|
|
Books > Business & Economics > Industry & industrial studies > Energy industries & utilities > General
Wind energy has been the fastest growing source of U.S. electric
power generation in recent years. The increase in federal funding
for wind technologies and involvement of multiple agencies has
raised questions about fragmented, overlapping, or duplicative
federal support. In this report, GAO examines federal wind-related
initiatives-programs or groups of agency activities that promoted
wind energy through a specific emphasis or focus. GAO (1)
identifies wind-related initiatives implemented by federal agencies
in fiscal year 2011 and their key characteristics; (2) assesses the
extent of fragmentation, overlap, and duplication, if any, among
these initiatives, and the extent to which they were coordinated;
and (3) examines how agencies allocate support to projects through
their initiatives and the extent to which they assess applicant
need for support. GAO identified 82 federal wind-related
initiatives, with a variety of key characteristics, implemented by
nine agencies in fiscal year 2011. Five agencies-the Departments of
Energy (DOE), the Interior, Agriculture (USDA), Commerce, and the
Treasury-collectively implemented 73 of the initiatives.
Initiatives supporting deployment of wind facilities, such as those
financing their construction or use, constituted the majority of
initiatives and accounted for nearly all obligations and estimated
tax subsidies related to wind in fiscal year 2011. In particular, a
tax expenditure and a grant initiative, both administered by
Treasury, accounted for nearly all federal financial support for
wind energy. The 82 wind-related initiatives GAO identified were
fragmented across agencies, most had overlapping characteristics,
and several that financed deployment of wind facilities provided
some duplicative financial support. The 82 initiatives were
fragmented because they were implemented across nine agencies, and
68 overlapped with at least one other initiative because of shared
characteristics. About half of all initiatives reported formal
coordination. Such coordination can, in principle, reduce the risk
of unnecessary duplication and improve the effectiveness of federal
efforts. However, GAO identified 7 initiatives that have provided
duplicative support-financial support from multiple initiatives to
the same recipient for deployment of a single project. GAO also
identified 3 other initiatives that did not fund any wind projects
in fiscal year 2011 but that could, based on their eligibility
criteria, be combined with 1 or more initiatives to provide
duplicative support. Of the 10 initiatives, those at Treasury
accounted for over 95 percent of the federal financial support for
wind in fiscal year 2011. Agencies implementing the 10 initiatives
allocate support to projects on the basis of the initiatives' goals
or eligibility criteria, but the extent to which applicant
financial need is considered is unclear. DOE and USDA allocate
support based on projects' ability to meet initiative goals such as
reducing emissions or benefitting rural communities, as well as
other criteria. Both agencies also consider applicant need for the
support of some initiatives, according to officials. However, GAO
found that neither agency documents assessments of applicant need;
therefore the extent to which they use such assessments to
determine how much support to provide is unclear. Unlike DOE and
USDA, Treasury generally supports projects based on the tax code's
eligibility criteria and does not have discretion to allocate
support to projects based on need. While the support of these
initiatives may be necessary in many cases for wind projects to be
built, because agencies do not document assessments of need, it is
unclear, in some cases, if the entire amount of federal support
provided was necessary. Federal support in excess of what is needed
to induce projects to be built could instead be used to induce
other projects to be built or simply withheld, thereby reducing
federal expenditures. GAO-13-136
Daniel Schallmo, Volker Herbort und Oliver D. Doleski diskutieren,
dass - ahnlich der Situation in nahezu allen Lebens- und
Wirtschaftsbereichen moderner Industriegesellschaften - auch die
Energiewirtschaft dem gegenwartig massgeblichen
Digitalisierungstrend unterliegt. Sie verweisen auf die
herausragende Rolle der digitalen Transformation von
Geschaftsmodellen. Angesichts der aktuellen Relevanz erlautern die
Autoren fur Betroffene die wesentlichen Begriffe im Kontext der
digitalen Transformation von Geschaftsmodellen und stellen
anschliessend eine Roadmap vor, die ein praxistaugliches Vorgehen
mit funf Phasen umfasst. Diese werden mit Zielsetzung, Aktivitaten
und Instrumenten beschrieben und anhand ausgewahlter Beispiele aus
der Energiewirtschaft erlautert.
The Department of Energy (DOE) has made $15 billion in loan
guarantees and conditionally committed to an additional $15
billion, but the program does not have the consolidated data on
application status needed to facilitate efficient management and
program oversight. For the 460 applications to the Loan Guarantee
Program (LGP), DOE has made loan guarantees for 7 percent and
committed to an additional 2 percent. The time the LGP took to
review loan applications decreased over the course of the program,
according to GAO's analysis of LGP data. However, when GAO
requested data from the LGP on the status of these applications,
the LGP did not have consolidated data readily available and had to
assemble these data over several months from various sources.
Without consolidated data on applicants, LGP managers do not have
readily accessible information that would facilitate more efficient
program management, and LGP staff may not be able to identify
weaknesses, if any, in the program's application review process and
approval procedures. Furthermore, because it took months to
assemble the data required for GAO's review, it is also clear that
the data were not readily available to conduct timely oversight of
the program. LGP officials have acknowledged the need for a
consolidated system and said that the program has begun developing
a comprehensive business management system that could also be used
to track the status of LGP applications. However, the LGP has not
committed to a timetable to fully implement this system. The LGP
adhered to most of its established process for reviewing
applications, but its actual process differed from its established
process at least once on 11 of the 13 applications GAO reviewed.
Private lenders who finance energy projects that GAO interviewed
found that the LGP's established review process was generally as
stringent as or more stringent than their own. However, GAO found
that the reviews that the LGP conducted sometimes differed from its
established process in that, for example, actual reviews skipped
applicable review steps. In other cases, GAO could not determine
whether the LGP had performed some established review steps because
of poor documentation. Omitting or poorly documenting reviews
reduces the LGP's assurance that it has treated applicants
consistently and equitably and, in some cases, may affect the LGP's
ability to fully assess and mitigate project risks. Furthermore,
the absence of adequate documentation may make it difficult for DOE
to defend its decisions on loan guarantees as sound and fair if it
is questioned about the justification for and equity of those
decisions. One cause of the differences between established and
actual processes was that, according to LGP staff, they were
following procedures that had been revised but were not yet updated
in the credit policies and procedures manual, which governs much of
the LGP's established review process. In particular, the version of
the manual in use at the time of GAO's review was dated March 5,
2009, even though the manual states it was meant to be updated at
least annually, and more frequently as needed. The updated manual
dated October 6, 2011, addresses many of the differences GAO
identified. Officials also demonstrated that LGP had taken steps to
address the documentation issues by beginning to implement its new
document management system. However, by the close of GAO's review,
LGP could not provide sufficient documentation to resolve the
issues identified in the review.
DOE prepared this Environmental Assessment (EA) to review the
potential for impacts to the human and natural environment of its
Proposed Action-providing financial assistance to EnerG2 under a
cooperative agreement. DOE's objective is to support the
development of the EDV industry in an effort to substantially
reduce the United States' consumption of petroleum, in addition to
stimulating the United States' economy. More specifically, DOE's
objective is to accelerate the development and production of
various EDV systems by building or increasing domestic
manufacturing capacity for advanced automotive batteries, their
components, recycling facilities, and EDV components. DOE's program
will enable market introduction of various electric vehicle
technologies by lowering the cost of battery packs, batteries, and
electric propulsion systems for EDVs through high-volume
manufacturing. Under the terms of this cooperative agreement, DOE
would provide approximately 75 percent of the funding for EnerG2 to
establish a commercial-size manufacturing plant for fine-grained
carbon powder (also known as electrode carbon) having a high degree
of purity, a high surface area per unit mass, and an improved pore
structure. The plant would be setup inside an existing warehouse
currently owned by Oregon Freeze Dry, Inc. and located in Albany,
Oregon. If successful, the plant would help meet the growing needs
of domestic and global producers of EDVs and HEVs. The production
capacity would be enough to support building at least 60,000 EDVs
per year. Additionally, the project would create approximately 50
temporary construction jobs and approximately 35 permanent jobs.
The environmental analysis identified that the most notable
changes, although minor, to result from EnerG2's Proposed Project
would occur in the following areas: air quality and greenhouse gas,
noise, geology and soils, vegetation and wildlife, solid and
hazardous wastes, utilities, transportation and traffic, and human
health and safety. No significant environmental effects were
identified in analyzing the potential consequences of these
changes.
The Department of Energy (DOE) prepared this Environmental
Assessment (EA) to evaluate the potential environmental
consequences of providing an American Recovery and Reinvestment Act
of 2009 (Recovery Act; Public Law 111-5, 123 Stat.115) financial
assistance grant to Brea Power II, LLC (Brea Power; formerly
Ridgewood Renewable Power, LLC). The grant would facilitate
expansion of an existing landfill gas collection system, and
construction and operation of a combined cycle power generation
facility at the Olinda Alpha Landfill in Brea, California. DOE's
proposed action is to provide $10 million in financial assistance
in a cost-sharing arrangement with the project proponent, Brea
Power. The cost of the project is estimated to be about $84
million. The primary objective of Brea Power's proposed project is
to maximize the productive use of substantial quantities of waste
landfill gas generated and collected at the Olinda Alpha Landfill
in Brea, California. The project proponent determined that
utilization of the waste gas for power generation in a combustion
turbine combined cycle facility was the best use for the gas. The
electricity generated from the proposed project, a net output of
approximately 280 kilowatt-hours of electricity annually, would be
distributed to the local power grid via a new electric transmission
line to be installed by the local utility company. Brea Power would
expand the existing gas collection system at the landfill and build
the new gas-to-energy facility across the street from the existing
gas-to-energy facility. Once the new facility is operational, the
existing facility would be used only as a contingency. This EA
evaluates 14 resource areas and, after proposed mitigation
measures, identifies no significant adverse environmental impacts
for the proposed project. Beneficial impacts to the nation's energy
efficiency and local economy could be recognized. The project would
generate 280 kilowatt-hours of electricity annually, and save an
estimated 2,216 trillion British thermal units per year annually
from the landfill gas that would otherwise be flared. In addition,
by using nearly 50,000 tons per year of methane from the landfill
gas, the project would provide carbon dioxide equivalent reductions
of greater than 1 million tons annually and enable the avoidance of
over 120,000 tons of carbon dioxide per year from not using fossil
fuels for generating a similar amount of electricity.
This latest volume includes contributions on the latest advances in
energy research. Chapter One discusses stability assessment using
direct methods. Chapter Two focuses on the geopolitical
implications of the energy reserves in the Caspian Basin. Chapter
Three reviews an investigation into the effect of various
parameters on the evaporator performance. Chapter Four helps to
understand the vapour compression cycle in which heat is absorbed
from a low temperature region and released in a high temperature
region. Chapter Five examines static voltage stability enhancements
by incorporating voltage-sourced based converters in continuation
power flow.
DOE prepared this EA to evaluate the potential environmental
consequences of providing a financial assistance grant under the
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 in a cooperative
agreement with the Beacon Power Corporation (Beacon Power) as part
of the Smart Grid Demonstrations Program. This EA evaluates two
similar proposed projects in two locations: Site 1 evaluates
installation of a utility-scale 20-megawatt flywheel energy storage
and frequency regulation plant in Chicago Heights, Illinois, to
provide frequency regulation services to PJM Interconnection, the
electrical grid operator. The cost of the proposed project at the
Illinois location would be about $48.1 million. Site 2 evaluates
installation of the same system in Hazle Township, Pennsylvania.
The cost of the proposed project at the Pennsylvania location would
be about $53 million. DOE could choose to provide a grant for
either location. DOE's Proposed Action would provide approximately
$24 million in financial assistance in a cost-sharing arrangement
to Beacon Power. In addition, for the proposed project in
Pennsylvania (Site 2), Beacon Power could receive a $5 million
grant from Pennsylvania's Redevelopment Capital Assistance Program.
This EA evaluates the environmental resource areas DOE commonly
addresses in its EAs and identifies no significant adverse
environmental impacts for the proposed project. The proposed
projects could result in beneficial impacts to the nation's energy
efficiency and the local economy, and could contribute to a minor
reduction of greenhouse gases.
The DOE prepared this Environmental Assessment (EA) to assess the
potential for impacts to the human and natural environment of its
Proposed Action-providing financial assistance to Toda under a
cooperative agreement. DOE's objective is to support the
development of the EDV industry in an effort to substantially
reduce the United States' consumption of petroleum, in addition to
stimulating the United States' economy. More specifically, DOE's
objective is to accelerate the development and production of
various EDV systems by building or increasing domestic
manufacturing capacity for advanced automotive batteries, their
components, recycling facilities, and EDV components. This work
will enable market introduction of various electric vehicle
technologies by lowering the cost of battery packs, batteries, and
electric propulsion systems for EDVs through high-volume
manufacturing. Under the terms of the cooperative agreement, DOE
would provide approximately 50 percent of the funding for Toda to
construct a manufacturing plant to produce oxide materials for
cathodes for lithium-ion batteries. The plant would be located
within the Fort Custer Industrial Park in Battle Creek, Michigan.
The project would help meet the growing needs of domestic and
global lithium-ion battery cell producers. The total production
volume at this facility would be sufficient to supply batteries for
around 450,000 HEVs or 125,000 plug-in HEVs. Additionally, the
project would create approximately 50 permanent jobs. The
environmental analysis identified that the most notable changes to
result from the Toda's Proposed Project would occur in the
following areas: land use, air quality and greenhouse, noise,
geology and soils, surface water and groundwater, vegetation and
wildlife, solid and hazardous wastes, utilities and energy use,
transportation and traffic, and human health and safety. No
significant environmental effects were identified in analyzing the
potential consequences of these changes.
DOE prepared this Environmental Assessment (EA) to assess the
potential for impacts to the human and natural environment of its
Proposed Action-providing financial assistance to BASF under a
cooperative agreement. DOE's objective is to support the
development of the EDV industry in an effort to substantially
reduce the United States' consumption of petroleum, in addition to
stimulating the United States' economy. More specifically, DOE's
objective is to accelerate the development and production of
various EDV systems by building or increasing domestic
manufacturing capacity for advanced automotive batteries, their
components, recycling facilities, and EDV components. This work
will enable market introduction of various electric vehicle
technologies by lowering the cost of battery packs, batteries, and
electric propulsion systems for EDVs through high-volume
manufacturing. Under the terms of the cooperative agreement, DOE
would provide approximately 50 percent of the funding for BASF to
construct a commercial-size manufacturing plant for cathode
material. The plant would be constructed on existing BASF property
located in Elyria, Ohio, and it would help meet the growing needs
of domestic and global lithium-ion battery cell producers. The
cathode materials to be produced are based on technology licensed
from DOE. The plant can produce enough material to supply a battery
manufacturer making from 20,000 to 100,000 plug-in HEV batteries
and/or their cells per year or equivalent volumes of other EDV
batteries. For purposes of production volume estimation, each
plug-in HEV is assumed to capable of delivering at least 5 kilowatt
hours of available energy. Additionally, the project would create a
number of permanent jobs. The environmental analysis identified
that the most notable changes, although minor, to result from
BASF's Proposed Project would occur in the following areas,
although minor: air quality, noise, and solid and hazardous wastes.
No significant environmental effects were identified in analyzing
the potential consequences of these changes.
The "Top 25 Coal and Minerals Mining of 2011-2012" report provides
insights into the state of mining performance measurement today by
listing and analyzing the most visited KPIs for this industry on
smartKPIs.com in 2011. In addition to KPI names, it contains a
detailed description of each KPI, in the standard smartKPIs.com KPI
documentation format that includes fields such as: definition,
purpose, calculation, limitation, overall notes and additional
resources. This product is part of the "Top KPIs of 2011-2012"
series of reports and a result of the research program conducted by
the analysts of smartKPIs.com in the area of integrated performance
management and measurement. SmartKPIs.com hosts the largest
catalogue of thoroughly documented KPI examples, representing an
excellent platform for research and dissemination of insights on
KPIs and related topics. The hundreds of thousands of visits to
smartKPIs.com and the thousands of KPIs visited, bookmarked and
rated by members of this online community in 2011 provided a rich
data set, which combined with further analysis from the editorial
team, formed the basis of these research reports.
 |
Enhancing the Resilience of the Nation's Electricity System
(Paperback)
National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences, Board on Energy and Environmental Systems, Committee on Enhancing the Resilience of the Nation's Electric Power Transmission and Distribution System
|
R1,577
R1,398
Discovery Miles 13 980
Save R179 (11%)
|
Ships in 9 - 17 working days
|
|
|
Americans' safety, productivity, comfort, and convenience depend on
the reliable supply of electric power. The electric power system is
a complex "cyber-physical" system composed of a network of millions
of components spread out across the continent. These components are
owned, operated, and regulated by thousands of different entities.
Power system operators work hard to assure safe and reliable
service, but large outages occasionally happen. Given the nature of
the system, there is simply no way that outages can be completely
avoided, no matter how much time and money is devoted to such an
effort. The system's reliability and resilience can be improved but
never made perfect. Thus, system owners, operators, and regulators
must prioritize their investments based on potential benefits.
Enhancing the Resilience of the Nation's Electricity System focuses
on identifying, developing, and implementing strategies to increase
the power system's resilience in the face of events that can cause
large-area, long-duration outages: blackouts that extend over
multiple service areas and last several days or longer. Resilience
is not just about lessening the likelihood that these outages will
occur. It is also about limiting the scope and impact of outages
when they do occur, restoring power rapidly afterwards, and
learning from these experiences to better deal with events in the
future. Table of Contents Front Matter Summary 1 Introduction and
Motivation 2 Today's Grid and the Evolving System of the Future 3
The Many Causes of Grid Failure 4 Strategies to Prepare for and
Mitigate Large-Area, Long-Duration Blackouts 5 Strategies for
Reducing the Harmful Consequences from Loss of Grid Power 6
Restoring Grid Function After a Major Disruption 7 Conclusions
Appendix A: Statement of Task Appendix B: Committee Biographies
Appendix C: Disclosure of Conflicts of Interest Appendix D:
Presentations and Committee Meetings Appendix E: Examples of Large
Outages Appendix F: Acronyms
The Department of Energy's (DOE) National Energy Technology
Laboratory (NETL) manages the research and development portfolio of
the Vehicle Technologies (VT) Program for the Office of Energy
Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE). A key objective of the VT
program is accelerating the development and production of electric
drive vehicle systems in order to substantially reduce the United
States' consumption of petroleum. Another of its goals is the
development of production-ready batteries, power electronics, and
electric machines that can be produced in volume economically so as
to increase the use of electric drive vehicles (EDVs). Congress
appropriated significant funding for the VT program in the American
Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, Public Law 111-5 (Recovery
Act) in order to stimulate the economy and reduce unemployment in
addition to furthering the existing objectives of the VT program.
DOE solicited applications for this funding by issuing a
competitive Funding Opportunity Announcement (DE-FOA-0000026),
Recovery Act - Electric Drive Vehicle Battery and Component
Manufacturing Initiative, on March 19, 2009. This project, Lithium
Ion (Li-Ion) Battery Manufacturing Project, was one of the 30 DOE
selected for funding. DOE's Proposed Action is to provide
$299,200,000 in financial assistance in a cost sharing arrangement
with the project proponent, Johnson Controls, Inc. (Johnson
Controls or JCI) and ENTEK International, LLC (ENTEK). The total
cost of the project is estimated at $599,449,514. The overall
purpose and need for DOE action pursuant to the VT program and the
funding opportunity under the Recovery Act is to accelerate the
development and production of various electric drive vehicle
systems by building or increasing domestic manufacturing capacity
for advanced automotive batteries, their components, recycling
facilities, and EDV components, in addition to stimulating the
United States' economy. This work will enable market introduction
of various electric vehicle technologies by lowering the cost of
battery packs, batteries, and electric propulsion systems for EDVs
through high-volume manufacturing. DOE intends to further this
purpose and satisfy this need by providing financial assistance
under cost-sharing arrangements to this and the other 29 projects
selected under this funding opportunity announcement. This and the
other selected projects are needed to reduce the United States'
petroleum consumption by investing in alternative vehicle
technologies. Successful commercialization of EDVs would support
DOE's Energy Strategic Goal of "protect ing] our national and
economic security by promoting a diverse supply and delivery of
reliable, affordable, and environmentally sound energy." This
project will also meaningfully assist in the nation's economic
recovery by creating manufacturing jobs in the United States in
accordance with the objectives of the Recovery Act.
DOE prepared this EA to evaluate the potential environmental
consequences of providing a financial assistance grant under the
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (Recovery Act;
Public Law 111-5, 123 Stat. 115) to the Center for
Commercialization of Electric Technology (CCET) to demonstrate
battery technology integration with wind generated electricity by
deploying and evaluating utility-scale lithium battery technology
to improve grid performance and thereby aid in the integration of
wind generation into the local electricity supply. This EA analyzes
the potential environmental impacts of DOE's proposed action of
providing the Recovery Act funding and of the No-Action
Alternative. In this EA, DOE evaluated potential environmental
consequences from a portion of the overall project that would
involve land disturbance. Other portions are described as major
elements of the project, but because they involve only installation
of equipment in existing facilities, they do not involve potential
for significant environmental impact and are not evaluated further.
With regard to the land disturbing actions considered in this EA,
DOE evaluated impacts to air quality, noise, aesthetics and visual
resources, surface water resources, biological resources, and areas
of environmental concern. After performing a screening analysis of
other environmental resource areas, DOE concluded that impacts to
some aspects of the environment would not be likely to occur or
would be negligible. The proposed project would be designed in
compliance with federal and state air quality regulations, would
reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and would have a net beneficial
impact on air quality in the region. New construction would
involve: (1) above ground and underground 12.5 kV distribution
lines, (2) 1.5 MW storage battery facility and foundation, (3) an
access road, and (4) site clearing. Two wind turbines and
foundations would also be constructed as part of the proposed
action. Although DOE is not funding the wind turbines, the effects
will be assessed as a connected action, as it is part of the
overall action. Operation of the proposed project would not result
in any increase in noise in the vicinity. The aesthetics of the RTC
and along the easements would change with the addition of the above
ground distribution lines, which would be along 5.5 miles of
right-of-way utility easements, storage battery facility, access
road, and wind turbines. There are two alternatives for the
aboveground distribution lines; Option A extends through
agricultural fields and Option B along county roads. The storage
battery facility is proposed to be 20 by 40 feet with a 20 foot
wide by 600 foot long access road. The wind turbines will not
adversely affect the aesthetics as the location since it is in an
open field with limited development in the area, and there is an
existing wind turbine already on-site at the RTC along with several
transmission and meteorological towers near the proposed location.
Clearing of 3 acres for the proposed project on the RTC site would
not significantly impact any plant or animal species population
because: (1) the project site has previously been disturbed; (2)
the project site is currently vacant land that is isolated from
larger tracts of undisturbed land; and (3) because plant and animal
species found there are expected to be widespread in the region or,
for sensitive species, the area is not unique habitat. The whooping
crane, which is an endangered species under the federal Endangered
Species Act, occurs in Lubbock County. However, the habitat needed
for the whooping crane is not located within the vicinity of the
project.
DOE prepared this EA to evaluate the potential environmental
consequences of providing a financial assistance grant under the
American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) to Delphi
Automotive Systems, Limited Liability Corporation (LLC) (Delphi).
Delphi proposes to construct a laboratory referred to as the
"Delphi Kokomo, IN Corporate Technology Center" (Delphi CTC
Project) and retrofit a manufacturing facility. The project would
advance DOE's Vehicle Technology Program through manufacturing and
testing of electric-drive vehicle components as well as assist in
the nation's economic recovery by creating manufacturing jobs in
the United States. The Delphi CTC Project would involve the
construction and operation of a 10,700 square foot (ft2) utilities
building containing boilers and heaters and a 70,000 ft2
engineering laboratory, as well as site improvements (roads,
parking, buildings, landscaping, and lighting). The engineering
laboratory would house equipment for helping to validate the
readiness of new products for manufacture in Delphi's Kokomo Morgan
Street (KMS) facility. Delphi's KMS facility is an existing 93,000
ft2 leased facility that Delphi would modify and equip for
validating and producing advanced automotive electric drive
components. DOE's proposed action would provide approximately $89.3
million in financial assistance in a cost sharing arrangement to
Delphi. The total cost of the proposed project would be
approximately $178.6 million. This EA evaluates the environmental
resource areas DOE commonly addresses in its EAs and identifies no
significant adverse environmental impacts for the proposed project.
The proposed project could result in beneficial impacts to the
nation's energy efficiency and the local economy, and the electric
vehicle components produced could contribute toward enabling
significant reductions of greenhouse gases.
DOE prepared this EA to evaluate the potential environmental
impacts of providing two types of financial assistance to Dow Kokam
MI, LLC to construct and operate the Midland Battery Park for
manufacturing of advanced lithium polymer batteries for hybrid and
electric vehicles: (1) a grant under Funding Opportunity
Announcement DE-FOA 0000026, Recovery Act - Electric Drive Vehicle
Battery and Component Manufacturing Initiative and (2) a loan
pursuant to Section 136 of the Energy Independence and Security Act
of 2007 as an automotive component supplier promoting improved fuel
economy in light-duty vehicles. As the name of the grant Funding
Opportunity Announcement indicates, the grant would be made from
funds appropriated by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of
2009 (Recovery Act; Public Law 111-5, 123 Stat. 115). This EA
analyzes the potential impacts of the proposed construction and
operation of the battery manufacturing facility by Dow Kokam MI,
LLC, the two proposed federal actions (a grant and a loan), and the
alternatives to the proposed project. The Midland Battery Park
would be constructed on a 50-acre vacant site in Midland, Michigan,
that is zoned industrial and surrounded by other industrial and
commercial facilities. The new battery manufacturing facility would
be about 770,000 square feet in size and would require a new 1- to
2-mile-long electric transmission line. DOE evaluated 15 resource
areas in this EA and identified no significant adverse impacts for
DOE's proposed actions, which would facilitate construction of the
Midland Battery Park. With the following exceptions, impacts to the
resource areas and issues examined would not occur or would be
negligible. The proposed project site would be located in an area
where soils were previously contaminated with dioxin and near areas
with shallow groundwater contaminated with vinyl chloride and Freon
11. Concentrations of dioxin at the site are within acceptable
limits for industrial uses and due care requirements would be
implemented during construction to minimize risks of exposure.
Discharge permit requirements for the safe handling and treatment
of contaminated groundwater would be implemented during temporary
dewatering to excavate and install detention basins and underground
utilities. Over nine acres of isolated non-jurisdictional wetlands
would be filled to construct the facility. The state of Michigan
determined that these wetlands are not regulated under Federal or
State laws. Detention basins would be created to temporarily store
on-site storm water runoff and replace the main function of these
low value wetlands. DOE determined that grading and filling these
wetlands would not cause significant adverse impacts. A new
transmission line could be a risk to migratory birds and could
impact nearby wetlands and sensitive species. However, the
transmission line should be designed to avoid these wetlands and
protected species and common design standards should be implemented
to minimize risks to migratory birds. Beneficial economic impacts
would occur from increased employment opportunities and spending in
the local economy. The use of batteries produced at this facility
would increase the use of electric and hybrid vehicles, which would
help reduce emissions of greenhouse gases from vehicles and reduce
the nation's dependence on foreign oil.
The 2014 Electricity Profiles publication provides an overall
picture of the electricity sector of over 200 countries and areas
on an internationally comparable basis, for the years 2009-2014. It
displays detailed information on production, trade and consumption
of electricity, on net installed capacity and thermal power plant
inputs and efficiency relevant to each of these countries and
areas. This is the third issue of Electricity Profiles as a
stand-alone publication, replacing the previous series of Energy
Balances and Electricity Profiles.
|
You may like...
Energy in Africa
Lucia de Strasser, Simone Tagliapietra, …
Hardcover
R1,238
Discovery Miles 12 380
|