Wind power is the fastest growing source of electricity generation in the United States. In 2003, the installed U.S. wind power capacity increased by 1,700 megawatts (MW) to a total of 6,374 MW.1 Most of this additional capacity came in large projects of 50 MW or more, typically owned by strategic investors who have developed or acquired a portfolio of projects. As wind power generation continues to grow, these large projects and experienced developers will likely continue to dominate wind power development. Because of their scale and access to capital, these large projects are the fastest way to move towards increasing renewable energy’s share of the generation mix—and they provide significant economic benefits to the communities where they are located, from payments to farmers for wind rights and turbine easements to construction-related spending to permanent operations and the maintenance staff at each project.

At the same time, there has been a growing interest in community wind power development. While the notion of community wind varies, these projects are generally smaller scale (less than 20 MW), and are locally initiated and owned. Projects range from single turbines erected by municipal utilities, school districts and tribal reservations to larger multi-turbine installations owned by one or more local investors and landowners. These projects may capture and retain more of the economic benefits locally (both construction-related and ongoing returns) and drive continued reinvestment in the communities. As a result, community wind projects often enjoy more favorable community support than large-scale commercial projects.

There have been numerous publications and conferences on community wind development, but less specific attention on options for project structuring and financing. The goal of this handbook is to identify critical financing issues and present several possible financing models that reflect the differing financial positions and investment goals of various project owners/developers.

The handbook includes six sections:

• Section I describes various models for community wind power ownership.

• Section II examines sources of equity and debt financing and the steps necessary to secure this financing.

• Section III identifies federal grant and loan programs and state incentives for wind power development.

• Section IV reviews the federal tax incentives supporting wind power projects, the impact of these incentives on project economics, and limitations on utilizing these incentives.

• Section V examines power purchase agreements and the value of green tags to community wind power projects.

• The Appendix contains a list of operating community wind projects in the United States and a list of project consultants and financing resources.

The Beacon Hill Institute at Suffolk University has studied the Cape Wind proposal in considerable detail, and offers the following comments on the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) Reference file no. NAE-2004-338-1:

1. A systematic cost-benefit analysis – missing from the DEIS – shows that, with 90% confidence, the costs of the project outweigh the benefits by between $83 million and $333 million, with a mean measure of net cost of $209 million (equivalent to 2.0 cents/kWh produced).

2. The DEIS conclusion of “no adverse impacts to tourism and recreation” is not supported by the data.

3. The DEIS conclusion that the project would not adversely affect property values is based on a flawed study, ignores other research, and is untenable.

4. The DEIS estimates of the value of health improvements are greatly exaggerated (at $53 million annually). Our own estimates show health improvements of $7 million, and even this may be overstated.

Background and Purpose:

Vermont’s energy needs are growing while its future energy sources remain uncertain. At the same time, Agency lands are under ever-increasing pressure to serve more uses and needs. Part of meeting Vermont’s future energy needs will likely involve development of additional renewable energy sources in Vermont. The role of Agency of Natural Resource (ANR) lands in accommodating wind energy and other renewable energy projects has been the subject of recent public debate and is the focus of this policy.

"In a number of European nations, offshore wind farms are well established. However, in the United States, the concept is relatively new and an established approval process for offshore wind farm permitting does not yet exist. This document identifies the approval process one would need to take in order to site an offshore wind farm in coastal waters of the U.S., particularly North Carolina."

Editor's Note: The U.S. Minerals Management Service, a branch of the Interior Department, has review responsibility for offshore projects per the 2005 Energy Policy Act passed in May 2005.

Thank you for your enquiry about wind farm noise. I should probably explain my background and interest in wind farms. I have been a noise and acoustic consultant for more than 30 years and most of my current work is dealing with the assessment of environmental noise as it affects residential properties. I work equally for those potentially creating noise and those affected by it. I have been a supporter of wind energy and other forms of renewable energy for some 35 years. I have carried out noise assessments for both “sides” in planning applications for wind farms and adopt the same method of assessment whoever employs me.

"In summary, there are serious problems with the draft Programmatic Environmental Impact statement (PEIS). The comments that follow are focused primarily on the portions of the draft that deal with the economics of wind energy development. The data and conclusions reflected in those parts of the draft are invalid because:.."

From: Sam Enfield - Atlantic Renewable Energy Corporation

Sent: Thu 2/12/2004

To: Jessica Almy, Humane Society, U.S.

Subject: FAQs about Bats and Wind Energy Turbines

Sorry, just to be a little more precise that I was in my prior e-mail.

....By way of introduction, I managed the development work on the Backbone Mountain Wind Project, now the Mountaineer Wind Energy Center, in West Virginia. Your FAQs about Bats and Wind Energy Turbines is good, although I just wanted to correct one statement about which I have specific knowledge.

Dear Mr. Boone:

I am in receipt of the information you sent regarding the Meyersdale wind project and the risk to bats, specifically Indiana bats in that area and your request for my opinion on this project. I have also done some research on my own concerning wind turbines and its affects on bats, to determine what data are available in the scientific literature in this area. I base this opinion on data and scientific literature, and my 16 years experience studying bat biology and bat ecology.

Promotional brochure for conference on financing wind power projects held at the Metropolitan Hotel, NYC, December 3-5,2003

The West Danish model clearly shows that the installation of large numbers of wind turbines can lead to severe and expensive problems with power transmission, and seriously degrade wildlife habitats and the aesthetic value of land- and seascapes for little or no reduction in carbon emissions. It is therefore imperative that energy conservation schemes and alternative sources of renewable energy are more thoroughly explored before large swathes of unique UK countryside and coastal scenery are lost to industrial wind stations. Conservation measures alone could reduce UK carbon emissions by 30% (Coppinger, 2003).