area development 10-2009 wind turbines markets white development 10... · wind turbine markets...

1

Wind Turbine Markets & StrategiesDallas, TexasNovember 2009

Ed McCallum, Senior Principal

Discussion

Introduction to McCallum Sweeney Consulting

The Industry in General

The Components

Why to Recruit

How to Recruit

How to Win

2

McCallum Sweeney Consulting

MSC Overview

Specializes in site selection and incentive negotiation services

Established in July 2000 by Ed McCallum and Mark Sweeney

Brings more than 50 years of combined location consulting experience to our clients worldwide

Provides clients with uncompromised service, conducting site selection and incentive negotiations with the highest standards of integrity

3

MSC C.I.R.C.L.E. of ValuesIntegrity• Emphasis on communication, with an “open process” allowing our clients to

know what we are doing and why• Redirection of any and all “location bonuses” from communities or developers

to the benefit of our clients• Policy not to pursue or accept economic development assignments in locations

that are, or may be, under consideration by our siting clients

Customer Service• Unrestricted commitment to our clients• Active involvement in every project by senior

principals Ed McCallum and Mark Sweeney• Independence, allowing sole focus on our clients’

projects (not a platform to sell other services)

Respect• For the values of our clients, and the responsibility we

have in representing them• For the stewardship role states, provinces, and

communities have as part of their efforts in attracting and retaining investment and employment

• For each other here at MSC, creating a supportive and collegial environment that thrives on the unique strengths we each bring to the company, and striving to balance the demands of our profession with the rewards of a personal life

Excellence• Maintaining the goal of MSC, as a company, to

be the best in our business• Creating and maintaining an operating

environment based on the principles of continuous performance improvement

• Conducting our business with an unrestrained passion for quality

Creativity• Maintaining a broad knowledge of successful location

strategies• Emphasizing the promotion of new ideas and finding

value in them• Committing to an operating environment that fosters

innovation and nurtures its development

Leading-Edge Technology• Maintaining in-house expertise in geographic information

systems (GIS) technologies• Supporting integration of GIS into all our assignments,

exploring new ways to leverage its value for our clients• Managing the technology as a powerful tool and avoiding the

temptation to let it serve as a substitute for a sound and comprehensive site selection process

MSC Clients

KasleSteel

4

MSC Project Experience (Note: Does not include projects that did not announced, cancelled, covered by an NDA, or in progress)

$7.4+ billion investment

18,500+ jobs

The Industry

5

Change in US Wind EnergyInstalled Wind Energy Capacity

Source:

Global Wind Energy Council - http://www.gwec.net/uploads/media/07-02_PR_Global_Statistics_2006.pdf

Growth Before Stimulus

12 000

14,000

16,000

U.S. Wind Power Capacity, Annual & Cumulative (MW)

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

1981

1982

1983

1984

1985

1986

987

988

989

990

991

92 93 94 95 6 7 8 91 1 1 1 19 19 19 19 19 199

199

199

199

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

(pro

j.)

Net Annual

Cumulative

6

Economics Make SenseCost of Wind Energy in Levelized Cents/Kwh

Assumptions: levelized cost at excellent wind sites, large project size, not including Production Tax Credits (PTC)

Source: American Wind Energy Association122 C Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20001, (202) 383-2500, fax (202) 383-2505, [email protected], http://www.awea.org.

8

Takeaway

Not a flash in the pan – here to stay

Economics steadily improvingEconomics steadily improving

Much of the country can participate (wind farms or component manufacturing)

Components for the grid is next wave

The Components

9

Basic Components

Rotor Blade

Tower Rotor Blade

Blade

Gear Box

Nacelle

Generator

Tower

Rotor Bl d

RotorHub

Rotor HubCompleted Nacelle

Blade

11

Increasing Size

Source: US Department of Energy – 20% Wind Energy by 2030, http://www.20percentwind.org/20percent_wind_energy_report_revOct08.pdf

Bigger Sizes = Greater Opportunity

12

Size Considerations

TowersTower sections for the common 250-foot (80-meter) wind turbine tower in the United States can weigh more than 150,000 lbs (70 tons), be 120 feet long (36 meters), and have a diameter of 15 feet (4 5 meters) The next generation of 330 foot (105 meter)have a diameter of 15 feet (4.5 meters). The next generation of 330-foot (105-meter) towers will be 18 feet (5.4 meters) in diameter at the base.

NacellesNacelles commonly weigh 50 to 70 tons and can weigh 90 tons or more.

BladesFor commercial scale projects, blades run from around 110 feet (33 meters) to 145 feet (44 meters). Blade lengths may continue to grow in the future, particularly for offshore wind projects. The largest blades are just over 200 feet long (60 meters-plus) where a p j g j g ( p )5-MW turbine scenario exists.

Federal Renewable Energy Standard

Presidential platform was to produce 25% of power by renewable sources by 2025 (been around before him)

– Sen. Tom Udall (D-N.M.) introduced legislation February 12, 2009, to establish a f d l RPS i i tiliti t d 25% f th i l t i it f bl federal RPS requiring utilities to produce 25% of their electricity from renewable sources by 2025. (The bill will be considered by the House Committee on Energy and Natural Resources.)

– H.R. 890, proposed February 4, 2009, by Rep. Ed Markey (D- CO), calls for 25% renewable energy by 2025.

– The Markey and Udall bills would both amend parts of the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978 to establish a federal RPS.

– Sen Jeff Bingaman (D-N M ) who chairs the Senate Energy Committee drafted Sen. Jeff Bingaman (D N.M.), who chairs the Senate Energy Committee, drafted a slightly different standard that would require 20% renewable energy in the national portfolio by 2020. Bingaman's draft would allow energy efficiency measures to count toward meeting the RPS goal.

13

Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS)

A renewables portfolio standard (RPS) is a regulation that requires the increased production of energy from renewable energy sources, such as wind, solar, biomass, and geothermal. Another common

f th t i bl l t i it t d dname for the same concept is renewable electricity standard(RES).

The RPS mechanism generally places an obligation on electricity supply companies to produce a specified fraction of their electricity from renewable energy sources. Certified renewable energy generators earn certificates for every unit of electricity they produce and can sell these along with their electricity to supply companies. Supply companies then pass the certificates to some form of

l b d d h i li i h h i l regulatory body to demonstrate their compliance with their regulatory obligations. Because it is a market mandate, the RPS relies almost entirely on the private market for its implementation.

Renewable Portfolio StandardsState Amount Year Organization Administering RPSArizona 15% 2025 Arizona Corporation Commission

California 33% 2030 California Energy Commission

Colorado 20% 2020 Colorado Public Utilities Commission

Connecticut 23% 2020 Department of Public Utility Control

Dist. of Columbia 20% 2020 DC Public Service Commission

Delaware 20% 2019 Delaware Energy Office

Hawaii 20% 2020 Hawaii Strategic Industries Division

Iowa 105 MW Iowa Utilities Board

Illinois 25% 2025 Illinois Department of Commerce

Massachusetts 15% 2020 Massachusetts Division of Energy Resources

Hawaii

Alaska

Massachusetts 15% 2020 Massachusetts Division of Energy Resources

Maryland 20% 2022 Maryland Public Service Commission

Maine 40% 2017 Maine Public Utilities Commission

Michigan 10% 2015 Michigan Public Service Commission

Minnesota 25% 2025 Minnesota Department of Commerce

Missouri 15% 2021 Missouri Public Service Commission

Montana 15% 2015 Montana Public Service Commission

New Hampshire 23.80% 2025 New Hampshire Office of Energy and Planning

New Jersey 22.50% 2021 New Jersey Board of Public Utilities

New Mexico 20% 2020 New Mexico Public Regulation Commission

Nevada 20% 2015 Public Utilities Commission of Nevada

New York 24% 2013 New York Public Service Commission

North Carolina 12.50% 2021 North Carolina Utilities Commission

North Dakota* 10% 2015 North Dakota Public Service Commission

Oregon 25% 2025 Oregon Energy Office

Pennsylvania 8% 2020 Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission

Rhode Island 16% 2019 Rhode Island Public Utilities Commission

South Dakota* 10% 2015 South Dakota Public Utility Commissiony

Texas 5,880 MW 2015 Public Utility Commission of Texas

Utah* 20% 2025 Utah Department of Environmental Quality

Vermont* 10% 2013 Vermont Department of Public Service

Virginia* 12% 2022 Virginia Department of Mines, Minerals, and Energy

Washington 15% 2020 Washington Secretary of State

Wisconsin 10% 2015 Public Service Commission of Wisconsin

*Five states, North Dakota, South Dakota, Utah, Virginia, and Vermont, have set voluntary goals for adopting renewable energy instead of portfolio standards with binding targets.

14

Takeaway

Large structures getting biggerTransportation infrastructure is critical

―Rail ―Highways―Possibly even barge

Weather can be a factorOEM and supplier scenario existsThere will be lots of companies in this space (Getting

smaller: Daiwoo purchase of Dewind)

Why to Recruit

15

General Statistics

2007 total US electricity generation was 4.2 million GWh (Peak load of 998 GW – annual average annual load was 480 GW1 ) – US Consumption 100 EJ

Hydro At or near full capacity w/about 9 0% of US generation Hydro At or near full capacity w/about 9.0% of US generation needs met by hydro. Increases occur at existing locations

Wind Onshore Potential 11.0 GWh per yrOffshore Potential 1.6 GWh per year

Solar PV 13.0-17.5 million GWh per yearConcentrated – 15.0 to 30 million GWh per year (?)

Geothermal Hydrothermal- 0.1 to 1.0 million GWh yearEnhanced Geothermal Sys. – Not enough land w/current tech.

Biofuel Balance with food production versus ethanol makes this pproblematic

Hyd (ALT) Entire West Coast , New England down to NJ would onlyprovide 0.007 GWh (2.0% of US electricity needs)

Electricity from Renewable Resources: Status, Prospects, and Impediments (2009)

National Academy of Sciences (NAS)

Is South Carolina in Wind Energy?

16

Federal Spending

Renewable Energy Loan Guarantee ProgramARRA extends the authority of the US Department of Energy to issue loan guarantees and appropriated

$6 billion for this program. Under this act, the DOE may enter into guarantees until September 30, 2011. Eligible projects include renewable energy projects that generate electricity or thermal energy and facilities that manufacture related components, electric power transmission systems, and innovative biofuels projects (funding limited to $500 million for biofuels). Davis-Bacon wage requirements apply to any project receiving a loan guarantee.

Grid DevelopmentARRA provides $11 billion to modernize the nation's electricity grid with smart grid technology. This includes $4.5

billion for the DOE Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability for activities to modernize the nation's electrical grid, integrate demand response equipment and implement smart grid technologies. In addition, $6.5 billion is provided for two federal power marketing administrations to assist with financing the construction, acquisition, and replacement of their transmission systems. The Act also increases federal matching grants for the Smart Grid Investment Program from 20% to 50%. (Source: ACORE).

State Energy Program FundingARRA provides $3 1 billion for the Department of Energy’s State Energy Program (SEP), which provides grants and p $3.1 billion p gy gy g ( ), p g

funding to state energy offices for energy efficiency and renewable energy programs. The funding is conditioned on state Governors’ assurances regarding regulatory policies, building code requirements and the prioritization of existing state programs.

MSC Clients Wind EnergyCompleted/Engaged Discussions/Negotiations

• Nacelle Assembler 1

• Nacelle Assembler 2

• Tower Manufacturer

• Gears/Shafts Manufacturer

• Blade Manufacturer 1

• Blade Manufacturer 2

• Electronics

Confidential 1

Confidential 2

17

Major Component Supply Chain

Source: Emerging Energy Research, Strategy White Paper, Wind at a Crossroads – Supply Shortages Spark Industry Restructuring, November 14, 2006 ID# GW 905-061114. www.emerging-energy.com

Nacelle Units – the Green OEM

Nacelle Component Parts

There are more than 8,000 individual parts that make up a completed Nacelle unitthat make up a completed Nacelle unit much of which is shipped in and assembled; however, critical mass has been reached where it makes sense for the sub-component manufacturers to start considering additional locations on a regional basis – particularly for very large pieces. This scenario is not too much different than the automotive OEM scenario where a supplier base within close proximity is the desire of the OEM.

18

Table C-3. U.S. construction-related economic impacts from 20% wind

Jobs Throughout the Value Chain

Source:20% Wind Energy by 2030 - Increasing Wind Energy’s Contribution to U.S. Electricity Supply. DOE/GO-102008-2567 • July 2008

http://www1.eere.energy.gov/windandhydro/pdfs/41869.pdf

How to Recruit

19

Understand the Needle Movers

Example Blade Manufacturing Facility Example Nacelle Assembly Facility

Labor

Freight

Utilities

TaxesInvestment $100,000,000Interest 6.0%T Y 10 0

Labor

Freight

Utilities

Taxes Investment$20,000,000Interest6.0%

Amortized CapEx Term Years 10.0

Wages, $18.00-35% Benefit, 1,500 Employees

Amortized CapEx TermYears10.0

Wages, $18.00 -35% Benefit , 500 Employees

Typical Training Model

Needs Assessment

Program Design

Identification or required resources to train the workforce and gaps in achieving the required workforce development.

Development of course curriculum, delivery mechanisms, and achievement of specific skill sets by function

Recruitment

Screening

Pre‐employment Training

Start‐up Assistance

specific skill sets by function.

Advertising, job fairs, employment service queries, and other means of mobilizing a candidate pool of prospective new hires.

Testing for various skills to identify basic and advanced skill sets. Could include background checks and drug screening.

Company orientation and training for fundamental skills and concepts along with a chance to observe the interaction of employees as well as problem resolution.

Once hired, an extension of the previous step to train in specific critical skill sets necessary to the success of the operation.

Ongoing training on a recurring basis, to gradually upgrade skills and improve performance Includes both hard and soft skills training

Post‐employment Training

Ongoing As‐Needed Assistance

performance. Includes both hard and soft skills training.

Training based on the previous three steps that includes normal training regimen as well as problem (needs) based program development.

20

Training Approach (Existing versus New Industry)

Reactive ProactivecsExisting industry training N i d t i

Existing Industry New Industry

Based on Specific Need (Usually Problem Driven)

Funding Identified (Commitment not Conditional)

Collaborative Resources (Resources and Needs Known)

Micro Program Oriented

Based on a Host of Needs (Usually Program Driven)

Funding Uncertain (Inducement to Company)

Variable Program Definition (Customized based on Need)

Macro Program Oriented

nctio

nalC

hara

cter

isticusually involves an

expansion or a specific problem identified by the employer who seeks out assistance from the appropriate organization. Typically, the company has the staff and the commitment of resources to address the problem; but, it is not uncommon for the firm to lack the expertise necessary to correct the issue in a timely manner. The cost is typically easy to estimate, and the availability of

New industries may or may not have an existing facility to refer to when benchmarking the production process. Also, the staffing is usually limited and the curriculum/methodology that happens to be successful in one location may not work in the new location for a variety of reasons. The training program usually requires several different types of training. Both production methods and soft skills

Resource Needs Known Resources UndefinedFuny

training equipment is usually situated in the company’s facility or at the local technical/community college already – for the most part.

training are required as well. The program may or may not be defined, and the resources are uncertain.

Acreage Needs Rotor Facility

Space Definition34 Meter Blade

(112 ft.)50 Meter Blade



(262 ft.)

Square meters required per mold 3,900 5,250 6,750 9,000

Square feet required per mold (approximate) 42,000 56,500 72,500 87,000

Estimated Acreages per mold set 1.0 1.3 1.7 2.2

4 to 1 ratio 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0

Square meters required per mold 15,600 21,000 27,000 36,000

Square feet required per mold (approximate) 168,000 226,000 291,000 387,500

Acres required per mold 3.9 5.2 6.7 8.9

Estimated acres for 6 mold facility 23.1 31.1 40.0 53.4

Estimated acres for 6 mold facility 31.0 42.0 53.0 71.0

Estimated Acreage Requirements for Rotor Manufacturing (Wind Blades)

Additional Blade Storage acreage 25.0 35.0 45.0 55.0Nacelle, Gear-box, and Rotor Hub Assembly (if marshalling) 15.0 15.0 25.0 30.0

Estimated Total acres 71.0 92.0 123.0 151.0

21

Typical Nacelle Manufacturing Facility PROJECT EXAMPLE - INFRASTRUCTURE AND OPERATIONS

Electricity

- Operating hours / days - Peak demand - Hours / day at full peak - Usage - Estimated load factor

Estimated power factor

24 / 7 2,600 kW 8 750,000 kWh / month 50% 95%

Other Physical Requirements

Acreage 25 to 75

Facility 60 – 125,000 Sq. ft

Rail – preferably dual- Estimated power factor - Requested service voltage - Largest motor (horsepower) - Number of motors greater than 75 HP - Redundant feed

95%277/480 kW, 60 Hz 275 11 Mandatory

Natural Gas (building heat only)

- Initial volume required - Future volume required

450 mcf / month 725 mcf / month

Water


55,000 gallons / month 185,000 gallons / month

Water - Fire Protection

- Requirements

Local Code Requirements

p y

Good Highway Accessibility

Within 1-1.5 hours of airport

FTZ Zone an advantage

Requirements Local Code Requirements

Wastewater


55,000 gallons / month 185,000 gallons / month

Telecommunications

- Telecom access

High speed data capability

Typical Rotor Blade Facility

Wind Blade Size

34 Meter Blade(112 ft.)

50 Meter Blade (164 ft.)



TPI- Newton, IA (US)

Height 7 meters (23 feet) 7 meters (23 feet) 9 meters (30 feet) 11 meters(36 feet)

Width30 meters (98 feet) 30 meters (98 feet) 30 meters(98 feet) 30 meters (98 feet)

Length130 meters (427

feet)175 meters (574 feet)

225 meters (738 feet)

300 meters (984 feet)

Vestas – Portland, Victoria (AU)

Siemens – Ft. Madison, IA (US)

Area3,900 sq. meters(41,979 sq. feet)

5,250 sq. meters (56,511sq. feet)

6,750 sq. meters(72,656 sq. feet)

9,000 sq. meters(96,432 sq. feet)

22

Support

Proactive, not reactive legislation (Federal, State and Local)

Continued tax supportContinued tax support Training development Comprehensive infrastructure Strategy

- Transmission- Highways- Rail

Supplier identification and qualification

2007 vs. 2008 PTC VoteHouse of Representatives Senate

2007

2008

23

PTC Renewed for 3 Years

How to Win

24

Comprehensive Analysis/Emphasis Drivers

Strategic Planning - Growth/Location Center of Market Analyses Regional Definition Competition Analysis

Work Ethic/Labor Climate Assessments Competitive Wage Surveys Productivity Assessments Qualitative Evaluations Training Resources Demographic Survey Legal Environment

Pro Forma Analysis Product Distribution Evaluation

MarketingHuman Resources

FinancialLogistics /

Transportation

SiteDevelopment Negotiations

Mfg.Production

Other

Pro-Forma Analysis Breakeven Analysis Recurring and Nonrecurring Cost

Comparisons Optimization Studies Sensitivity Analysis Project Financing Alternatives Risk Analysis

Topographic Surveys Environmental Conditions Boundary Surveys Zoning Status/Modification Access and Site Planning

Real Estate Negotiations Incentive Negotiations Site Acquisition Purchase Options

Product Distribution Evaluation Raw Material Identification Comparative Transportation

Cost Analysis Multi-Model Scenario Studies

Permitting

Infrastructure Suitability Project Scheduling Sensitivity Support Services Assessment Expandability/Flexibility Determinations

Livability, Quality of Life Assessment Factor Ratings (Kepner-Tregoe Decision Making) Market Assessment Engineering/Construction/Cost Comparisons

26

Example of Cost Analysis - Phase III

PROJECT XFINANCIALS 15 YEARS

BEFORE INCENTIVESNON-RECURRINGSITE-VARIABLE COSTS SITE A SITE BSite and Infrastructure 13,565,432$ 27,662,527$ Sales Tax 3,547,500$ 2,580,000$ Recruit, Screen & Train 3,623,460$ 3,623,460$

Total 20,736,392$ 33,865,987$ Present Value 18,959,659$ 31,184,187$

RECURRINGSITE-VARIABLE COSTS SITE A SITE BOperating Costs - HR 328,531,195$ 315,108,084$ Operating Costs - Utilities 23,831,968$ 17,579,222$ Operating Costs - Transport -$ -$ Operating Costs - Taxes 14,128,398$ 19,494,176$


COMBINEDSITE-VARIABLE COSTS SITE A SITE BTotal 387,227,954$ 386,047,468$ Present Value 216,000,525$ 220,449,772$

27


INCENTIVESNON-RECURRINGSITE-VARIABLE INCENTIVES SITE A SITE BSite and Infrastructure 6,008,950$ 4,301,000$ Sales Tax 3,547,500$ 1,800,000$ R it S & T i $ 500 000$Recruit, Screen & Train -$ 500,000$


RECURRINGSITE-VARIABLE INCENTIVES SITE A SITE BOperating Costs - HR -$ -$ Operating Costs - Utilities 2,906,795$ -$ Operating Costs - Transport -$ -$ Operating Costs - Taxes 9,624,893$ 9,581,500$


Extraordinary Incentives -$ -$ Present Value $ $Present Value -$ -$

COMBINEDSITE-VARIABLE INCENTIVES SITE A SITE BTotal 22,088,138$ 16,182,500$ Percent of Project 36.8% 27.0%Present Value Total 16,655,445$ 12,670,218$ Percent of Project 27.8% 21.1%


AFTER INCENTIVESNON-RECURRINGSITE-VARIABLE COSTS SITE A SITE BSite and Infrastructure 7,556,482$ 23,361,527$ Sales Tax -$ 780,000$ R it S & T i 3 623 460$ 3 123 460$Recruit, Screen & Train 3,623,460$ 3,123,460$


RECURRINGSITE-VARIABLE COSTS SITE A SITE BOperating Costs - HR 328,531,195$ 315,108,084$ Operating Costs - Utilities 20,925,174$ 17,579,222$ Operating Costs - Transport -$ -$ Operating Costs - Taxes 4,503,505$ 9,912,676$


COMBINEDSITE VARIABLE COSTS SITE A SITE BSITE-VARIABLE COSTS SITE A SITE BTotal 365,139,816$ 369,864,968$

Cost Advantage > 4,725,152$ 1.3%

Present Value 199,345,080$ 207,779,553$ Cost Advantage > 8,434,474$

4.1%

28

Skills vs. Training Assistance/Resources Relationship

ProfessionalDE

P

PO

RT

ProfessionalEngineering and DesignProject ManagementLogisticsEtc.

(Technical, Bachelors or Masters degreed with little training required.

Semi‐Skilled(Screening for basic educational and skill-

sets enhanced and structured by the ith i t f t id

Unskilled(Training provided entirely by the company with the assistance of outside resources)

EX

PE

CTA

TIO

N O

F O

UT

SI

SO

UR

CE

/INC

EN

TIV

E S

UP

SkilledNacelle Assembly and TestingElectronics Troubleshooting/TestingMechanical Troubleshooting/TestingMachining (Gears and Shafts)BearingsGear Box Assembly

Semi-skilledRotor Blade TechniciansNacelle CoveringControl Box AssemblyTcompany with assistance from outside

Resources)

RESOURCE/TIME REQUIREMENT

ER

ES Towers

Castings

The Case for Rail

Truck Transport Costs

Due to the length and weights of the towers d bl d t i d t il d h ve

s

and blades, customized trailers and heavy haul tractors are required. Each trailer is customized requiring a significant amount of investment from the carriers. The cost of each combined trailer and heavy haul tractor unit can reach $500,000 to $750,000. Escort vehicles are also required for the trucks. Depending upon the state, the number of escort vehicles varies but typically range from one to three escort cars per truck for the blades or towers.

Tran

spo

rt C

ost

Cu

rvR

ail T

29

Traffic DensityRailroad freight traffic density is measured in

millions of gross tons per mile per year (MGT). Here, it is displayed as a number from 0-7:

0 - less than 1 megaton, no traffic, unknown or abandoned

1 - 1.0 to 4.9 MGT 2 - 5.0 to 9.9 MGT 3 - 10.0 to 19.9 MGT 4 - 20.0 to 39.9 MGT 5 - 40.0 to 59.9 MGT 6 - 60.0 to 99.9 MGT 7 - Over 100 MGT

X

X

7 - Over 100 MGT

FRA classificationThe Federal Railroad Administration uses the

following criteria to classify railroads:

• Class 1 - Annual operating revenue greater than $255.9 million

• Class 2 - Annual operating revenue $20.5 to $255.9 million

• Class 3 - Annual operating revenue less than $20.5 million

Signaling Types

CTC - Centralized traffic Control ABS - Automatic Block signal ACS - Automatic Cab Signal ATS - Automatic Train Stop ATC A t ti T i C t l

Greater Little Rock(Operator Owner, Trackage Rights,Volume)

ATC - Automatic Train Control MAN - Manual, including dark TTO - Time Table / Train Order Blank – unknown

Passenger Trains

Amtrak Commuter Tourist Rapid Transit VIA Other (i.e. Alaska Railroad) Discontinued

Traffic DensityRailroad freight traffic density is measured in

millions of gross tons per mile per year (MGT). Here, it is displayed as a number from 0-7:

0 - less than 1 megaton, no traffic, unknown or abandoned

1 - 1.0 to 4.9 MGT 2 - 5.0 to 9.9 MGT 3 - 10.0 to 19.9 MGT 4 - 20.0 to 39.9 MGT 5 - 40.0 to 59.9 MGT 6 - 60.0 to 99.9 MGT 7 Over 100 MGT7 - Over 100 MGT

FRA classificationThe Federal Railroad Administration uses the

following criteria to classify railroads:

• Class 1 - Annual operating revenue greater than $255.9 million

• Class 2 - Annual operating revenue $20.5 to $255.9 million

• Class 3 - Annual operating revenue less than $20.5 million

Signaling Types

CTC - Centralized traffic Control ABS - Automatic Block signal ACS - Automatic Cab Signal ATS - Automatic Train Stop ATC A t ti T i C t l

Greater Little Rock(Operator Owner, Trackage Rights,Volume)

ATC - Automatic Train Control MAN - Manual, including dark TTO - Time Table / Train Order Blank – unknown

Passenger Trains

Amtrak Commuter Tourist Rapid Transit VIA Other (i.e. Alaska Railroad) Discontinued

30

Oklahoma and Offshore Wind

Source:20% Wind Energy by 2030 - Increasing Wind Energy’s Contribution to U.S. Electricity Supply. DOE/GO-102008-2567 • July 2008

http://www1.eere.energy.gov/windandhydro/pdfs/41869.pdf

Important Considerations

“Ready to Go” opportunities – Site is but one part of this equation

• Includes deal making capabilities• Expedited permitting

D b l ki f i h d l• De-bottlenecking of entire schedule

Workforce Development & Training– Includes K-12, Vocational, Technical, College & Post Grad

Energy Costs– LEEDS is more than just cool now – it is $’s– Incentives that encourage conservation

State (legislative support) for industries – Federal, State– Industry support to promote and assist innovation– Tailored to assist in recruitment

31

How to Get on the Radar Screen

KNOW the players in this industry (Wind)

This is still a people business – reach out

Keep us informed relevant information not fluff Keep us informed – relevant information, not fluff

Respond appropriately (7 points of contact for a project)

1. Consultant / Company calls2. Confirmation of RFP receipt3. Questions about the RFP4. Notification of response being sent5. Confirmation of Delivery FU6. Candidacy update/is the RFP clear?7. Post-decision debrief

Respond to the inquiry first (qualification) – sell later (qualification).

Make an impression through project execution, not by coming to visit

MSC Contact Information

Ed McCallumSenior Principal864-553-7031

[email protected]

McCallum Sweeney Consulting550 South Main Street, Suite 550Greenville, SC 29601

864-672-1600 (main)864-672-1610 (fax)

www.mccallumsweeney.com

area development 10-2009 wind turbines markets white development 10... · wind turbine markets...

Documents