Posted Thu, May 13, 2010 at 10:27 AM

The preliminary draft of my research work has been completed and is nearly 100 pages long including 23 tables and 18 Figures. I will continue to revise and edit it to ensure that it is of the highest quality and accuracy before being published and internationally released within the coming weeks.

While revising non-essential data in the appendix I found the only error so far and it is with the 'household' analysis posted above. The 0.16/KWh is the rate at MY location, NOT in Champaign County (yes, it is insanely expensive here).  Apparently, it was a bit late and I had overdosed on coffee that 'evening' - lesson learned! The revised version with a more appropriate title is posted below. Apologies! I'm still human!

Proposed 175MW Everpower Energy Production Analysis
331,000 to 460,000 megawatt hours (MWh) of electricity each year (EVERPOWER DEV APP PG 2)

460,000 / 12 = 38333.33(MWh) per month X 1000 = 38,333,333.33 (KWh) per month

Home Power Rate 0.06495 + [(0.06495)(0.2)] = (0.07794) Adjusted Power Rate (Assumes: 20% increase in cost for the 'green' energy)

(0.07794) X 38,333,333.33 (KWh) per month = $2,987,699.99 power generation related revenue per month  

X 12 months = $35,852,399.99 power generation related revenue per year

Note:  The 0.06495/KWh figure was taken from August 2009 Pioneer Rural Electric Monthly Bill

Posted Thu, May 27, 2010 at 11:05 AM

Right.  

So, the university apparently owns my work, that is until it is published in an academic journal and then it becomes complicated and generally annoying.

How do you short circuit all the red tape so it can become 'public'?

You simply change it until it is different.  

Luckily, the project size changed after the OPSB decision and more information has come out.  I'll work on that after things are finished up for this semester, it's pretty full on right now.

Posted Tue, June 15, 2010 at 9:54 AM

I saw that OPSB approved up to 135MW (54 turbines rated at 2.5MW each) on their website.  They are normally quite good at this, however, i would like to confirm it.  Everpower still seems hell bent on the 150MW project size according to their website.

Can this community confirm that this is the appropriate and most current information?

I will make amendments to the modelling environment assumptions, re-run the data for public use and put together a new report. Please provide a source (author, year, title, url if available).

Cheers!

Posted Sun, June 20, 2010 at 8:22 AM

I will run a new set of data through an updated model using a project size of 135MW (54 turbines).

I will post the data sets shortly.

Source:
http://www.opsb.ohio.gov/opsb/mediaroom/mediarelease.cfm?id=4355

Posted Sun, June 20, 2010 at 10:46 AM

I updated the modelling environment with the new project size, adjusted a few of the assumption parameters with information that has become available and created new analysis excel sheets. Two of the excel sheets are roughly 500 rows long by 15 columns wide still - absolutely massive...

I'll review the data, analyse it and prepare a write up...

Posted Mon, July 5, 2010 at 7:26 AM

What's taking so long? Seriously, I'm asking myself this also...

Red Tape (copyright clearance with the uni, awaiting marks and so on)
I took a much needed 'break' in Tasmania...
Did a bit of solar research in Victoria and Tasmania
Now preparing to evacuate Australia...

Posted Tue, August 3, 2010 at 11:20 PM

I took care of the Red Tape!

I will update the data again, but first I require a bit of information from the community before proceeding. After that I will begin to prepare a brief report or media release from various working papers and databases.

Does anyone have any new information about the development related to the sourcing of materials, components and services that are produced or sourced from Logan, Union and or Champaign counties?

A bit of healthy conversation is needed!

Cheers and Best Regards!

Posted Mon, August 16, 2010 at 9:48 PM

I have made revised extracts of the research temporarily available at the following URL:

http://uohrtemporaryiso.blogspot.com/

Notes: Assumes the installation of 54 turbines (130MW) in LUC geographic area. Information has been removed from this text including, but not limited to data, sources, modeling assumptions and certain tables/charts.Text is written in Australian English. Text is highly edited and of a limited nature as the original report is approximately 100 pages in length excluding raw and processed data. This research was conducted from a non-biased perspective as scientific research.

The results of this research are exposed to chaotic dynamics due to limitations of the modelling environment including, but not limited to numerical rounding, limited assumption data, ECT.

Abstract
Wind energy has become an increasingly popular form of renewable energy infrastructure resulting in its integration with the economies, communities and landscapes of rural areas.  Communities undergoing wind development generally perceive that socio-economic benefits will accrue and qualitative studies have found that community wind structures are preferable over corporate ones, yet lack supporting quantitative data. This research study uses the proposed Everpower wind development, to be located in Logan-Union-Champaign counties of Ohio, as a hypothetical modelling environment to investigate how funding structure affects the level of socio-economic impacts. The aim of this research is to determine the socio-economic impacts of the wind development and to examine the effects of various funding structures. To achieve the research aim, the following primary research questions were proposed: What are the socio-economic impacts of the development and what trends are revealed when comparing the socio-economic impacts arising from corporate, community, hybrid-equity and hybrid-local debt funding structures? Analysis of the Everpower development application, four National Renewable Energy Laboratories Jobs and Economic Development Impact funding structure scenario models and a review of relevant literature were conducted to assist in answering the questions. The corporate funding structure of the Everpower development was found to provide minimal socio-economic benefits to the local area primarily due to the incorporation and reliance upon foreign private equity. This research found that increasingly localized funding structures significantly increase the level of accrued socio-economic benefits by more than 250%. The incorporation of community shares and or local debt financing was found to have the limited ability to offset the negative effects of external equity and reinforce the wider economy due to increased activity in finance industry. The current policy environment fails to seriously consider socio-economic impacts, reduce economic externalities to the United States economy and ensure equitable democratic control, legal and or ethical accountability. The quantitative findings of this research provide the groundwork for an alternative and innovative planning approach focused to maximize socio-economic benefits, minimize costs and equitably distribute the costs and benefits of wind energy, while improving community engagement, economic participation and streamlining the planning process.

Posted Thu, August 26, 2010 at 12:15 PM

Temporary Research Release Expired

Posted Fri, August 27, 2010 at 9:10 AM

On May 13, 2010, at 10:45 AM, Josh _ said:

The preliminary draft of my research work has been completed and is nearly 100 pages long including 23 tables and 18 Figures. I will continue to revise and edit it to ensure that it is of the highest quality and accuracy before being published and internationally released within the coming weeks.

While revising non-essential data in the appendix I found the only error so far and it is with the 'household' analysis posted above. The 0.16/KWh is the rate at MY location, NOT in Champaign County (yes, it is insanely expensive here).  Apparently, it was a bit late and I had overdosed on coffee that 'evening' - lesson learned! The revised version with a more appropriate title is posted below. Apologies! I'm still human!

Proposed 175MW Everpower Energy Production Analysis

331,000 to 460,000 megawatt hours (MWh) of electricity each year (EVERPOWER DEV APP PG 2)

460,000 / 12 = 38333.33(MWh) per month X 1000 = 38,333,333.33 (KWh) per month

Home Power Rate 0.06495 + [(0.06495)(0.2)] = (0.07794) Adjusted Power Rate (Assumes: 20% increase in cost for the 'green' energy)

(0.07794) X 38,333,333.33 (KWh) per month = $2,987,699.99 power generation related revenue per month  

X 12 months = $35,852,399.99 power generation related revenue per year

Note:  The 0.06495/KWh figure was taken from August 2009 Pioneer Rural Electric Monthly Bill

Josh,

I believe the power will be sold to a large entity like Duke or someone else at a lower rate than what you used for your figures. The end result will be affected as will the total dollars you suggested. The market to which the power is to be sold may fetch higher or lower rates for the power than you have used.

Additionally, I didn't see any mention of their total dollars of investment in order for them to generate the suggested revenue. It kinda makes your report to be a one-sided affair as opposed to an unbiased report. Was that your objective ? You have also not included any value to the county for the improvements to the county and township roads at intersections where the construction will have to make turns to get to the properties in question.

Regards,

Joe Slater

Posted Sat, August 28, 2010 at 10:25 PM

Joe,

I find it interesting they have not indicated who will be purchasing the produced energy. The above calculation is for the 175MW facility (not the current 135MW facility) and assumes a 20% increase in current electricity costs, which is rather generous considering green energy sells for about 20% more than current power rates and the cost of energy is on the increase.  As you point out it will vary depending on a number of factors. The calculation above was conducted simply to draw a line of further query in the research text, it was not used in the modeling environment.

The total investment amount for the 135MW facility was estimated to be approximately $312,039,391inclusive of various infrastructure improvements. The research questions are above in the abstract.

There are no sides in the quantitative sciences. You either have the data to confirm your hypothesis or research question/s or you do not. It is that simple. Research has limitations that you have to understand and disclose. Chaotic dynamics make absolute answers impossible to derive, for example, the number of local employees will change over the facilities 20 year expected lifetime. How funding structure impacts the level of socio-economic benefits for renewable energy infrastructure is an emerging field of research, thus the model, data, analysis and drafts must be updated and revised prior to international publishing.

(GO needs a save draft button)

Posted Sun, August 29, 2010 at 12:25 PM

In regards to my previous post, it should be understood that the modeling environment is designed to comprehensively examine socio-economic impacts, not regenerate Everpower or any other companies financial information or projections - as that was not the intention of the research.