage and expiration of the federal PTC for renewable 

energy. 

Production Tax Credits, Grants and Loans for Cellulosic Ethanol: Tax 

credits based upon the units of renewable energy produced can encourage ethanol 

refining facilities to site within a given region. Providing incentives and low 

interest starter loans specific to the cellulosic industry can jump start the region in 

the production of this form of fuel. Grants associated with R&D in the cellulosic 

arena can also help establish a foundation for the nascent industry in the region, 

perhaps in association with existing research and educational institutions.

Renewable Fuel Standards: Augmenting the Federal Renewable Fuel Standard 

with passage of a long-term goal for cellulosic fuel production or consumption in 

the region can provide for certainty for investors and producers of cellulosic 

ethanol.

Immediate next steps, however, should involve an in-depth assessment of the 

manufacturers identified in this report. Beyond their technical capacity to produce 

components for renewable energy industries, important aspects of their transitional 

capacity must be gauged. Ownership and management structures must be identified in 

addition to assessing each establishment’s interest and means to transition production 

capacity. Additionally, outreach to existing renewable energy industries, particularly 

those interested in diversifying their supply chain or expanding local energy production 

can provide important cues for expanding manufacturing capacity within the Appalachian 

region. 
52

Conclusion

As energy demands continue to increase and interest in clean, renewable sources grows, 

the economic opportunities to produce equipment for the production of renewable energy 

will expand. Investigating the characteristics of renewable energy industries expose 

where some of the greatest opportunities exist, for both near-term and long-term 

economic growth. The rapid expansion currently experienced within renewable energy 

industries such as wind and solar power has created a situation where the subcomponents for these industries are in high demand. Producing such parts may be one of 

the most immediate opportunities to capitalize on this growth industry for a region with 

existing technical capacity to manufacture renewable energy equipment, such as 

Appalachia. 

Even in a climate of increasing consolidation, demand is forcing large, integrated firms to 

outsource much of their non-essential components manufacturing. Windows of 

opportunity exist for manufacturers poised to produce these needed components, and can 

provide for long-term supply contracts with established companies. Where a handful of 

domestic manufacturers are currently producing parts for the renewable energy industry, 

dominated by states such as California, there is significant room for domestic demand for 

renewable energy equipment to be met with domestic supply. Sub-components 

manufacturing may be the most immediate and achievable opportunity for wide-scale 

engagement, particularly as large, international firms expand US-based production 

capacity to meet domestic demand. Already in both the wind and solar industries 

European wind firms and Japanese solar firms contract with US-based component 

manufacturers for needed parts. 

This report provides an initial assessment of the potential capacity of the Appalachian 

region to supply components for the wind, solar and biomass industries. Where there is 

marked variation in each Appalachian state’s capacity to produce parts for these three 

industries, analysis shows that substantial capacity exists to produce renewable energy 

components. Each state possesses some level of production capacity, for each of the three 

industries investigated, ranging from hundreds of jobs to tens of thousands of jobs for 

each single industry. As a whole, almost 3,000 establishments exist in Appalachia with 

the technical capacity to manufacture renewable energy equipment. These facilities 

employ almost 200,000 people in the region. Pennsylvania alone possesses over 60,000 

jobs in potential renewable components manufacturing, followed by Tennessee with over 

26,000 jobs. Maryland, with only three counties in the Appalachian region, still possesses 

over 1,000 jobs in potential renewable components manufacturing. 

Even further, there are concentrated manufacturing potentials within each state that 

provide significant opportunities to develop regions of specialization for renewable 

energy industry-specific product manufacturing. Such concentrated regions are attractive 

to larger equipment suppliers interested in contracting for sub-components 

manufacturing. 
53

Numerous mechanisms exist which can encourage domestic manufacturing at many 

levels. Financial incentives can enable or encourage both sub-components manufacturing 

as well as turn-key, integrated facility establishment. This can function to either grow a 

domestically- or locally-based firm through tax abatements, low interest loans to launch a 

new renewable energy enterprise or facilitate the siting of larger, established firms within 

a given region. Finally, fostering a renewable manufacturing-friendly zone through 

incubation, outreach and coordination can better enable local industry to transition to 

renewable energy manufacturing. 

In addition to components manufacturing, Appalachia may contain the resource base to 

become a leader in cellulosic ethanol production. Given the current uncertainties 

regarding the nature and extent of the cellulosic resource within the region as well as the 

timeframe for available commercial cellulosic technology, it may be in the best interest of 

the region to position itself to be an early entrant into the industry. Getting in on the 

ground floor of the industry and becoming an early industry leader could produce 

substantial economic benefit to the region. 
54

APPENDICES 
55

Appendix A. Renewable Energy Manufacturers 

Top Ten Global Wind Energy Equipment Manufacturing Firms

(based upon 2005 Market Share)

1 – Vestas11

o Headquarters: Denmark 

 Began manufacturing wind turbines in 1979, exclusively in wind 

energy since 1987 

 Production facilities in Denmark, Germany, India, Italy, Scotland, 

England, Spain, Sweden, Norway, Australia, and China 

 Acquired NEG Micon in 2004 

 Decreasing sales in Germany and North America; increasing 

Southern Europe, Oceania, and Asia

o Revenue/Size 

 11,200 employees (June 2006) 

 Global market share of 35%; US market share of 28% 

 204 MW delivered to North America in 2004; down 62% from 

2003 

 Approximately 40,000 MW installed wind capacity 

2 – GE Wind78 (subsidiary of GE Industries)

o Headquarters: Atlanta, GA, United States

 Major facilities in: Atlanta, GA; Greenville, SC; Houston, TX; 

Melbourne and Pensacola, FL; San Jose, CA; Schenectady, NY; 

Tehachapi, CA; Wilmington, NC; France; Italy; Hungary; Norway, 

Quebec; Germany

 Vertically integrated wind turbine production, though heavily 

diversified beyond wind turbine manufacturing

o Revenue/Size (reflects GE Energy subsidiary totals – engaged in 

conventional equipment manufacturing in addition to wind)

 $16.5 billion in 2005

 ~34,000 employees

3 – Enercon Gmbh79

o Headquarters: Aurich, Germany 

 Production facilities in: Turkey, Brazil, Sweden, India and three in 

Germany 

 Founded in 1984, and has retained ownership through the last 20 

years (no major acquisitions) 

 Works exclusively in the wind sector; in-house production of most 

components(produce blades, turbines, towers) 

 

78 GE Power Fact sheet: http://www.gepower.com/about/info/en/downloads/05_fact_sheet_global.pdf 79 Enercon Gmbh website: Facts and Figures: http://www.enercon.de/en/_home.htm 
56

o Revenue/ Size: 3rd largest by sales in 2005, 2nd largest amount of installed 

MW globally 

 $88,100,000 annual sales80

 8,186 employees globally 

 13.2% of global market share for sales in 2005 

 10,200 MW installed wind capacity 

4 – Gamesa81

o Headquarters: Spain

 Gamesa’s renewable energy segment makes wind turbines and 

operates wind farms. The company has sold many of its wind 

farms in Europe to Electrabel.

o Revenue/ Size: 4th in installed MW globally in 2005

 1,745,000 Euros Revenue in 2005

 8,186 employees

 Has experienced positive growth in both sales and employment in 

the last year.

 Gamesa Wind US carries out the manufacturing, sales and 

operation and maintenance of Gamesa’s wind turbines in the USA 

as well as in Canada

5 – Suzlon 

o Headquarters: Pune, India 

 Production facilities in India and the United States (explicitly 

stated to meet North American demand82), China and Belguim; 

Engineering R&D HQ in Germany, Blade R&D HQ in 

Netherlands, Global Expansion HQ in Denmark. 

 Founded in 1995, private equity placement in 2004, acquired 

Hansen in 2006. 

 Works exclusively in the wind sector 

 Vertically integrated: manufacturing of generators, towers, control 

systems (India), gearboxes (Hansen Transmissions - Belgium), and 

blades (India, US, China). 

 Provide services from project development, manufacturing, 

installation and service operation. 

o Revenue/ Size: 5th largest by sales in 2005, 5th in installed MW globally 

 $854,000,000 sales83

 5,300 employees globally (8,600 reported to investors 10/200684) 

 6.1% of global market share for sales in 2005 

 4,253 MW installed wind capacity 

 

80 Hoovers: 

http://premium.hoovers.com.ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/subscribe/basic/factsheet.xhtml?ID=yryykrkct 81 Gamesa Corporation Annual Report 2005: 

http://www.gamesa.es/gamesa/modules/idealportal/uploadlink/memoria2005ing.pdf 82 http://www.suzlon.com/locations.htm 83 http://www.suzlon.com/Investors%20Presentation.pdf 84 http://www.suzlon.com/Investors%20Presentation.pdf 
57

 6 – Seimens85

o Headquarters: Germany 

 Company not limited to wind; involved in automation products, 

controls, drives, instruments, and power distribution products 

 Acquired Bonus Energy A/S in Dec. 2004 

o Revenue/Size 

 5,800 installed turbines 

 4,498 installed MW (of which 1400 MW are installed in 

Germany) 

 Net Sales of Siemens Power Generation 8,061 million Euro 

 33,000 employees 

 7 – RePower Systems86

o Headquarters: Germany 

o Revenue/Size: 7th largest by sales in 2005 

 2004 Sales of $411.1 (mil) R2 [Positive growth in sales & 

employment] 

 583 employees. 

 8 – Nordex87

o Headquarters: Norderstedt, Germany 

 Production Facilities: Germany, China 

o Revenue/Size: 8th largest by sales in 2005 

 308,000,000 Euro in 2005 - Turnover 

 730 employees 

 9 – Ecotecnia88

o Headquarters: Spain 

 Production facilities: Spain 

 Founded in 1981; Acquired by Mondragon Corporation 1999 (the 

7th largest business group is Spain, the world’s largest worker 

cooperative owning 260 widely diverse companies (financial 

services, automotive, capital goods, construction, household 

goods, etc.) 

 Manufacturing in wind and solar sector, project development and 

construction 

o Revenue/ Size: 9th largest by sales in 2005 

 183, 000,000 Euros annual sales in 2005 

 680 employees 

 

85 Seimens website: www.powergeneration.siemens.com/en/windpower/index.cfm 86 Repower Systems, Global Perspectives, Annual Report 2005. 

http://www.repower.de/index.php?id=372&L=1 87 Nordex website: Key Figures and Facts: http://www.nordex-online.com/en/company-career-career/keyfigures-and-facts.html 88 Mondragon Annual Report: http://www.mcc.es/ing/magnitudes/memoria2005.pdf 
58

 2.1% of global market share for sales in 2005 

 948 MW installed wind capacity 

 10 – Mitsubishi Power Systems 

o Headquarters: Tokyo, Japan (parent) MPS HQ in Lake Mary, FL 

 Production facility in Lake Mary, FL 

 Subsidiary of Mitsubishi Heavy Industries: Work in many sectors 

of heavy industry, also in other power sectors: including gas, 

steam, geothermal, combined cycle power production. 

 In house production of turbines (Japan, US), joint venture with 

TPI Composites (US) to produce blades in Juarez, Mexico 

(formed “Vien Tek” in joint venture)89

 Provides services including project management and design 

construction for power plants. 

o Revenue/ Size: 10th largest by sales in 2005 

 $319,600,000 annual sales90, including all other turbines 

manufactured in US facility 

 2% of global market share for sales in 2005 

 558 MW installed wind capacity 

Others - BTM Consultants highlight two emerging companies as holding significant 

promise in coming years, the Chinese firm Goldwind and the Indian firm NPEC.91 Other 

wind energy companies producing large wind turbines include winWind based in Finland 

and Fuhrlander based in Germany. 

Wind Energy Components Suppliers

LM Glasfiber Group: Largest Wind Turbine Blade Manufacturer in the world 

HQ: Denmark 

o Production Facility in South Dakota 

$24,100,000 Revenue92

o Operating profit (EBIT) fell 6% from DKK 95 million to DKK 89 

million. The lower profit is due in part to a greater proportion of sales 

in USD in H1 2005. This adversely impacted LM GlasFiber is still not 

able to procure all raw materials and components locally in USD. The 

other reason for the lower profit is raising prices of composite 

 

89 http://www.mpshq.com/medialine_index.htm#news 90 Hoovers Online: 

http://premium.hoovers.com.ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/subscribe/co/factsheet.xhtml?ID=rrrkfhftkstkshx 91 BTM Consult ApS: International Wind Energy Development World Market Update 2005 Forecast 2006- 

2010, Press Release: http://www.btm.dk/Pages/wmu.htm

92 Hoovers Online: 

http://premium.hoovers.com.ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/subscribe/basic/factsheet.xhtml?ID=ycrtyxcsj 
59

materials such as resin, carbon fibers and core materials (excerpt 

directly from NetComposites Website).93

Hansen Transmissions (acquired by Suzlon Wind) 

Headquarters: Antwerp, Belgium 

o Production Facilities: Belgium 

Leading gear manufacturer 

Acquired by Suzlon Energy 

Marlec Engineering Co LTD94

Headquarters: Corby Northants, UK 

Component: Balance of System, Batteries, Small Wind Applications 

MG srl95 

Headquarters: Fossano, Italy 

Component: Manufacturer of plate bending machines for the construction of 

wind towers. 

Greenworld96

Headquarters: Varna, Bulgaria 

Component: wind turbines (large), wind energy towers and structures (large), 

wind energy systems (large). 

Nascom 

Headquarters: Sindh Pakistan 

Component: Utility Grade (Large) Wind Towers 

Domestic Wind Power Manufacturers

Clipper Windpower97

Headquarters: Carpentaria, CA 

o Production facilities: California, Iowa 

o Clipper Windpower is a conglomeration of subsidiaries formed in 2001 

(first public offering in the European Alternative Investment Market in 

2005), a vertically integrated company providing turbines primarily for 

the domestic market 

 

93 Net Composites: http://www.netcomposites.com/news.asp?3249 94 Energy Source Guides Wind Energy Wholesale Suppliers 

http://energy.sourceguides.com/businesses/byP/wRP/byB/wholesale/byN/byName.shtml 95 Energy Source Guides Wind Energy Wholesale Suppliers 

http://energy.sourceguides.com/businesses/byP/wRP/byB/wholesale/byN/byName.shtml 96 Ibid 97 Clipper Windpower Plc 2005 Annual Report: 

http://www.clipperwind.com/pdfs/2005_annual_report_web.pdf 
60

o Clipper currently offers the largest turbine (2.5 MW) manufactured in 

North America 

o Looking to expand into the European and Latin American markets 

Revenue/ Size: 

o $15.9 million USD98 (Clipper Windpower Plc actually posted a 

significant reduction in turnover revenue in 2005 of only $2.7 million as 

a result of the selling off of large production facilities, Clipper posted a 

net loss for 2005 of $ 19 million as a result of lower turnover and 

subsequent large capital investments in increased manufacturing 

capacity)99

o 127 employees 

Trinity Structural Towers100 

Headquarters: Dallas, TX 

o Subsidiary of Trinity Industries 

One of largest producers of wind towers in North America 

o 12.1 million in sales 

o 160 employees 

Also involved in turbine components, concrete and aggregates, product 

transportation and specialized coatings 

Builds turbines as large as 2.5 MW 

Wind Components Manufacturers in ARC Member States101

Maryland Wind Components Manufacturers102: 

Fibox, Inc. 

Headquarters: Glen Burnie, MD 

Component: Nema 4x non-metallic enclosures 

New York Wind Components Manufacturers103: 

GE Energy. 

Headquarters: Schenectady, NY 

Component: large wind turbines (1.500 - 3.600 kW), utility-scale wind turbine 

generators. 

 

98 Hoovers Online: Clipper Windpower Inc Information: 

http://premium.hoovers.com/subscribe/basic/factsheet.xhtml?ID=ychftrhx 99 Clipper Windpower Plc 2005 Annual Report: 

http://www.clipperwind.com/pdfs/2005_annual_report_web.pdf 100 www.trinitytowers.com 101 These establishments are located within ARC member states, but are not necessarily located within the 

ARC’s jurisdiction. 

102 Renewable Energy Source Guides, Large Wind Components Manufacturers: 

http://energy.sourceguides.com/businesses/byGeo/US/byP/wRP/lwindcomp/byS/WI/WI.shtml 103 Renewable Energy Source Guides, Large Wind Components Manufacturers: 

http://energy.sourceguides.com/businesses/byGeo/US/byP/wRP/lwindcomp/byS/WI/WI.shtml 
61

Pennsylvania Wind Components Manufacturers104: 

Motors & Controls International 

Headquarters: Hazleton, PA 

Component: wind energy system Inverters (large), Variable Speed Generators 

(VSG) 

SunEnergy Tehnologies, Inc. 

Headquarters: Philadelphia, PA 

Component: wind energy system components 

Ohio Wind Components Manufacturers105: 

Canton Drop Forge 

Headquarters: Canton, OH 

Component: wind energy system components (large) 

Engineering Methods, Inc 

Headquarters: Cincinnati , OH 

Component: Engineering Software, FEA & Engineering Design Services and 

Consulting 

Michael Byrne Manufacturing, Inc 

Headquarters: Mansfield , OH 

Component: wind energy system components (large) 

Molded Fiberglass Company 

Headquarters: Ashtabula, OH 

Component: wind energy system components (large), large wind turbine rotor 

blades 20 meters and longer 

National Electric Coil 

Headquarters: Columbus, OH 

Component: Windings for any generator above 1 MW, driven by any fuel or 

turbine type 

Parker Hannifin Corporation 

Headquarters: Cleveland, OH 

Component: wind energy system components (large), hydraulic systems for 

large wind turbines, motion and control systems for large wind turbines 

Tennessee Wind Components Manufacturers106: 

Thomas & Betts Corporation 

Headquarters: Memphis, TN 

Component: wind energy system components (large), wind energy towers and 

structures (large), wind turbine support structures, lattice steel towers, tubular 

steel towers. 

 

104 Renewable Energy Source Guides, Large Wind Components Manufacturers: 

http://energy.sourceguides.com/businesses/byGeo/US/byP/wRP/lwindcomp/byS/WI/WI.shtml 105 Renewable Energy Source Guides, Large Wind Components Manufacturers: 

http://energy.sourceguides.com/businesses/byGeo/US/byP/wRP/lwindcomp/byS/WI/WI.shtml 106 Renewable Energy Source Guides, Large Wind Components Manufacturers: 

http://energy.sourceguides.com/businesses/byGeo/US/byP/wRP/lwindcomp/byS/WI/WI.shtml 
62

Virginia Wind Components Manufacturers107: 

Fiber Technology Corporation 

Headquarters: Lorton, VA 

Component: wind energy system components (large) 

Wind Components Manufacturers – U.S. Other

California Wind Components Manufacturers108: 

Access Energy 

Headquarters: Beverly Hills, CA 

Component: wind energy system components (large), wind energy systems 

(large), back up systems, distributed energy systems, solar cells, wind farm, 

Hydrogen and bio-ethanol systems. 

Dutch Pacific, LLC 

Headquarters: Westlake Village, CA 

Component: wind turbines (large). 

RLH Industries, Inc. 

Headquarters: Orange, CA 

Component: wind turbines (large) 

Solera Industries, Inc. 

Headquarters: Morgan Hill, CA 

Component: wind energy system components (large) 

Thelen, Reid & Priest, Inc. 

Headquarters: San Francisco, CA 

Component: all system components (large) 

Wind Energy Conversion Systems 

Headquarters: North Palm Springs, CA 

Component: Electrical distributor Wind energy Specialty 

WindTesting.com 

Headquarters: Tehachapi, CA 

Component: wind energy system components (large), wind energy system 

components (small), wind turbines (large), wind turbines (small), wind energy 

systems (large) 

Wind Energy Company 

Headquarters: Lancaster , CA 

Component: wind energy system components (large) 

 

107 Renewable Energy Source Guides, Large Wind Components Manufacturers: 

http://energy.sourceguides.com/businesses/byGeo/US/byP/wRP/lwindcomp/byS/WI/WI.shtml 108 Renewable Energy Source Guides, Large Wind Components Manufacturers: 

http://energy.sourceguides.com/businesses/byGeo/US/byP/wRP/lwindcomp/byS/WI/WI.shtml 
63

Texas Wind Components Manufacturers109

Nicholson-Paige Electric 

Headquarters: Ransom Canyon, TX 

Component: submersible pump wire and specialized cable, wind energy 

system components (large) 

Trinity Structural Towers 

Headquarters: Fort Worth, TX 

Component: wind energy system components (large), wind energy towers and 

structures (large) 

Barr Fabrication, LLC 

Headquarters: Brownwood, TX 

Component: wind energy towers and structures (large), wind energy system 

components (large) 

Washington Wind Components Manufacturers110

Global Energy Concepts, LLC 

Headquarters: Kirkland, WA 

Component: wind energy systems (large), wind energy systems (small), wind 

turbines (large), wind turbines (small), wind energy system components 

(large), wind energy system components (small), All aspects of wind energy) 

Spin Trends, LLC 

Headquarters: Walla Walla, WA 

Component: Condition Monitoring and assessment of Bearings, gears and 

critical components of: wind power plants, wind energy system components 

(large) 

Toray Composites (America), Inc 

Headquarters: Tacoma, WA 

Component: , wind energy system components (large) 

Wisconsin Wind Components Manufacturers111

Powertrain Engineers 

Headquarters: Pewaukee, WI 

Component: wind energy system components, wind energy systems (large) 

Tower Tech Systems, Inc. 

Headquarters: Manitowoc, WI 

Component: wind energy towers and structures (large), wind turbines (large), 

wind energy system components 

Florida Wind Components Manufacturers112

 

109 Renewable Energy Source Guides, Large Wind Components Manufacturers: 

http://energy.sourceguides.com/businesses/byGeo/US/byP/wRP/lwindcomp/byS/WI/WI.shtml 110 Renewable Energy Source Guides, Large Wind Components Manufacturers: 

http://energy.sourceguides.com/businesses/byGeo/US/byP/wRP/lwindcomp/byS/WI/WI.shtml 111 Renewable Energy Source Guides, Large Wind Components Manufacturers: 

http://energy.sourceguides.com/businesses/byGeo/US/byP/wRP/lwindcomp/byS/WI/WI.shtml 
64

American Wire Group 

Headquarters: , Hallandale, FL 

Component: wind energy system components 

USA Solar & Wind, Inc. 

Headquarters: Tallahassee , FL 

Component: wind energy system components, , wind power plants, wind 

energy towers and structures (large) 

ElectricPowerforless.biz 

Headquarters: Jacksonville Beach, FL 

Component: wind energy system components 

Idaho Wind Components Manufacturers113

Windland, Inc 

Headquarters: Boise, ID 

Component: refurbished wind turbines 

Windpower Unlimited, LLC 

Headquarters: Filer, ID 

Component: wind energy system components 

Michigan Wind Components Manufacturers114: 

Citation Corporation 

Headquarters: Novi, MI 

Component: wind energy system components, wind power components from 

ductile iron, blade extenders, hubs, tower flanges and frame components 

Danotec Motion Technologies, LLC 

Headquarters: Ann Arbor, MI 

Component: wind energy system components, Variable Speed Brushless 

Motors 

K & M Machine Fabrication, Inc 

Headquarters: Cassopolis, MI 

Component: wind fabricated structures (large), wind energy system 

components (large), bedplates, hubs and gear boxes 

Minnesota Wind Components Manufacturers115

SMI and Hydraulics 

Headquarters: Porter, MN 

 112 Renewable Energy Source Guides, Large Wind Components Manufacturers: 

http://energy.sourceguides.com/businesses/byGeo/US/byP/wRP/lwindcomp/byS/WI/WI.shtml 113 Renewable Energy Source Guides, Large Wind Components Manufacturers: 

http://energy.sourceguides.com/businesses/byGeo/US/byP/wRP/lwindcomp/byS/WI/WI.shtml 114 Renewable Energy Source Guides, Large Wind Components Manufacturers: 

http://energy.sourceguides.com/businesses/byGeo/US/byP/wRP/lwindcomp/byS/WI/WI.shtml 115 Renewable Energy Source Guides, Large Wind Components Manufacturers: 

http://energy.sourceguides.com/businesses/byGeo/US/byP/wRP/lwindcomp/byS/WI/WI.shtml 
65

Component: wind energy system components (large), wind energy towers and 

structures Wind Tower Footing Material, Anchor Bolts, Imbed Rings and 

Rebar. 

Montana Wind Components Manufacturers116

LineHaul Logistics, Inc 

Headquarters: Missoula, MT 

Component: wind energy system components (large), wind turbines 

Planetary Systems, Inc 

Headquarters: , Ennis, MT 

Component: wind energy system components 

Solar PV Manufacturers

The following information was gathered from a base of Corporate Annual Reports and from resources such 

as Hoovers Online. 

Kyocera117

Head Quarters- Kyoto, Japan 

US Division- Scottsdale, AZ 

Total Revenue $- 10,098,000 

US/ Solar Revenue$- ’06 $117mm product group containing solar cells 

Employees- 58,559 

Components/NAICS- PV cells (335311, 42172, 333611) 

Products- Solar & Hybrid Power Systems, Solar Panels, Solar Water 

Pumping, Solar Modules, Investors, Controllers, Batteries, Solar Electricity, 

Solar Power Solar, Wind Turbine, Solar Company 

US Manufacturing- None 

Sharp118

Head Quarters- Osaka, Japan 

US Division- Mawah, NJ 

Total Revenue $- 24,113 mm 

US/ Solar Revenue$- 291billion (total for groupings of “other electronics”) 

Employees- 46,741 – 54,900 

Components/NAICS- PV cells, Inverters 

US Manufacturing- Memphis, Tennessee 

 

116 Renewable Energy Source Guides, Large Wind Components Manufacturers: 

http://energy.sourceguides.com/businesses/byGeo/US/byP/wRP/lwindcomp/byS/WI/WI.shtml 117 Hoovers Online: 

http://premium.hoovers.com.ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/subscribe/co/factsheet.xhtml?ID=ffffcrxktjsfhhkjtc

&ticker=KYO 

118 Hoovers Online: 

http://premium.hoovers.com.ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/subscribe/co/factsheet.xhtml?ID=ffffcrkxhjsfhyjsth 
66

Solar World 

Head Quarters- Bonn, Germany 

US Division- Camarillo, CA 

Total Revenue $- 272.7mm 

US/ Solar Revenue$- 26.9mm 

Employees- 616 

Components/NAICS- PV cells, Solar film, inverters, Batteries 

2006 acquisition of Shell Solar (100% of crystalline solar activities of the 

shell group.) With this merger, SolarWorld will be the largest US producer of 

solar products. SolarWorld parent company, Duetchse Solar AG, has signed a 

10 year silicon wafer agreement with Suntech China's #1 solar company and 

number 8 globally. SolarWorld is both a customer and competitor of Suntech. 

Conergy119

Head Quarters- Hamburg, Germany 

US Division- Santa Fe, NM 

Total Revenue - $629,000,000 sales in 2005 

US/ Solar Revenue: $ 25mm 

Employees- 724 

Components/NAICS- PV Cells, Inverters 

Products- The company makes components such as photovoltaic modules, 

mounting systems, and both off-grid and grid-connected inverters. It also 

makes solar collectors, control units, pumps, storage tanks, and other solar 

thermal products 

US Manufacturing- None 

50/50/08 plan: 50% rev abroad, 50% renewable. This comment is a 

“Strategy/Vision” and illustrates the desire of Conergy to grow abroad, 

especially in the US. ’08: Voltwerk, PA location is a channel for distribution. 

This shows an interest in locating facilities in the US and this is location is an 

ARC county; R&D and engineering potential. 

#2 worldwide sales (#1 Germany) this is the companies own statement 

Built largest solar plant = 10MW 

Conergy is one of Suntech’s largest customers 

Sanyo 

Head Quarters-Osaka, Japan 

US Division- San Diego, CA, and Detroit, MI 

Total Revenue: $21,804 mm 

US/ Solar Revenue $- Semiconductor Branch in Saddle Brooke NJ, 75.7MM 

Employees- 106,389 

US Manufacturing- San Diego, CA Detroit, Michigan 

 

119 Hoovers Online: 

http://premium.hoovers.com.ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/subscribe/co/factsheet.xhtml?ID=rysyrsyrjryjfjy 
67

In 1994 Sanyo "combined forces" with Soltec, a solar PV cell company since 

the '70s. Demonstration of large firms gaining markets through acquisition. 

SunPower 

Head Quarters- Sunnyvale, CA 

US Division- Sunnyvale, CA 

Total Revenue $- 65.3 MM (the third quarter ended September 30, 2006 was 

$65.3 million, up 19% from the prior quarter's revenue of $54.7 million and 

up 198% from the third quarter 2005 revenue of $21.9 million.) 

Employees- 788 (1yr growth 89.4%) 

Components/NAICS- A-300, SPR series and STM series, solar cells and 

panels

In 2002, Cypress Semiconductor company purchased a majority interest in 

SunPower and subsequently funded much of the mass production for A-300 

solar cells (press release 10/18/06); For the year 2007, the contract calls for 

SunPower to purchase approximately $20 million of silicon ingots from REC 

SciTech. This contract builds on previous ingot supply agreements and 

purchase orders between the two companies. SunPower's silicon supply for 

2007 remains sufficient to produce 110 megawatts of cell production. 

Matrix Solar 

Head Quarters- Albuquerque NM 

US Division- Albuquerque NM 

Total Revenue $- 52.5mm 

Employees- 300 

Components/NAICS- Assembles Solar PV Modules 

Parent Company Automation Tooling Systems (ATS) (largest Turn Key based 

in Canada) 

Matrix subsidiary Photowatt International Europe PV cell manufacturer. 

Evergreen Solar 

Head Quarters- Marlboro, MA 

US Division- Marlboro, MA 

Total Revenue: $36 MM (87% growth) 

US/ Solar Revenue: $ 90% of sales 

Employees- 290 (16% growth) 

Components/NAICS- String ribbon wafer technology (develops and 

manufactures solar power cells and panels.)

Spire Solar 

Head Quarters- Bedford, MA 

US Division- Bedford, MA 

Total Revenue: $22.4 mm 

US/ Solar Revenue: $*0.3MM 

Employees- 118 
68

Components/NAICS- Solar Manufacturing equipment, Turnkey production 

lines, wafer and module systems/installation 

Company press release states that 3rd quarter sales increase is due to increase 

in solar cell production and manufacturing base sales 

EPV (Energy Photovoltaic Inc.) 

Head Quarters- Lawrenceville, NJ 

US Division- Lawrenceville, NJ 

US/ Solar Revenue$- 1mm 

Employees- 50 

InnovaLight 

Head Quarters- Santa Clara, CA 

US Division- Santa Clara, CA 

Total Revenue $- 1.5mm 

US/ Solar Revenue$- 1.5mm 

Employees- 15 

Components/NAICS- Ultra thin silicon PV, very flexible and can capture new 

UV wave levels 

GreenMountain Engineering 

Head Quarters- San Francisco, CA 

US Division- San Francisco, CA 

US/ Solar Revenue: $0.3mm 

Employees- 20 

Components/NAICS- raw material production (LLC).(541330) 

UniSource Energy 

Head Quarters- Tucson, AZ 

US Division- Tucson, AZ 

Total Revenue $- 1,229.5MM 

Employees- 1,947 

Components/NAICS- Electric Power Transmission, Control, and Distribution 

US ManufacturingSold its Global Solar Energy (subsidiary) in 2006 to Solon AG for 16MM. 

UniSource gains most of its revenue from utility subsidiaries. 

MEMC Electronic Materials 

Head Quarters- St. Peters MO 

US Division- St. Peters MO 

Total Revenue $- 1107.4mm 

US/ Solar Revenue$- 10% polysilicon 

Employees- 5,500 
69

Components/NAICS- Makes silicon wafers, and also solar grade polysilicon 

for PV cells 

US Manufacturing- Hillsborough MT, San Jose CA, Maryland Heights MT 

Largest customer is Samsung Electronics, which also includes Texas 

Instruments. 

Konarka

Head Quarters- Lowell, MA 

US Division- Lowell, MA 

Total Revenue $- .5mm (2003) 

US/ Solar Revenue$- .5mm (2003) 

EmployeesComponents/NAICS- OV cells, thin converters 

Founded 2001, former military project, this company has over 200 global 

patents. Like InnovaLight, their cells can capture energy from all light sources 

not just visible. 

BP Solar 

Head Quarters- London, England 

US Division- Frederick, MD 

Total Revenue: $245,486 mm 

Employees- >106,000 

Components/NAICS- BP solar manufactures cells, wafers, and complete 

systems - starting to sell ready to install PV modules at Home Depot. 

BP has recently allocated 1.6 Billion dollars to an alternative energy 

campaign. This includes solar wind and biofuels. However, 1.6 billion is more 

than most other solar companies have even accounted for in sales. 

Suntech Power Holdings, Co. Ltd 

Head Quarters- Jiangsu, China 

Total Revenue: $226 mm 

Employees- 1374 

Components/NAICS- PV sells and solar electric systems for both on and off 

grid 

Suntech is the number eight company in the world and the leader in China. 

They have recently purchased MSK corp. of Japan. This acquisition will gain 

them access to the difficult-to-enter Japanese solar market. The company has 

also signed 10-year silicon wafer cell agreements with both SolarWorld and 

MEMC 

Photowatt (Part of ATS Automation—Acquired by Matrix Solar in 1997) 

Head Quarters- France, Cambridge, Canada 

Total Revenue: $121.9 mm 

US/ Solar Revenue: $121.9 mm 
70

Employees- 711 

Components/NAICS- photovoltaic, solar energy, products including 

installation kits and solar power system designs 

Q Cells 

Head Quarters- Thalheilm, Germany 

Total Revenue: $351mm 

US/ Solar Revenue: $351MM 

Employees- 500 

Components/NAICS- PV Cells 

BTU International 

Head Quarters- N. Billercia, MA 

US Division- N. Billercia, MA. 

Total Revenue $- 66.4mm 

US/ Solar Revenue$- 66.4mm 

Employees- 177 

Components/NAICS- supplier of semiconductor wafers for solar and thermal 

process equipment 

In 2006, purchased RTC Radiant Technology corp. which adds a new line for 

furnaces used in the manufacturing of photovoltaic systems 

Advanced Silicon /REC 

Head Quarters- Silver Bell, MT 

US Division- Silver Bell, MT 

Total Revenue $- 89.6mm 

US/ Solar Revenue$- 89.6mm 

Employees- 410 

Components/NAICS- produces polycrystalline silicon not a PV maker 

US Manufacturing- Washington 

Norway's Renewable Energy Corporation (REC) now has a 75% stock in 

advanced silicon 

Thirteen additional solar energy materials suppliers were located abroad with facilities in 

the following countries: United Kingdom (3), Japan (2), Italy (1), Germany (2), France 

(1), China (2), Austria (1), and Argentina (1). 120

Solar Materials Suppliers and Solar Cell Manufacturers in ARC States121

AFG Industries, Inc. 

 

120 SolarBuzz, Fast Solar Energy Facts: http://www.solarbuzz.com/FastFactsIndustry.htm

121 SolarBuzz, Fast Solar Energy Facts: http://www.solarbuzz.com/FastFactsIndustry.htm
71

Facility: US, Kingsport TN 

Components: Tin oxide coated glass for thin film solar cells 

DuPont Tedlar 

Facility: US, Buffalo NY 

Components: Tin oxide coated glass for thin film solar cells 

Ferro 

Facility: US, Cleveland, OH 

Components: Thick film paste 

Torpedo Specialty Wire, Inc. 

Facility: US, Rocky Mount, NC 

Components: PV tabbing and bus ribbon products 

Ulbrich 

Facility: US, Westminster, SC 

Components: Solar cell tabbing and bus ribbon 

Solar Power Industries 

Facility: US, Vernon, PA 

Components: Multicrystalline silicon 

Additional Solar Energy Materials Suppliers in the US 122

Asahi Glass Corporation Electronic Materials 

Facility: US, Hillsboro, OR 

Components: Glass Frits 

Cermet Materials, Inc. 

Facility: US, Wilmington, DE 

Components: Thick film paste 

Crane Nonwovens 

Facility: US, Dalton, MA 

Components: Craneglas glass fibre matting 

Global Wedge, Inc. 

Facility: US, Riverside, CA 

Components: Glass, Tedlar, EVA, tabbing and glass fibre mat 

Madico 

 

122 SolarBuzz, Fast Solar Energy Facts: http://www.solarbuzz.com/FastFactsIndustry.htm
72

Facility: US, Woburn, MA 

Components: PVF composite films for module backing 

Specialized Technology Resources, Inc. 

Facility: US, Enfield, CA 

Components: EVA 

Sputtering Materials, Inc. 

Facility: US, Reno, NV 

Components: Thin film planar and ratable target materials for solar cells 

Additional Solar Cell Manufacturers in the US 123

Energy Conversion Devices, Inc. 

Facility: US, Rochester Hills, MI 

Components: Amorphous silicon thin film 

First Solar LLC 

Facility: US, Phoenix, AZ 

Components: Cadmium Telluride 

GE Energy (Solar Division) 

Facility: US, Newark, DE 

Components: Monocrystalline silicon 

Iowa Thin Film Technologies 

Facility: US, Boone, IA 

Components: Amorphous silicon thin film on plastic substrate 

Terra Solar, Inc 

Facility: US, Carson, CA 

Components: Monocrystalline silicon 

United Solar Ovonic 

Facility: US, Auburn Hill, MI 

Components: Amorphous silicon thin film 

There are over 62 solar cell manufacturers abroad located in over 18 countries. China 

leads with over 14 manufactures, India has 11 and Japan has 10.124

 

123 SolarBuzz, Fast Solar Energy Facts: http://www.solarbuzz.com/FastFactsIndustry.htm 124 SolarBuzz, Fast Solar Energy Facts: http://www.solarbuzz.com/FastFactsIndustry.htm
73

Biomass – Ethanol Production

Abengoa, S.A.125

Location: Seville, Spain 

Employment: 11,082 

Sales: $2,396,400,000 

Product: Biofuels for transport, bioethanol, and biodiesel 

Description: Subsidiary is Abengoa Bioenergy which is headquartered in St. 

Louis, MO 

Archer Daniels Midland126

Location: Decatur, Illinois 

Employment: 25,641 

Sales: $36,596,100,000 

Product: Processes crops to make food, animal feed, renewable fuels, and 

natural alternatives to industrial chemicals. 

Description: Global distributor of quality foods. 

Aventine Renewable Energy Holdings, Inc.127

Location: Pekin, Illinois 

Employment: 280 

Sales: $935,500,000 

Product: Makes ethanol, bioproducts, and feed products. 

Description: A leading producer and marketer of ethanol in the United States. 

Danisco A/S Genencor International128

Location: Copenhagen, Denmark (Genencor - Palo Alto, CA) 

Employment: 10,636 

Sales: $3,540,400,000 

Product: Produces food ingredients. 

Description: Among the technological leaders in converting biomass - starch 

and non-starch materials - into ethanol. Enzymes such as STARGENTM and 

SPEZYMETM have made the production of bioethanol a cost-effective 

proposition. 

Harvest Biofuels BV 

Location: Austria 

 

125 Hoovers Online: January 16, 2007: 

http://premium.hoovers.com.ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/subscribe/co/factsheet.xhtml?ID=rfrcshcjyrfkjhr 126 Hoovers Online: January 16, 2007: 

http://premium.hoovers.com.ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/subscribe/co/factsheet.xhtml?ID=rfrtcffryfkhxj 127 Hoovers Online: January 16, 2007: 

http://premium.hoovers.com.ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/subscribe/co/factsheet.xhtml?ID=rcsrttstssttxys 128 Ibid: 

http://premium.hoovers.com.ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/subscribe/co/factsheet.xhtml?ID=sfshcyfjrxktyx 
74

Description: Harvest Biofuels BV is a subsidiary of Harvest Energy Limited, 

one of the largest suppliers of high quality gasolines and diesel road fuels to 

the U.K. independent sector and one of the market leaders for supply of bioethanol and bio-diesel road fuels in the United Kingdom 

Caltex Australia Limited129

Location: Sydney, 2000, Australia 

Employment: 3,046 

Sales: $8,939,900,000 

Product: It is engaged in the refining, distribution and marketing of fuels and 

lubricants across the country 

Description: Australia Limited is the largest refiner and marketer of petroleum 

products in Australia with operations in all states and territories 

CHS, Incorporated130

Location: Inver Grove Heights, MN 

Employment: 6,370 

Sales: $11,941,100,000.00 

Product: CHS trades grain and sells supplies to members through its stores. It 

also processes soybeans for use in food and animal feeds, and markets 

petroleum. 

Description: CHS is one of the nation’s largest suppliers of ethanol-enhanced 

gasoline and a leading marketer of biodiesel products. CHS is an owner of 

US BioEnergy, a premier ethanol manufacturer, distributor and marketer. 

CSR Limited131

Location: Chatswood, New South Wales, Australia 

Employment: 6,363 

Sales: $2,037,800,000 

Product: CSR Limited is now heavy into construction materials such as 

plasterboard, cement fiber products, roof tile, clay brick, and insulation. 

Description: CSR has operations in sugar milling, sugar refining, and ethanol 

production and is expanding its capacity to generate commercially renewable 

electricity. 

Cargill, Inc.132

Location: Waytaza, MN 

Employment: 149,000 in 63 countries 

 

129 Hoovers Online, January 18, 2007: 

http://premium.hoovers.com.ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/subscribe/co/factsheet.xhtml?ID=rtfycykhfttrkjc 130 Hoovers Online, January 18, 2007: 

http://premium.hoovers.com.ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/subscribe/co/factsheet.xhtml?ID=hktrxffjrckrkk 131Hoovers Online, January 18, 2007: 

http://premium.hoovers.com.ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/subscribe/co/factsheet.xhtml?ID=hjtkhkhfkytjyx 132 Hoovers Online, January 18, 2007: 

http://premium.hoovers.com.ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/subscribe/co/factsheet.xhtml?ID=cffksffjtcsrxs 
75

Sales: $75,208,000,000 

Product: Cargill's diversified operations include grain, cotton, sugar, and 

petroleum trading; financial trading; food processing; futures brokering; and 

agricultural services including animal feed and fertilizer production. 

Description: manufactures ethanol at two production facilities in the heart of 

the cornbelt: Eddyville, IA; and Blair, NE; makes biodiesel in Iowa Falls, IA 

Matrix Service Company133

Location: Tulsa, OK 74116 

Employment: 2,092 

Sales: $493,900,000 

Product: ethanol and petroleum refining 

Description: provides construction, and repair and maintenance services 

primarily to the downstream petroleum and power industries in the United 

States and Canada 

VeraSun Energy Corporation134

Location: Brookings, SD 57006 

Employment: 160 

Sales: $236.4 million 

Product: The Company is one of the nation’s leading producers of ethanol, 

Description: The Company is selling a branded fuel, VE85, at service stations 

in the Midwest 

Hawkeye Holdings Inc135. 

Location: Iowa Falls, IA 

Employment: 85 

Sales: $89,100,000 

Product: 1) Product ethanol 2) Produce and sell distillers grains as ethanol coproducts 

Description: Like most ethanol producers, Hawkeye also markets distiller 

grains (a by-product of the manufacturing process) as animal feed 

 

133Hoovers Online, January 18, 2007: 

http://premium.hoovers.com.ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/subscribe/co/factsheet.xhtml?ID=rfjffrrhrfhxtk 134 Hoovers Online, January 18, 2007: 

http://premium.hoovers.com.ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/subscribe/co/factsheet.xhtml?ID=rcsrtrfjktfjrjc 135 Hoovers Online, January 18, 2007: 

http://premium.hoovers.com.ezaccess.libraries.psu.edu/subscribe/co/factsheet.xhtml?ID=rhfcchrjrhftjyy 
76

Appendix B – Concentrated Renewable Manufacturing 

County Level Biomass Manufacturing Capacity

Table B-1. Counties with substantial biomass presence were selected for either their total 

number of potential jobs in the biomass sector, total number of establishments per 

county, the potential number of different types of components for the biomass sector, or 

average firm size. 

Sector State County 

# 

of 

Estabs 

# 

of 

Jobs 

# of 

Component 

Types 

SocioEconomic 

Status 

Pop. 

Class 

Primary 

City(s) 

Biomass AL Jefferson 25 1280 12 Transitional Metro Birmingham, 

Hoover 

Biomass 

(Solar) AL Morgan 4 1266 3 Transitional Metro Decatur 

Biomass AL Marshall 3 699 3 Transitional Rural/ 

Other 

Biomass 

(Solar 

Wind) 

AL Madison 10 529 9 Attainment Metro Huntsville 

Biomass 

(Solar 

Wind) 

AL De Kalb 2 453 2 Transitional Micro Fort Payne 

Biomass AL Cullman 3 415 3 Transitional Micro Cullman 

Biomass 

(Solar 

Wind) 

AL Shelby 14 393 9 Attainment Metro Birmingham, 

Hoover 

Biomass AL Marion 1 310 1 At-Risk Rural/ 

Other 

Biomass AL Limestone 2 286 2 Transitional Metro Huntsville 

Biomass 

(Solar 

Wind) 

GA Gwinnett 25 1342 11 Attainment Metro 

Atlanta-Sandy 

SpringsMarietta 

Biomass GA Barrow 3 1158 2 Transitional Metro 

Atlanta-Sandy 

SpringsMarietta 

Biomass GA Bartow 3 883 3 Competitive Metro 

Atlanta-Sandy 

SpringsMarietta 
77

Sector State County 

# 

of 

Estabs 

# 

of 

Jobs 

# of 

Component 

Types 

SocioEconomic 

Status 

Pop. 

Class 

Primary 

City(s) 

Biomass 

(Solar) GA Hall 4 697 4 Transitional Metro Gainesville 

Biomass GA Stephens 2 363 2 Transitional Micro Toccoa 

Biomass 

(Solar 

Wind) 

GA Cherokee 7 319 5 Attainment Metro 

Atlanta-Sandy 

SpringsMarietta 

Biomass GA Gordon 2 304 2 Transitional Micro Calhoun 

Biomass KY Whitley 1 520 1 Distressed Micro Corbin 

Biomass 

(Solar) KY Laurel 1 320 1 At-Risk Micro London 

Biomass KY Magoffin 1 170 1 Distressed Rural/ 

Other 

Biomass MS Lee 3 1160 2 Transitional Micro Tupelo 

Biomass MS Clay 1 577 1 Distressed Micro West Point 

Biomass MS Winston 1 511 1 Distressed Rural/ 

Other 

Biomass MS Union 3 436 3 Transitional Rural/ 

Other 

Biomass MS Marshall 2 255 2 Distressed Metro Memphis, TN 

Biomass MS Tishomingo 2 232 2 At-Risk Rural/ 

Other 

Biomass 

(Solar) NC Buncombe 13 1632 9 Competitive Metro Asheville 

Biomass 

(Wind) NC Forsyth 12 1322 9 Attainment Metro Winston-Salem 

Biomass 

(Solar 

Wind) 

NC Watauga 16 1052 9 Transitional Micro Boone 
78

Sector State County 

# 

of 

Estabs 

# 

of 

Jobs 

# of 

Component 

Types 

SocioEconomic 

Status 

Pop. 

Class 

Primary 

City(s) 

Biomass NC Davie 1 578 1 Competitive Metro Winston-Salem 

Biomass NC Rutherford 2 504 2 At-Risk Micro Forest City 

Biomass NY Steuben 8 1905 5 Transitional Micro Corning 

Biomass 

(Wind) NY Allegany 2 1253 2 Transitional Rural/ 

Other 

Biomass NY Cattaraugus 4 1119 3 Transitional Micro Olean 

Biomass NY Cortland 2 713 2 Transitional Micro Cortland 

Biomass 

(Solar 

Wind) 

NY Chautauqua 4 530 4 Transitional Micro 

Jamestown, 

Dunkirk, 

Fredonia 

Biomass NY Chemung 3 373 3 Transitional Metro Elmira 

Biomass 

(Solar 

Wind) 

NY Broome 9 296 6 Transitional Metro Binghamton 

Biomass 

(Solar 

Wind) 

OH Tuscarawas 9 861 7 Transitional Micro 

New 

Philadelphia, 

Dover 

Biomass OH Columbiana 13 392 9 Transitional Micro East LiverpoolSalem 

Biomass 

(Solar 

Wind) 

PA Erie 40 6835 15 Transitional Metro Erie 

Biomass 

(Solar 

Wind) 

PA Allegheny 63 6202 15 Attainment Metro Pittsburg 

Biomass 

(Solar) PA Westmorelan

d 27 2265 13 Competitive Metro Pittsburgh 

Biomass PA Fulton 2 1889 2 Transitional Rural/ 

Other 

Biomass 

(Solar) PA Washington 15 1385 6 Transitional Metro Pittsburgh 
79

Sector State County 

# 

of 

Estabs 

# 

of 

Jobs 

# of 

Component 

Types 

SocioEconomic 

Status 

Pop. 

Class 

Primary 

City(s) 

Biomass PA Luzerne 18 1163 9 Transitional Metro Scranton, 

Wilkes-Barre 

Biomass 

(Solar) PA Beaver 7 783 6 Transitional Metro Pittsburg 

Biomass 

(Solar 

Wind) 

PA Cambria 8 645 4 Transitional Metro Johnstown 

Biomass PA Mercer 11 608 7 Transitional Metro 

Youngstown, 

OH, Warren, 

OH, Boardman, 

OH 

Biomass PA Schuylkill 6 516 4 Transitional Metro Pottsville 

Biomass PA Lycoming 7 503 6 Transitional Metro Williamsport 

Biomass PA Mifflin 3 471 3 Transitional Micro Lewistown 

Biomass 

(Solar 

Wind) 

PA Butler 15 470 11 Competitive Metro Pittsburg 

Biomass PA Bedford 2 402 1 Transitional Rural/ 

Other 

Biomass PA Northumberl

and 2 349 3 Transitional Micro Sunbury 

Biomass 

(Wind) PA Indiana 8 332 5 Transitional Micro Indiana 

Biomass PA Jefferson 5 307 5 Transitional Rural/ 

Other 

Biomass 

(Solar 

Wind) 

PA Somerset 6 241 6 Transitional Micro Somerset 

Biomass PA Lawrence 7 232 5 Transitional Micro New Castle 

Biomass 

(Solar 

Wind) 

SC Greenville 19 3715 8 Competitive Metro Greenville 

Biomass 

(Solar 

Wind) 

SC Spartanburg 17 1944 13 Transitional Metro Spartanburg 
80

Sector State County 

# 

of 

Estabs 

# 

of 

Jobs 

# of 

Component 

Types 

SocioEconomic 

Status 

Pop. 

Class 

Primary 

City(s) 

Biomass 

(Solar) TN Hamilton 29 3322 12 Competitive Metro Chattanooga 

Biomass TN Warren 3 1297 3 Transitional Rural/ 

Other 

Biomass 

(Solar) TN Putnam 11 934 8 Transitional Micro Cookeville 

Biomass 

(Solar 

Wind) 

TN Greene 10 914 8 Transitional Micro Greeneville 

Biomass 

(Solar 

Wind) 

TN Washington 9 783 7 Transitional Metro Johnson City 

Biomass 

(Solar 

Wind) 

TN Knox 13 355 9 Transitional Metro Knoxville 

Biomass TN Monroe 1 350 1 Transitional Rural/ 

Other 

Biomass TN Rhea 1 336 1 Transitional Rural/ 

Other 

Biomass 

(Solar 

Wind) 

TN Anderson 7 184 5 Transitional Metro Knoxville 

Biomass 

(Solar) VA Bristol City 5 3112 4 Transitional Metro 

Kingsport, TN, 

Bristol, TN, 

Bristol, VA 

Biomass VA Washington 3 444 3 Transitional Metro 

Kingsport, TN, 

Bristol, TN, 

Bristol, VA 

Biomass VA Buena Vista 

City 2 331 2 Transitional Rural/ 

Other 

Buena Vista 

City 

Biomass VA 

Rockbridge/ 

Buena Vista/ 

Lexington 

City 

2 319 2 Transitional Rural/ 

Other Lexington City 

Biomass 

(Solar) VA Bland 2 276 2 Transitional Rural/ 

Other 

Biomass 

(Solar) VA Tazewell 5 221 5 Transitional Micro Bluefield, WV 

Biomass WV Hancock 2 588 2 Transitional Metro 

Weirton, WV, 

Steubenville, 

OH 
81

Sector State County 

# 

of 

Estabs 

# 

of 

Jobs 

# of 

Component 

Types 

SocioEconomic 

Status 

Pop. 

Class 

Primary 

City(s) 

Biomass 

(Solar 

Wind) 

WV Cabell 6 318 6 Transitional Metro 

Huntington, 

WV, Ashland, 

KY 

Biomass WV Greenbrier 1 206 1 At-Risk Rural/ 

Other 

Biomass 

(Solar 

Wind) 

WV Raleigh 6 182 5 Transitional Micro Beckley 
82

Figure B-1. Counties with potential biomass job totals over 1,000

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

Erie

Allegheny

Greenville

Hamilton

Bristol City

Westmoreland

Spartanburg

Steuben

Fulton

Buncombe

Washington

Gwinnett

Forsyth

Warren

Jefferson

Morgan

Allegany

Luzerne

Lee

Barrow

Cattaraugus

Watauga

PA PA SC TN VA PA SC NY PA NC PA GA NC TN AL AL NY PA MS GA NY NC

Figure B-2. The number of potential establishments and the number of different 

biomass components for counties with job totals over 1,000

Number of Biomass Firms and Components for Counties with over 1000 Jobs

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Erie

Allegheny

Greenville

Hamilton

Bristol City

Westmoreland

Spartanburg

Steuben

Fulton

Buncombe

Washington

Gwinnett

Forsyth

Warren

Jefferson

Morgan

Allegany

Luzerne

Lee

Barrow

Cattaraugus

Watauga

PA PA SC TN VA PA SC NY PA NC PA GA NC TN AL AL NY PA MS GA NY NC

Number of

Firms

Number of

Components
83

Figure B-3. Counties with potential biomass job totals from 500 to 999

Counties with Biomass Job Totals 500-999

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

PutnamGreene

Bartow

TuscarawasWashington

Beaver

Cortland

Marshall

Hall

Cambria

Mercer

Hancock

Davie

Clay

Chautauqua

Madison

Whitley

Schuylkill

Winston

Rutherford

Lycoming

TN TN GA OH TN PA NY AL GA PA PA WV NC MS NY AL KY PA MS NC PA

Figure B-4. The number of potential establishments and the number of different 

biomass components for counties with job totals between 500 and 999

Number of Biomass Firms and Components for Counties with Jobs 500-999 

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

PutnamGreene

Bartow

TuscarawasWashington

Beaver

Cortland

Marshall

Hall

Cambria

Mercer

Hancock

Davie

Clay

Chautauqua

Madison

Whitley

Schuylkill

Winston

Rutherford

Lycoming

TN TN GA OH TN PA NY AL GA PA PA WV NC MS NY AL KY PA MS NC PA

Number of

Firms

Number of

Components
84

Figure B-5. Counties with potential biomass job totals from 80 to 499

Counties with Biomass Job Totals 80 - 499

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

MifflinButler

De Kalb

Washington

Union

Cullman

Bedford

Shelby

Columbiana

Chemung

Stephens

Knox

Monroe

Northumberland

Rhea

Indiana

Buena Vista City

Laurel

Rockbridge/

Buena Vista/

Cherokee

Cabell

Marion

Jefferson

GordonBroome

Limestone

Bland

Marshall

Somerset

Lawrence

Tishomingo

Tazewell

Greenbrier

Anderson

Raleigh

Magoffin

Coffee

Tazewell

Hamblen

Schuyler

Tioga

Brooke

Monroe

Washington

PAPAALVAMSALPAALOHNYGATNTNPATNPAVAKYVAGAWVALPAGANYALVAMSPAPAMSVAWVTNWVKYTNVATNNYPAWVMSMD

Figure B-6. The number of potential establishments and the number of different 

biomass components for counties with job totals between 80 and 499

Number of Biomass Firms and Components for Counties with Jobs 80 - 499

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

MifflinButler

De Kalb

Washington

Union

Cullman

Bedford

Shelby

Columbiana

Chemung

Stephens

Knox

Monroe

Northumberland

Rhea

Indiana

Buena Vista City

Laurel

Rockbridge/

Buena Vista/

Cherokee

Cabell

Marion

Jefferson

GordonBroome

Limestone

Bland

Marshall

Somerset

Lawrence

Tishomingo

Tazewell

Greenbrier

Anderson

Raleigh

Magoffin

Coffee

Tazewell

Hamblen

Schuyler

Tioga

Brooke

Monroe

Washington

PAPA AL VAMSAL PA ALOHNYGATNTNPATNPA VA KYVA GAWVAL PAGANY ALVAMSPAPAMSVAWVTNWVKYTNVA TNNYPAWVMSMD

Number of

Firms

Number of

Components
85

County Level Solar Manufacturing Capacity 

Counties with substantial solar presence were selected for either their total number of 

potential jobs in the solar sector, total number of establishments per county, the potential 

number of different types of components for the solar sector, or average firm size. 

Table B-2. Counties are listed that meet at least one of the following criteria: job totals of 

500 or greater, 10 or greater establishments, an average size of 125 employees or greater or 

five or more components for the industry are produced. Jobs that are relevant to other sectors 

are noted in parentheses in the first column, with each ARC county listed in decreasing order 

based upon the number of jobs within each respective county.

Sector State County 

# 

 of 

Estabs. 

# 

of 

Jobs 

# of 

Components 

SocioEconomic 

Status 

Population 

Class Primary City(s) 

Solar 

(Biomass) AL Morgan 2 444 2 Transitional Metro Decatur 

Solar 

(Biomass 

Wind) 

AL Madison 13 292 5 Attainment Metro Huntsville 

Solar 

(Biomass 

Wind) 

AL Marshall 2 274 2 Transitional Rural/ 

Other 

Solar 

(Biomass 

Wind) 

AL Jefferson 10 183 4 Transitional Metro Birmingham, 

Hoover 

Solar GA Gwinnett 18 336 7 Attainment Metro Atlanta-Sandy 

Springs-Marietta 

Solar GA Habersham 1 170 1 Transitional Micro Cornelia 

Solar KY Madison 2 749 2 Transitional Micro Richmond, Berea 

Solar 

(Biomass) KY Laurel 1 320 1 At-Risk Micro London 

Solar KY Russell 1 180 1 Distressed Rural/ 

Other 

Solar 

(Biomass 

Wind) 

MD Washington 10 391 4 Competitive Metro Hagerstown, MD, 

Martinsburg, WV 

Solar MS Alcorn 1 401 1 At-Risk Micro Corinth 
86

Sector State County 

# 

 of 

Estabs. 

# 

of 

Jobs 

# of 

Components 

SocioEconomic 

Status 

Population 

Class Primary City(s) 

Solar 

(Biomass 

Wind) 

NC Watauga 31 1923 6 Transitional Micro Boone 

Solar NC Forsyth 11 1319 4 Attainment Metro Winston-Salem 

Solar NC Burke 2 1277 2 Transitional Metro Hickory, Lenoir, 

Morganton 

Solar 

(Biomass) NC Buncombe 9 670 5 Competitive Metro Asheville 

Solar NY Steuben 3 546 1 Transitional Micro Corning 

Solar 

(Biomass 

Wind) 

NY Broome 12 279 6 Transitional Metro Binghamton 

Solar NY Cattaraugus 1 279 1 Transitional Micro Boone 

Solar NY Broome 10 191 5 Transitional Micro Olean 

Solar NY Allegheny 1 176 1 Transitional Rural/ 

Other 

Solar OH Washington 6 803 2 Transitional Metro 

Parkersburg, WV, 

Marietta, OH, 

Vienna, WV 

Solar OH Muskingum 5 712 3 Transitional Micro Zanesville 

Solar OH Hocking 1 150 1 Transitional Rural/ 

Other 

Solar OH Clermont 6 144 5 Competitive Metro Cincinnati, 

Middletown 

Solar 

(Biomass 

Wind) 

PA Allegheny 40 2612 8 Attainment Metro Pittsburg 

Solar 

(Biomass) PA Westmoreland 19 1487 7 Competitive Metro Pittsburgh 

Solar PA Luzerne 12 1152 4 Transitional Metro Scranton, WilkesBarre 
87

Sector State County 

# 

 of 

Estabs. 

# 

of 

Jobs 

# of 

Components 

SocioEconomic 

Status 

Population 

Class Primary City(s) 

Solar 

(Biomass 

Wind) 

PA Erie 25 977 8 Transitional Metro Erie 

Solar PA Schuylkill 7 702 3 Transitional Metro Pottsville 

Solar 

(Biomass) PA Beaver 9 600 5 Transitional Metro Pittsburg 

Solar 

(Biomass) PA Washington 8 488 3 Transitional Metro Pittsburgh 

Solar PA Lackawanna 14 424 3 Transitional Metro Scranton, WilkesBarre 

Solar PA Crawford 2 337 2 Transitional Micro Meadville 

Solar PA Huntingdon 1 115 1 At-Risk Micro Huntington 

Solar 

(Biomass) SC Greenville 15 1485 5 Competitive Metro Greenville 

Solar 

(Biomass 

Wind) 

SC Spartanburg 10 1322 5 Transitional Metro Spartanburg 

Solar SC Oconee 2 860 2 Transitional Micro Seneca 

Solar TN Hawkins 2 723 2 Transitional Metro 

Kingsport, TN, 

Bristol, TN, Bristol, 

VA 

Solar 

(Biomass) TN Hamilton 16 670 6 Competitive Metro Chattanooga 

Solar 

(Biomass 

Wind) 

TN Knox 8 417 5 Transitional Metro Knoxville 

Solar TN Sullivan 1 304 1 Transitional Metro 

Kingsport, TN, 

Bristol, TN, Bristol, 

VA 

Solar TN Loudon 1 226 1 Transitional Metro Knoxville 

Solar TN De Kalb 1 176 1 Transitional Rural/ 

Other 
88

Sector State County 

# 

 of 

Estabs. 

# 

of 

Jobs 

# of 

Components 

SocioEconomic 

Status 

Population 

Class Primary City(s) 

Solar TN Cocke 1 167 1 At-Risk Micro Newport 

Solar 

(Biomass) TN Bradley 1 154 1 Competitive Metro Cleveland 

Solar 

(Biomass) VA Bristol City 2 295 1 Transitional Metro 

Kingsport, TN, 

Bristol, TN, Bristol, 

VA 

Solar VA Covington 

City 1 164 1 Transitional Rural/ Other Covington City 

Solar WV Wood 3 2710 2 Transitional Metro 

Parkersburg, WV, 

Marietta, OH, 

Vienna, WV 

Solar 

(Biomass 

Wind) 

WV Cabell 6 308 5 Transitional Metro Huntington, WV, 

Ashland, KY 

Solar WV Harrison 2 266 2 Transitional Micro Clarksburg 

Solar WV Marion 1 224 1 Transitional Micro Fairmont 

Solar WV Wayne 1 118 1 At-Risk Metro Huntington, WV, 

Ashland, KY 
89

Figure B-7. Counties with potential solar job totals over 500. 

Counties with Potential Solar Manufacturing Jobs Over 500

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Wood

Allegheny

Watauga

Westmoreland

Greenville

Spartanburg

Forsyth

Burke

Luzerne

Erie

Oconee

Washington

MadisonHawkins

Muskingum

Schuylkill

Hamilton

Buncombe

Beaver

Steuben

WV PA NC PA SC SC NC NC PA PA SC OH KY TN OH PA TN NC PA NY

Figure B-8. The number of potential establishments and the number of different 

solar components for counties with job totals over 500. 

Number of Firms and Components for Counties with Potential Solar

Manufacturing Jobs Over 500 

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

Wood

Allegheny

Watauga

Westmoreland

Greenville

Spartanburg

Forsyth

Burke

Luzerne

Erie

Oconee

Washington

MadisonHawkins

Muskingum

Schuylkill

Hamilton

Buncombe

Beaver

Steuben

WVPA NC PA SCSCNCNCPA PA SCOHKY TNOHPA TNNC PA NY

Number of

Firms

Number of

Components
90

Figure B-9. Counties with potential solar job totals from 200 to 499. 

Counties with Potential Solar Manufacturing Jobs 

Between 200 - 499

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

Washington

Morgan

Lackawanna

Knox

Alcorn

Washington

Crawford

Gwinnett

LaurelCabell

Sullivan

Bristol City

Madison

Broome

Cattaraugus

Marshall

Harrison

Loudon

Marion

PA AL PA TN MS MD PA GA KY WV TN VA AL NY NY AL WV TN WV

Figure B-10. The number of potential establishments and the number of different 

solar components for counties with job totals between 200 and 499. 

Number of Firms and Components for Counties with Potential Solar 

Manufacturing Jobs Between 200 - 499

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

Washington

Morgan

Lackawanna

Knox

Alcorn

Washington

Crawford

Gwinnett

Laurel

Cabell

Sullivan

Bristol City

Madison

Broome

Cattaraugus

Marshall

Harrison

Loudon

Marion

PA AL PA TN MS MD PA GA KY WV TN VA AL NY NY AL WV TN WV

Number of

Firms

Number of

Components
91

Figure B-11. Counties with potential solar job totals from 115 to 199. 

Counties with Potential Solar Manufacturing Jobs 

Between 115 - 199

0

50

100

150

200

250

Broome

Jefferson

Russell

De Kalb

Allegheny

Habersham

Cocke

Covington

City

Bradley

Hocking

Clermont

Henderson

Armstrong

Lumpkin

Tioga

Wayne

Huntingdon

NY AL KY TN NY GA TN VA TN OH OH NC PA GA PA WV PA

Figure B-12. The number of potential establishments and the number of different 

solar components for counties with job totals between 115 and 499. 

Number of Firms and Componenets for Counties with Potential Solar 

Manufacturing Jobs Between 115 - 199

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

Broome

Jefferson

Russell

De Kalb

Allegheny

Habersham

Cocke

Covington

City

BradleyHocking

Clermont

Henderson

Armstrong

Lumpkin

Tioga

Wayne

Huntingdon

NY AL KY TN NY GA TN VA TN OH OH NC PA GA PA WV PA

Number of

Firms

Number of

Components
92

County Level Wind Manufacturing Capacity 

Counties with substantial wind manufacturing potential were selected for either total 

number of potential jobs in the solar sector, total number of establishments per county, 

the potential number of different types of components for the wind sector, or average 

firm size. 

Table B-3. Counties are listed that meet at least one of the following criteria: job totals of 

500 or greater, 10 or greater establishments, an average size of 125 employees or greater or 

five or more components for the industry are produced. Jobs that are relevant to other sectors 

are noted in parentheses in the first column, with each ARC county listed in decreasing order 

based upon the number of jobs within each respective county.

Sector State County 

# 

of 

Estabs 

# 

of 

Jobs 

# 

 of 

Components 

SocioEconomic 

Status 

Population 

Class 

Primary 

City(s) 

Wind 

(Biomass 

Solar) 

AL Madison 8 627 3 Attainment Metro Huntsville 

Wind 

(Biomass 

Solar) 

AL De Kalb 2 453 2 Transitional Micro Fort Payne 

Wind 

(Biomass 

Solar) 

AL Marshall 3 360 2 Transitional Rural/ 

Other 

Wind AL Marion 1 300 1 At-Risk Rural/ 

Other 

Wind 

(Biomass 

Solar) 

GA Gwinnett 36 1894 7 Attainment Metro 

AtlantaSandy 

SpringsMarietta 

Wind GA Hall 12 1345 5 Transitional Metro Gainesville 

Wind GA Douglas 5 760 2 Competitive 

Wind GA Bartow 8 664 3 Competitive Metro 

AtlantaSandy 

SpringsMarietta 

Wind GA Lumpkin 2 261 2 Transitional Rural/ 

Other 

Wind KY Jackson 5 1051 3 Distressed 

Rural/ 

Other 
93

Sector State County 

# 

of 

Estabs 

# 

of 

Jobs 

# 

 of 

Components 

SocioEconomic 

Status 

Population 

Class 

Primary 

City(s) 

Wind KY Rowan 2 861 2 At-Risk Rural/ 

Other 

Wind KY Clark 4 680 2 Transitional Metro LexingtonFayette 

Wind KY Rockcastle 1 383 1 At-Risk Micro Richmond, 

Berea 

Wind 

(Biomass 

Solar) 

MD Washington 13 676 7 Competitive Metro 

Hagerstown, 

MD, 

Martinsburg, 

WV 

Wind MS Lowndes 5 535 3 At-Risk Micro Columbus 

Wind MS Prentiss 4 482 1 Transitional Rural/ 

Other 

Wind MS Noxubee 1 188 1 Distressed Rural/ 

Other 

Wind 

(Biomass 

Solar) 

NC Watauga 29 1483 7 Transitional Micro Boone 

Wind NC Buncombe 18 1451 7 Competitive Metro Asheville 

Wind NC Rutherford 11 1017 2 At-Risk Micro Forest City 

Wind 

(Biomass) NC Forsyth 19 639 6 Attainment Metro WinstonSalem 

Wind NC Caldwell 6 618 3 Transitional Metro 

Hickory, 

Lenoir, 

Morganton 

Wind NC Burke 4 469 3 Transitional Metro 

Hickory, 

Lenoir, 

Morganton 

Wind NC Cherokee 2 358 2 At-Risk Rural/ 

Other 

Wind NC Haywood 1 166 1 Transitional Metro Asheville 

Wind NC Jackson 1 128 1 Transitional Rural/ 

Other 
94

Sector State County 

# 

of 

Estabs 

# 

of 

Jobs 

# 

 of 

Components 

SocioEconomic 

Status 

Population 

Class 

Primary 

City(s) 

Wind 

(Biomass 

Solar) 

NY Broome 18 1889 8 Transitional Metro Binghamton 

Wind 

(Biomass 

Solar) 

NY Chautauqua 13 1153 6 Transitional Micro 

Jamestown, 

Dunkirk, 

Fredonia 

Wind 

(Biomass) NY Allegheny 5 696 4 Transitional Rural/ 

Other 

Wind NY Chemung 4 599 4 Transitional Metro Elmira 

Wind NY Tompkins 2 307 2 Transitional Metro Ithaca 

Wind OH Columbiana 13 837 4 Transitional Micro 

East 

LiverpoolSalem 

Wind 

(Biomass 

Solar) 

OH Tuscarawas 15 812 5 Transitional Micro 

New 

Philadelphia, 

Dover 

Wind OH Guernsey 5 710 1 Transitional Micro Cambridge 

Wind OH Gallia 2 437 2 Transitional Micro 

Point 

Pleasant, 

WV 

Wind OH Clermont 13 435 5 Competitive Metro Cincinnati, 

Middletown 

Wind OH Scioto 3 348 2 At-Risk Micro Portsmouth 

Wind OH Coshocton 2 329 2 Transitional Micro Coshocton 

Wind 

(Biomass 

Solar) 

PA Erie 66 5374 8 Transitional Metro Erie 

Wind PA Westmorela

nd 42 2012 6 Competitive Metro Pittsburgh 

Wind 

(Biomass 

Solar) 

PA Allegheny 59 1809 9 Attainment Metro Pittsburgh 

Wind PA Lycoming 17 1715 6 Transitional Metro Williamsport 
95

Sector State County 

# 

of 

Estabs 

# 

of 

Jobs 

# 

 of 

Components 

SocioEconomic 

Status 

Population 

Class 

Primary 

City(s) 

Wind PA Beaver 12 1027 3 Transitional Metro Pittsburgh 

Wind 

(Biomass 

Solar) 

PA Butler 23 970 7 Competitive Metro Pittsburgh 

Wind 

(Biomass 

Solar) 

PA Tioga 5 891 4 Transitional Rural/ 

Other 

Wind PA Mercer 15 844 5 Transitional Metro 

Youngstown

, OH, 

Warren, OH, 

Boardman, 

OH 

Wind PA Luzerne 10 812 3 Transitional Metro 

Scranton, 

WilkesBarre 

Wind PA Crawford 15 678 4 Transitional Micro Meadville 

Wind 

(Biomass) PA Indiana 7 578 4 Transitional Micro Indiana 

Wind PA Mifflin 5 517 2 Transitional Micro Lewistown 

Wind PA Lackawanna 10 513 2 Transitional Metro 

Scranton, 

WilkesBarre 

Wind PA Snyder 4 483 1 Transitional Micro Selinsgrove 

Wind PA Lawrence 10 420 3 Transitional Micro New Castle 

Wind PA Washington 14 372 3 Transitional Metro Pittsburgh 

Wind PA Bradford 1 340 1 Transitional Micro Sayre 

Wind PA Union 2 330 2 Transitional Micro Lewisburg 

Wind 

(Biomass 

Solar) 

PA Cambria 10 303 4 Transitional Metro Johnstown 
96

Sector State County 

# 

of 

Estabs 

# 

of 

Jobs 

# 

 of 

Components 

SocioEconomic 

Status 

Population 

Class 

Primary 

City(s) 

Wind PA Clearfield 1 135 1 At-Risk Micro DuBois 

Wind 

(Biomass) SC Greenville 23 4595 8 Competitive Metro Greenville 

Wind SC Anderson 27 1865 4 Transitional Metro Anderson 

Wind 

(Biomass 

Solar) 

SC Spartanburg 26 1484 7 Transitional Metro Spartanburg 

Wind SC Cherokee 4 1219 3 At-Risk Micro Gaffney 

Wind SC Oconee 5 636 3 Transitional Micro Gaffney 

Wind 

(Biomass 

Solar) 

TN Knox 36 1570 8 Transitional Metro Knoxville 

Wind TN Warren 6 915 3 Transitional Rural/ 

Other 

Wind TN Unicoi 10 911 3 Transitional Metro Johnson City 

Wind 

(Biomass 

Solar) 

TN Anderson 12 843 4 Transitional Metro Knoxville 

Wind TN Hamilton 22 744 4 Competitive Metro Chattanooga 

Wind 

(Biomass 

Solar) 

TN Blount 13 675 5 Transitional Metro Knoxville 

Wind 

(Biomass 

Solar) 

TN Washington 3 657 3 Transitional Metro Johnson City 

Wind TN Hawkins 4 632 3 Transitional Metro 

Kingsport, 

TN, 

Bristol, TN, 

Bristol, VA 

Wind TN McMinn 3 415 2 Transitional Micro Athens 

Wind TN Marion 2 379 2 Transitional Metro Chattanooga 
97

Sector State County 

# 

of 

Estabs 

# 

of 

Jobs 

# 

 of 

Components 

SocioEconomic 

Status 

Population 

Class 

Primary 

City(s) 

Wind TN Rhea 2 377 1 Transitional Rural/ 

Other 

Wind TN Overton 2 224 2 Transitional Micro Cookeville 

Wind TN Macon 1 146 1 Transitional Metro 

NashvilleDavidson, 

Murfreesbor

o 

Wind TN Hancock 1 128 1 Distressed Rural/ 

Other 

Wind VA Russell 1 736 1 Transitional Rural/ 

Other 

Wind VA Smyth 1 708 1 At-Risk Rural/ 

Other 

Wind VA Bristol City 2 362 2 Transitional Metro 

Kingsport, 

TN, Bristol, 

TN, Bristol, 

VA 

Wind VA Covington 

City 1 359 1 Transitional Rural/ Other 

Covington 

City 

Wind VA Pulaski 2 295 1 Transitional Metro 

Blacksburg, 

Christiansbu

rg, Radford 

Wind WV Ritchie 3 1177 1 Distressed Rural/ 

Other 

Wind WV Boone 2 385 1 At-Risk Metro Charleston 

Wind WV Jackson 1 312 1 Transitional Rural/ 

Other 

Wind WV Kanawha 10 204 2 Transitional Metro Charleston 
98

Figure B13. Counties with potential wind job totals over 1,000. 

Counties with Potential Wind Manufacturing Jobs Over 1000

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

Erie

Greenville

Westmoreland

Gwinnett

Broome

Anderson

Allegheny

Lycoming

Knox

Spartanburg

Watauga

Buncombe

Hall

Cherokee

Ritchie

Chautauqua

Jackson

Beaver

Rutherford

PA SC PA GA NY SC PA PA TN SC NC NC GA SC WV NY KY PA NC

Figure B-14. The number of potential establishments and the number of different 

wind components for counties with job totals over 1,000. 

Number of Firms and Components in Counties iwith Potential Wind 

Manufacturing Jobs Over 1000

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Erie

Greenville

Westmoreland

Gwinnett

Broome

Anderson

Allegheny

Lycoming

Knox

Spartanburg

Watauga

Buncombe

Hall

Cherokee

Ritchie

Chautauqua

Jackson

Beaver

Rutherford

PA SC PA GA NY SC PA PA TN SCNC NC GA SCWV NY KY PA NC

Number of

Firms

Number of

Components
99

Appendix C - State Manufacturing Potential Totals 

ALABAMA

Table C-1. Counties in Alabama with concentrated employment totals over 100 

Sector County 

# 

of 

Estabs 

# 

of 

Jobs 

# 

of 

Comps. 

SocioEconomic 

Status 

Pop. 

Class 

Primary 

 City 

Biomass Jefferson 25 1280 12 Transitional Metro Birmingham 

Hoover 

Biomass 

(Solar) Morgan 4 1266 3 Transitional Metro Decatur 

Biomass Marshall 3 699 3 Transitional Micro Albertville 

Wind 

(Biomass 

Solar) 

Madison 8 627 3 Attainment Metro Huntsville 

Biomass 

(Solar Wind) Madison 10 529 9 Attainment Metro Huntsville 

Biomass 

(Solar Wind) De Kalb 2 453 2 Transitional Micro Fort Payne 

Wind 

(Biomass 

Solar) 

De Kalb 2 453 2 Transitional Micro Fort Payne 

Solar 

(Biomass) Morgan 2 444 2 Transitional Metro Decatur 

Biomass Cullman 3 415 3 Transitional Micro Cullman 

Biomass 

 (Solar Wind) Shelby 14 393 9 Attainment Metro Birmingham, 

Hoover 

Wind 

(Biomass 

Solar) 

Marshall 3 360 2 Transitional Micro Albertville 

Biomass Marion 1 310 1 At-Risk Rural/ 

Other 

Wind Marion 1 300 1 At-Risk Rural/ 

Other 

Solar 

(Biomass 

Wind) 

Madison 13 292 5 Attainment Metro Huntsville 
100

Sector County 

# 

of 

Estabs 

# 

of 

Jobs 

# 

of 

Comps. 

SocioEconomic 

Status 

Pop. 

Class 

Primary 

 City 

Biomass Limestone 2 286 2 Transitional Metro Huntsville 

Solar 

(Biomass 

Wind) 

Marshall 2 274 2 Transitional Micro Albertville 

Biomass Jackson 5 263 4 At-Risk Micro Scottsboro 

Solar 

(Biomass 

Wind) 

Jefferson 10 183 4 Transitional Metro Birmingham, 

Hoover 

Biomass Talladega 4 122 3 At-Risk Micro Talladega, 

Sylacuaga 

Biomass Winston 3 111 3 At-Risk Rural/ 

Other 

Figure C-1. Locations of manufacturing facilities by resource type. 

Large circles indicate total employment greater than 1000, ellipses indicate employment 

over 500, and small circles indicate employment over 100. Orange indicates solar 

manufacturing, dark gray indicates biomass, and light gray indicates wind. 
101

GEORGIA

Table C-2. Counties in Georgia with concentrated employment totals over 100. 

Sector County 

# 

of 

Estabs 

# 

of 

Jobs 

# 

of 

Comps. 

SocioEconomic 

Status 

Pop. 

Class 

Primary 

 City 

Wind (Biomass 

Solar) Gwinnett 36 1894 7 Attainment Metro 

Atlanta 

Sandy Springs 

Marietta 

Wind Hall 12 1345 5 Transitional Metro Gainesville 

Biomass (Solar 

Wind) Gwinnett 25 1342 11 Attainment Metro 

Atlanta 

Sandy Springs 

Marietta 

Biomass Barrow 3 1158 2 Transitional Metro 

Atlanta 

Sandy Springs 

Marietta 

Biomass Bartow 3 883 3 Competitive Metro 

Atlanta 

Sandy Springs 

Marietta 

Wind Douglas 5 760 2 Competitive Metro 

Atlanta 

Sandy Springs 

Marietta 

Biomass 

(Solar) Hall 4 697 4 Transitional Metro Gainesville 

Wind Bartow 8 664 3 Competitive Metro 

Atlanta 

Sandy Springs 

Marietta 

Wind Cherokee 8 386 2 Attainment Metro 

Atlanta 

Sandy Springs 

Marietta 

Wind Forsyth 7 363 3 Attainment Metro 

Atlanta 

Sandy Springs 

Marietta 

Biomass Stephens 2 363 2 Transitional Micro Toccoa 

Solar Gwinnett 18 336 7 Attainment Metro 

Atlanta 

Sandy Springs 

Marietta 

Biomass (Solar 

Wind) Cherokee 7 319 5 Attainment Metro 

Atlanta 

Sandy Springs 

Marietta 

Biomass Gordon 2 304 2 Transitional Micro Calhoun 

Solar Douglas 5 267 2 Competitive Metro 

Atlanta 

Sandy Springs 

Marietta 
102

Sector County 

# 

of 

Estabs 

# 

of 

Jobs 

# 

of 

Comps. 

SocioEconomic 

Status 

Pop. 

Class 

Primary 

 City 

Wind Lumpkin 2 261 2 Transitional Rural/ 

Other 

Biomass Douglas 5 247 3 Competitive Metro 

Atlanta 

Sandy Springs 

Marietta 

Solar 

(Biomass) Forsyth 5 225 3 Attainment Metro 

Atlanta 

Sandy Springs 

Marietta 

Solar Whitfield 3 224 3 Competitive Metro Dalton 

Biomass 

(Solar) Jackson 4 201 4 Transitional Rural/ 

Other 

Solar Bartow 4 200 3 Competitive Metro 

Atlanta 

Sandy Springs 

Marietta 

Wind Haralson 3 176 1 Transitional Metro 

Atlanta 

Sandy Springs 

Marietta 

Solar Habersham 1 170 1 Transitional Micro Cornelia 

Solar 

(Biomass) Hall 7 168 3 Transitional Metro Gainesville 

Solar Gordon 3 144 2 Transitional Micro Calhoun 

Solar Lumpkin 1 134 1 Transitional Rural/ 

Other 

Wind Carroll 5 127 3 Transitional Metro 

Atlanta 

Sandy Springs 

Marietta 

Wind Gordon 3 119 1 Transitional Micro Calhoun 

Solar Carroll 3 118 3 Transitional Metro 

Atlanta 

Sandy Springs 

Marietta 

Solar Barrow 5 114 1 Transitional Metro 

Atlanta 

Sandy Springs 

Marietta 

Solar (Biomass 

Wind) Cherokee 3 101 3 Attainment Metro 

Atlanta 

Sandy Springs 

Marietta 
103

Figure C-2. Locations of manufacturing facilities in Georgia by resource type. 

Large circles indicate total employment greater than 1000, ellipses indicate employment 

over 500, and small circles indicate employment over 100. Orange indicates solar 

manufacturing, dark gray indicates biomass, and light gray indicates wind. 
104

KENTUCKY

Table C-3. Counties in Kentucky with concentrated employment totals over 100. 

Sector County 

# 

of 

Estabs 

# 

of 

Jobs 

# 

of 

Comps. 

SocioEconomic 

Status 

Pop. 

Class 

Primary 

City 

Wind Jackson 5 1051 3 Distressed Rural/ Other 

Wind Rowan 2 861 2 At-Risk Rural/ Other 

Solar Madison 2 749 2 Transitional Micro Richmond 

Berea 

Wind Clark 4 680 2 Transitional Metro Lexington 

Fayette 

Biomass Whitley 1 520 1 Distressed Micro Corbin 

Wind Montgomery 4 456 2 Transitional Micro Mount Sterling 

Wind Rockcastle 1 383 1 At-Risk Micro Richmond 

Berea 

Wind Madison 3 344 3 Transitional Micro Richmond 

Berea 

Biomass 

(Solar) Laurel 1 320 1 At-Risk Micro London 

Solar 

(Biomass) Laurel 1 320 1 At-Risk Micro London 

Wind Whitley 3 294 1 Distressed Micro Corbin 

Biomass Madison 3 241 3 Transitional Micro Richmond 

Berea 

Solar Russell 1 180 1 Distressed Rural/ Other 

Biomass Magoffin 1 170 1 Distressed Rural/ Other 
105

Figure C-3. Locations of manufacturing facilities in Kentucky by resource type. 

Large circles indicate total employment greater than 1000, ellipses indicate employment 

over 500, and small circles indicate employment over 100. Orange indicates solar 

manufacturing, dark gray indicates biomass, and light gray indicates wind. 
106

MARYLAND

Table C-4. Counties in Maryland with concentrated employment totals over 100. 

Sector County 

# 

of 

Estabs 

# 

of 

Jobs 

# 

of 

Comps 

SocioEconomic 

Status 

Pop. 

Class 

Primary 

City 

Wind 

(Biomass 

Solar) 

Washington 13 676 7 Competitive Metro Hagerstown, MD, 

Martinsburg, WV 

Solar 

(Biomass 

Wind) 

Washington 10 391 4 Competitive Metro Hagerstown, MD, 

Martinsburg, WV 

Wind Allegany 2 173 1 Transitional Metro Cumberland 

Biomass 

(Solar Wind) Washington 6 88 5 Competitive Metro Hagerstown, MD, 

Martinsburg, WV 

Figure C-4. Locations of manufacturing facilities in Maryland by resource type. 

Large circles indicate total employment greater than 1000, ellipses indicate employment 

over 500, and small circles indicate employment over 100. Orange indicates solar 

manufacturing, dark gray indicates biomass, and light gray indicates wind. 
107

MISSISSIPPI

Table C-5. Counties in Mississippi with concentrated employment totals over 100. 

Sector County 

# 

of 

Estabs 

# 

of 

Jobs 

# 

of 

Components 

SocioEconomic 

Status 

Pop. 

Class 

Primary 

City 

Biomass Lee 3 1160 2 Transitional Micro Tupelo 

Biomass Clay 1 577 1 Distressed Micro West Point 

Wind Lowndes 5 535 3 At-Risk Micro Columbus 

Biomass Winston 1 511 1 Distressed Rural/ 

Other 

Wind Prentiss 4 482 1 Transitional Rural/ 

Other 

Biomass Union 3 436 3 Transitional Rural/ 

Other 

Solar Alcorn 1 401 1 At-Risk Micro Corinth 

Wind Alcorn 4 327 3 At-Risk Micro Corinth 

Solar Monroe 3 318 1 At-Risk Rural/ 

Other 

Biomass Marshall 2 255 2 Distressed Metro Memphis, TN 

Biomass Tishomingo 2 232 2 At-Risk Rural/ 

Other 

Wind Noxubee 1 188 1 Distressed Rural/ 

Other 

Biomass Monroe 1 126 1 At-Risk Rural/ 

Other 

Wind Panola 4 118 2 Distressed Rural/ 

Other 

(Biomass 

Solar Wind) Kemper 2 112 1 Distressed Micro Meridian 
108

Sector County 

# 

of 

Estabs 

# 

of 

Jobs 

# 

of 

Components 

SocioEconomic 

Status 

Pop. 

Class 

Primary 

City 

Wind Lee 2 101 2 Transitional Micro Tupelo 

Figure C-5. Locations of manufacturing facilities in Mississippi by resource type. 

Large circles indicate total employment greater than 1000, ellipses indicate employment 

over 500, and small circles indicate employment over 100. Orange indicates solar 

manufacturing, dark gray indicates biomass, and light gray indicates wind. 
109

NORTH CAROLINA

Table C-6. Counties in North Carolina with concentrated employment totals over 

100. 

Sector County 

# 

of 

Estabs 

# 

of 

Jobs 

# 

of 

Components 

SocioEconomic 

Status 

Pop. 

Class 

Primary 

City 

Solar 

(Biomass 

Wind) 

Watauga 31 1923 6 Transitional Micro Boone 

Biomass 

(Solar) Buncombe 13 1632 9 Competitive Metro Asheville 

Wind 

(Biomass 

Solar) 

Watauga 29 1483 7 Transitional Micro Boone 

Wind Buncombe 18 1451 7 Competitive Metro Asheville 

Biomass 

(Wind) Forsyth 12 1322 9 Attainment Metro WinstonSalem 

Solar Forsyth 11 1319 4 Attainment Metro WinstonSalem 

Solar Burke 2 1277 2 Transitional Metro 

Hickory 

Lenoir 

Morganton 

Biomass 

(Solar Wind) Watauga 16 1052 9 Transitional Micro Boone 

Wind Rutherford 11 1017 2 At-Risk Micro Forest City 

Solar 

(Biomass) Buncombe 9 670 5 Competitive Metro Asheville 

Wind 

(Biomass) Forsyth 19 639 6 Attainment Metro WinstonSalem 

Wind Caldwell 6 618 3 Transitional Metro 

Hickory 

Lenoir 

Morganton 

Biomass Davie 1 578 1 Competitive Metro WinstonSalem 

Biomass Rutherford 2 504 2 At-Risk Micro Forest City 

Wind Burke 4 469 3 Transitional Metro 

Hickory 

Lenoir 

Morganton 
110

Sector County 

# 

of 

Estabs 

# 

of 

Jobs 

# 

of 

Components 

SocioEconomic 

Status 

Pop. 

Class 

Primary 

City 

Wind Cherokee 2 358 2 At-Risk Rural/ 

Other 

Biomass 

 (Solar Wind) Henderson 4 217 3 Competitive Metro Asheville 

Wind Swain 2 169 1 At-Risk Rural/ 

Other 

Wind Haywood 1 166 1 Transitional Metro Asheville 

Solar 

(Biomass 

Wind) 

Henderson 7 139 6 Competitive Metro Asheville 

Wind Jackson 1 128 1 Transitional Rural/ 

Other 

Wind McDowell 3 108 3 At-Risk Rural/ 

Other 

Figure C-6. Locations of manufacturing facilities in North Carolina by resource 

type. 

Large circles indicate total employment greater than 1000, ellipses indicate employment 

over 500, and small circles indicate employment over 100. Yellow indicates solar 

manufacturing, green indicates biomass, and blue indicates wind. 
111

NEW YORK

Table C-7. Counties in New York with concentrated employment totals over 100. 

Sector County 

# 

of 

Estabs 

# 

of 

Jobs 

# 

of 

Components 

SocioEconomic 

Status 

Pop. 

Class 

Primary 

City 

Biomass Steuben 8 1905 5 Transitional Micro Corning 

Wind 

(Biomass 

Solar) 

Broome 18 1889 8 Transitional Metro Binghamton 

Biomass 

(Wind) Allegany 2 1253 2 Transitional Rural/ Other 

Wind 

(Biomass 

Solar) 

Chautauqua 13 1153 6 Transitional Micro 

Jamestown 

Dunkirk 

Fredonia 

Biomass Cattaraugus 4 1119 3 Transitional Micro Olean 

Biomass Cortland 2 713 2 Transitional Micro Cortland 

Wind 

(Biomass) Allegany 5 696 4 Transitional Rural/ Other 

Wind Chemung 4 599 4 Transitional Metro Elmira 

Solar Steuben 3 546 1 Transitional Micro Corning 

Biomass 

(Solar Wind) Chautauqua 4 530 4 Transitional Micro 

Jamestown 

Dunkirk 

Fredonia 

Biomass Chemung 3 373 3 Transitional Metro Elmira 

Wind 

(Biomass 

Solar) 

Ostego 7 315 4 Transitional Micro Oneonta 

Wind Tompkins 2 307 2 Transitional Metro Ithaca 

Biomass 

(Solar Wind) Broome 9 296 6 Transitional Metro Binghamton 

Solar 

(Biomass 

Wind) 

Broome 12 279 6 Transitional Metro Binghamton 
112

Sector County 

# 

of 

Estabs 

# 

of 

Jobs 

# 

of 

Components 

SocioEconomic 

Status 

Pop. 

Class 

Primary 

City 

Solar Cattaraugus 1 279 1 Transitional Micro Olean 

Solar Allegany 1 176 1 Transitional Rural/ Other 

Solar 

(Biomass 

Wind) 

Chautauqua 3 146 2 Transitional Micro 

Jamestown 

Dunkirk 

Fredonia 

Biomass Schuyler 1 145 1 Transitional Rural/ Other 

Wind Schoharie 3 129 2 Transitional Rural/ Other 

Wind Delaware 3 128 3 Transitional Rural/ Other 

Wind Tioga 4 123 3 Transitional Metro Binghamton 

Solar Chemung 3 113 2 Transitional Metro Elmira 

Wind Cattaraugus 4 111 3 Transitional Micro Olean 

Figure C-7. Locations of manufacturing facilities in New York by resource type. 

Large circles indicate total employment greater than 1000, ellipses indicate employment 

over 500, and small circles indicate employment over 100. Orange indicates solar 

manufacturing, dark gray indicates biomass, and light gray indicates wind. 
113

OHIO

Table C-8. Counties in Ohio with concentrated employment totals over 100. 

Sector County 

# 

of 

Estabs 

# 

of 

Jobs 

# 

of 

Components 

SocioEconomic 

Status 

Pop. 

Class 

Primary 

City 

Biomass 

(Solar Wind) Tuscarawas 9 861 7 Transitional Micro New Philadelphia 

Dover 

Wind Columbiana 13 837 4 Transitional Micro East LiverpoolSalem 

Wind 

(Biomass 

Solar) 

Tuscarawas 15 812 5 Transitional Micro New Philadelphia 

Dover 

Solar Washington 6 803 2 Transitional Metro 

Parkersburg, WV 

Marietta, OH, 

Vienna, WV 

Solar Muskingum 5 712 3 Transitional Micro Zanesville 

Wind Guernsey 5 710 1 Transitional Micro Cambridge 

Wind Gallia 2 437 2 Transitional Micro Point Pleasant, WV 

Wind Clermont 13 435 5 Competitive Metro Cincinnati 

Middletown 

Wind Highland 4 429 2 Transitional Rural/ 

Other 

Biomass Columbiana 13 392 9 Transitional Micro East Liverpool 

Salem 

Wind Scioto 3 348 2 At-Risk Micro Portsmouth 

Wind Muskingum 4 331 3 Transitional Micro Zanesville 

Wind Coshocton 2 329 2 Transitional Micro Coshocton 

Solar 

(Biomass 

Wind) 

Tuscarawas 5 328 4 Transitional Micro New Philadelphia 

Dover 

Biomass Lawrence 5 317 4 At-Risk Metro Huntington, WV 

Ashland, KY 
114

Sector County 

# 

of 

Estabs 

# 

of 

Jobs 

# 

of 

Components 

SocioEconomic 

Status 

Pop. 

Class 

Primary 

City 

Wind Jackson 4 244 3 At-Risk Rural/ 

Other 

Wind Washington 7 176 3 Transitional Metro 

Parkersburg, WV 

Marietta, OH, 

Vienna, WV 

Solar Guernsey 4 150 3 Transitional Micro Cambridge 

Solar Hocking 1 150 1 Transitional Rural/ 

Other 

Solar Clermont 6 144 5 Competitive Metro Cincinnati, 

Middletown 

Wind Holmes 7 127 2 Transitional Rural/ 

Other 

Solar Lawrence 2 107 2 At-Risk Metro Huntington, WV 

Ashland, KY 

Figure 8. Locations of manufacturing facilities in Ohio by resource type. 

Large circles indicate total employment greater than 1000, ellipses indicate employment 

over 500, and small circles indicate employment over 100. Orange indicates solar 

manufacturing, dark gray indicates biomass, and light gray indicates wind. 
115

PENNSYLVANIA

Table C-9. Counties in Pennsylvania with concentrated employment totals over 100. 

Sector County 

# 

of 

Estabs 

# 

of 

Jobs 

# 

of 

 Components 

SocioEconomic 

 Status 

Pop. 

Class 

Primary 

City 

Biomass 

(Solar Wind) Erie 40 6835 15 Transitional Metro Erie 

Biomass 

(Solar Wind) Allegheny 63 6202 15 Attainment Metro Pittsburgh 

Solar 

(Biomass Wind) Allegheny 40 2612 8 Attainment Metro Pittsburgh 

Biomass 

(Solar) Westmoreland 27 2265 13 Competitive Metro Pittsburgh 

Biomass Fulton 2 1889 2 Transitional Rural/ 

Other 

Wind Lycoming 17 1715 6 Transitional Metro Williamsport 

Solar 

(Biomass) Westmoreland 19 1487 7 Competitive Metro Pittsburgh 

Biomass 

Solar) Washington 15 1385 6 Transitional Metro Pittsburgh 

Biomass Luzerne 18 1163 9 Transitional Metro Scranton 

Wilkes-Barre 

Solar Luzerne 12 1152 4 Transitional Metro Scranton 

Wilkes-Barre 

Wind Beaver 12 1027 3 Transitional Metro Pittsburgh 

Solar 

(Biomass Wind) Erie 25 977 8 Transitional Metro Erie 

Wind Mercer 15 844 5 Transitional Metro 

Youngstown, 

OH, Warren, 

OH, Boardman, 

OH 

Wind Luzerne 10 812 3 Transitional Metro Scranton 

Wilkes-Barre 

Biomass 

 (Solar) Beaver 7 783 6 Transitional Metro Pittsburgh 
116

Sector County 

# 

of 

Estabs 

# 

of 

Jobs 

# 

of 

 Components 

SocioEconomic 

 Status 

Pop. 

Class 

Primary 

City 

Solar Schuylkill 7 702 3 Transitional Micro Pottsville 

Wind Crawford 15 678 4 Transitional Micro Meadville 

Biomass 

(Solar Wind) Cambria 8 645 4 Transitional Metro Johnstown 

Biomass Mercer 11 608 7 Transitional Metro 

Youngstown, 

OH, Warren, 

OH, Boardman, 

OH 

Solar 

(Biomass) Beaver 9 600 5 Transitional Metro Pittsburgh 

Biomass Schuylkill 6 516 4 Transitional Micro Pottsville 

Wind Lackawanna 10 513 2 Transitional Metro Scranton 

Wilkes-Barre 

Biomass Lycoming 7 503 6 Transitional Metro Williamsport 

Solar 

(Biomass) Washington 8 488 3 Transitional Metro Pittsburgh 

Biomass Centre 7 474 4 Transitional Metro State College 

Biomass Mifflin 3 471 3 Transitional Micro Lewistown 

Biomass 

(Solar Wind) Butler 15 470 11 Competitive Metro Pittsburgh 

Wind Jefferson 7 470 4 Transitional Rural/ 

Other 

Wind Bedford 4 454 2 Transitional Rural/ 

Other 

Solar Lackawanna 14 424 3 Transitional Metro Scranton 

Wilkes-Barre 

Wind Lawrence 10 420 3 Transitional Micro New Castle 
117

Sector County 

# 

of 

Estabs 

# 

of 

Jobs 

# 

of 

 Components 

SocioEconomic 

 Status 

Pop. 

Class 

Primary 

City 

Biomass Bedford 2 402 1 Transitional Rural/ 

Other 

Biomass Northumberlan

d 2 349 3 Transitional Micro Sunbury 

Wind Bradford 1 340 1 Transitional Micro Sayre 

Solar Crawford 2 337 2 Transitional Micro Meadville 

Biomass 

(Wind) Indiana 8 332 5 Transitional Micro Indiana 

Biomass Jefferson 5 307 5 Transitional Rural/ 

Other 

Biomass Warren 4 299 4 Transitional Metro/ 

Micro 

Allentown, 

Bethlehem/ 

Warren 

Wind Blair 3 296 3 Transitional Metro Altoona 

Solar 

(Biomass Wind) Monroe 6 292 3 Transitional Micro East 

Stroudsburg 

Biomass 

 (Solar Wind) Somerset 6 241 6 Transitional Micro Somerset 

Biomass Lawrence 7 232 5 Transitional Micro New Castle 

Wind Centre 3 226 2 Transitional Metro State College 

Biomass McKean 2 210 2 Transitional Micro Bradford 

Solar Lawrence 3 185 2 Transitional Micro New Castle 

Solar Mercer 6 177 3 Transitional Metro 

Youngstown, 

OH, Warren, 

OH, Boardman, 

OH 

Wind Carbon 5 154 2 Transitional Metro Allentown, 

Bethlehem 
118

Sector County 

# 

of 

Estabs 

# 

of 

Jobs 

# 

of 

 Components 

SocioEconomic 

 Status 

Pop. 

Class 

Primary 

City 

Biomass 

(Solar Wind) Monroe 2 148 2 Transitional Micro East 

Stroudsburg 

Solar Armstrong 1 137 1 Transitional Metro Pittsburgh 

Wind Clearfield 1 135 1 At-Risk Micro DuBois 

Biomass 

(Solar Wind) Tioga 1 131 1 Transitional Rural/ 

Other 

Solar 

(Biomass Wind) Tioga 1 131 1 Transitional Rural/ 

Other 

Solar Huntingdon 1 115 1 At-Risk Micro Huntington 

Solar 

(Biomass Wind) Butler 6 113 3 Competitive Metro Pittsburgh 

Figure C-9. Locations of manufacturing facilities in Pennsylvania by resource type. 

Large circles indicate total employment greater than 1000, ellipses indicate employment 

over 500, and small circles indicate employment over 100. Orange indicates solar 

manufacturing, dark gray indicates biomass, and light gray indicates wind. 
119

SOUTH CAROLINA

Table C-10. Counties in South Carolina with concentrated employment totals over 

100. 

Sector County 

# 

of 

Estabs 

# 

of 

Jobs 

# 

of 

Components 

SocioEconomic 

Status 

Pop. 

Class Primary City 

Wind 

(Biomass) Greenville 23 4595 8 Competitive Metro Greenville 

Biomass 

(Solar Wind) Greenville 19 3715 8 Competitive Metro Greenville 

Biomass 

(Solar Wind) Spartanburg 17 1944 13 Transitional Metro Spartanburg 

Wind Anderson 27 1865 4 Transitional Metro Anderson 

Solar 

(Biomass) Greenville 15 1485 5 Competitive Metro Greenville 

Wind 

(Biomass Solar) Spartanburg 26 1484 7 Transitional Metro Spartanburg 

Solar 

(Biomass 

Wind) 

Spartanburg 10 1322 5 Transitional Metro Spartanburg 

Wind Cherokee 4 1219 3 At-Risk Micro Gaffney 

Solar Oconee 2 860 2 Transitional Micro Seneca 

Wind Oconee 5 636 3 Transitional Micro Seneca 

Solar Anderson 9 339 3 Transitional Metro Anderson 

Wind Pickens 7 237 3 Transitional Metro Greenville 

Biomass Anderson 4 134 3 Transitional Metro Anderson 
120

Figure C-10. Locations of manufacturing facilities in South Carolina by resource 

type. 

Large circles indicate total employment greater than 1000, ellipses indicate employment 

over 500, and small circles indicate employment over 100. Orange indicates solar 

manufacturing, dark gray indicates biomass, and light gray indicates wind. 
121

TENNESSEE

Table C-11. Counties in Tennessee with concentrated employment totals over 100. 

Sector County 

# 

of 

Estabs 

# 

of 

Jobs 

# 

of 

Components 

SocioEconomic 

Status 

Pop. 

Class 

Primary 

City 

Biomass 

(Solar) Hamilton 29 3322 12 Competitive Metro Chattanooga 

Wind 

(Biomass 

Solar) 

Knox 36 1570 8 Transitional Metro Knoxville 

Biomass Warren 3 1297 3 Transitional Rural/ 

Other 

Biomass 

(Solar) Putnam 11 934 8 Transitional Micro Cookeville 

Wind Warren 6 915 3 Transitional Rural/ 

Other 

Biomass 

(Solar Wind) Greene 10 914 8 Transitional Micro Greeneville 

Wind Unicoi 10 911 3 Transitional Metro Johnson City 

Wind 

(Biomass 

Solar) 

Anderson 12 843 4 Transitional Metro Knoxville 

Biomass 

(Solar Wind) Washington 9 783 7 Transitional Metro Johnson City 

Wind Hamilton 22 744 4 Competitive Metro Chattanooga 

Solar Hawkins 2 723 2 Transitional Metro 

Kingsport, TN 

Bristol, TN 

Bristol, VA 

Wind 

(Biomass 

Solar) 

Blount 13 675 5 Transitional Metro Knoxville 

Solar 

(Biomass) Hamilton 16 670 6 Competitive Metro Chattanooga 

Wind 

(Biomass 

Solar) 

Washington 3 657 3 Transitional Metro Johnson City 

Wind Hawkins 4 632 3 Transitional Metro 

Kingsport, TN 

Bristol, TN 

Bristol, VA 
122

Sector County 

# 

of 

Estabs 

# 

of 

Jobs 

# 

of 

Components 

SocioEconomic 

Status 

Pop. 

Class 

Primary 

City 

Wing White 6 450 4 Transitional Rural/ 

Other 

Solar 

(Biomass 

Wind) 

Knox 8 417 5 Transitional Metro Knoxville 

Wind McMinn 3 415 2 Transitional Micro Athens 

Wind Marion 2 379 2 Transitional Metro Chattanooga 

Wind Sullivan 9 378 4 Transitional Metro 

Kingsport, TN 

Bristol, TN 

Bristol, VA 

Wind Rhea 2 377 1 Transitional Rural/ 

Other 

Biomass 

(Solar Wind) Knox 13 355 9 Transitional Metro Knoxville 

Biomass Monroe 1 350 1 Transitional Rural/ 

Other 

Biomass Rhea 1 336 1 Transitional Rural/ 

Other 

Wind Hamblen 5 323 3 Transitional Metro Morristown 

Solar 

(Biomass) Hamblen 4 321 3 Transitional Metro Morristown 

Solar Sullivan 1 304 1 Transitional Metro 

Kingsport, TN 

Bristol, TN 

Bristol, VA 

Wind Franklin 3 296 1 Transitional Micro Tullahoma 

Wind Monroe 3 259 3 Transitional Rural/ 

Other 

Solar Loudon 1 226 1 Transitional Metro Knoxville 

Wind Overton 2 224 2 Transitional Micro Cookeville 
123

Sector County 

# 

of 

Estabs 

# 

of 

Jobs 

# 

of 

Components 

SocioEconomic 

Status 

Pop. 

Class 

Primary 

City 

Biomass 

(Solar) Bradley 2 188 2 Competitive Metro Cleveland 

Biomass 

(Solar Wind) Anderson 7 184 5 Transitional Metro Knoxville 

Solar De Kalb 1 176 1 Transitional Rural/ 

Other 

Wind 

(Biomass 

Solar) 

Greene 4 176 3 Transitional Micro Greeneville 

Wind Union 2 169 2 At-Risk Metro Knoxville 

Biomass Coffee 1 168 1 Transitional Micro Tullahoma 

Solar Cocke 1 167 1 At-Risk Micro Newport 

Solar Sequatchie 2 160 2 Transitional Metro Chattanooga 

Solar 

(Biomass) Bradley 1 154 1 Competitive Metro Cleveland 

Biomass 

(Solar) Hamblen 1 152 1 Transitional Metro Morristown 

Wind Johnson 2 148 2 Distressed Rural/ 

Other 

Wind Macon 1 146 1 Transitional Metro 

NashvilleDavidson 

Murfreesboro 

Wind Putnam 5 137 1 Transitional Micro Cookeville 

Wind Hancock 1 128 1 Distressed Rural/ 

Other 

Solar 

(Biomass 

Wind) 

Greene 3 114 2 Transitional Micro Greeneville 

Biomass 

(Solar Wind) Blount 5 107 4 Transitional Metro Knoxville 
124

Sector County 

# 

of 

Estabs 

# 

of 

Jobs 

# 

of 

Components 

SocioEconomic 

Status 

Pop. 

Class 

Primary 

City 

Wind Campbell 3 107 3 At-Risk Rural/ 

Other 

Biomass Cumberland 3 107 2 Transitional Micro Crossville 

Figure C-11. Locations of manufacturing facilities in Tennessee by resource type. 

Large circles indicate total employment greater than 1000, ellipses indicate employment 

over 500, and small circles indicate employment over 100. Orange indicates solar 

manufacturing, dark gray indicates biomass, and light gray indicates wind. 
125

VIRGINIA

Table C-12. Counties in Virginia with concentrated employment totals over 100. 

Sector County 

# 

of 

Estabs 

# 

of 

Jobs 

# 

of 

Components 

SocioEconomic 

Status 

Pop. 

Class 

Primary 

City 

Biomass 

(Solar) Bristol City 5 3112 4 Transitional Metro 

Kingsport, TN 

Bristol, TN 

Bristol, VA 

Wind Russell 1 736 1 Transitional Rural/ Other 

Wind Smyth 1 708 1 At-Risk Rural/ Other 

Biomass Washington 3 444 3 Transitional Metro 

Kingsport, TN 

Bristol, TN 

Bristol, VA 

Wind Bristol City 2 362 2 Transitional Metro 

Kingsport, TN 

Bristol, TN 

Bristol, VA 

Wind Covington 

City 1 359 1 Transitional Rural/ Other Covington City 

Biomass Buena Vista 

City 2 331 2 Transitional Rural/ Other Buena Vista City 

Biomass Rockbridge 2 319 2 Transitional Rural/ Other 

Solar 

(Biomass) Bristol City 2 295 1 Transitional Metro 

Kingsport, TN 

Bristol, TN 

Bristol, VA 

Wind Pulaski 2 295 1 Transitional Metro 

Blacksburg, 

Christiansburg, 

Radford 

Biomass 

(Solar) Bland 2 276 2 Transitional Rural/ Other 

Biomass 

(Solar) Tazewell 5 221 5 Transitional Micro Bluefield, WV 

Wind Washington 4 197 2 Transitional Metro 

Kingsport, TN 

Bristol, TN 

Bristol, VA 

Wind Tazewell 6 191 3 Transitional Micro Bluefield, WV 

Solar 

(Biomass) Tazewell 3 185 3 Transitional Micro Bluefield, WV 
126

Sector County 

# 

of 

Estabs 

# 

of 

Jobs 

# 

of 

Components 

SocioEconomic 

Status 

Pop. 

Class 

Primary 

City 

Solar Covington 

City 1 164 1 Transitional Rural/ Other Covington City 

Wind Montgomery 2 157 2 At-Risk Metro 

Blacksburg 

Christiansburg 

Radford 

Wind Botetourt 2 142 1 Attainment Rural/ Other 

Figure C-12. Locations of manufacturing facilities in Virginia by resource type. 

Large circles indicate total employment greater than 1000, ellipses indicate employment 

over 500, and small circles indicate employment over 100. Orange indicates solar 

manufacturing, dark gray indicates biomass, and light gray indicates wind. 
127

WEST VIRGINA

Table C-13. Counties in West Virginia with concentrated employment totals over 

100. 

Sector County 

# 

of 

Estabs 

# 

of 

Jobs 

# 

of 

Components 

SocioEconomic 

Status 

Pop. 

Class 

Primary 

City 

Solar Wood 3 2710 2 Transitional Metro 

Parkersburg, WV 

Marietta, OH Vienna, 

WV 

Wind Ritchie 3 1177 1 Distressed Rural/ 

Other 

Biomass Hancock 2 588 2 Transitional Metro Weirton, WV, 

Steubenville, OH 

Wind Boone 2 385 1 At-Risk Metro Charleston 

Biomass 

(Solar Wind) Cabell 6 318 6 Transitional Metro Huntington, WV 

Ashland, KY 

Wind Jackson 1 312 1 Transitional Rural/ 

Other 

Solar 

(Biomass 

Wind) 

Cabell 6 308 5 Transitional Metro Huntington, WV 

Ashland, KY 

Solar Mason 3 281 3 Distressed Micro Point Pleasant, WV 

Wind Ohio 4 281 3 Transitional Metro Wheeling 

Solar Harrison 2 266 2 Transitional Micro Clarksburg 

Solar Marion 1 224 1 Transitional Micro Fairmont 

Biomass Greenbrier 1 206 1 At-Risk Rural/ 

Other 

Wind Kanawha 10 204 2 Transitional Metro Charleston 

Biomass 

(Solar Wind) Raleigh 6 182 5 Transitional Micro Beckley 

Wind Wood 3 164 2 Transitional Metro 

Parkersburg, WV 

Marietta, OH Vienna, 

WV 
128

Sector County 

# 

of 

Estabs 

# 

of 

Jobs 

# 

of 

Components 

SocioEconomic 

Status 

Pop. 

Class 

Primary 

City 

Wind Harrison 3 139 2 Transitional Micro Clarksburg 

Wind Putnam 5 139 2 Competitive Metro Charleston 

Biomass Brooke 1 128 1 Transitional Metro Weirton, WV 

Steubenville, OH 

Wind Greenbrier 3 122 3 At-Risk Rural/ 

Other 

Biomass Kanawha 4 120 3 Transitional Metro Charleston 

Solar Wayne 1 118 1 At-Risk Metro Huntington, WV 

Ashland, KY 

Wind Cabell 5 114 2 Transitional Metro Huntington, WV 

Ashland, KY 

Figure 13. Locations of manufacturing facilities in West Virginia by resource type. 

Large circles indicate total employment greater than 1000, ellipses indicate employment 

over 500, and small circles indicate employment over 100. Orange indicates solar 

manufacturing, dark gray indicates biomass, and light gray indicates wind.