Alternative Energy Draft EA - NASA Visitor Center at Wallops Flight ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Proposed Action and Alternatives Figure 2: Diagram of Major Wind Turbine Components Although modern utility-scale wind turbines typically operate 65 to 90 percent of the time, they often run at less than full capacity. Capacity factor, which compares the turbine’s actual production over a given period of time with the amount of power the turbine would have produced if it had run at full capacity for the same amount of time, is one element in measuring the productivity of a wind turbine (or any other power production facility). Iberdrola (2009) determined that the capacity factor of potential wind turbines initially evaluated for installation at Wallops Island (based on one 1.5 MW and two 2.0 MW models) was between 25 and 30 percent. Higher capacity factors may be achieved during windy weeks or months. 2.1.1.1 Wind Turbine Specifications Utility-Scale Turbines Based on the classification the wind resource at WFF (Class IIa) and the appropriate level of electrical generation, either a 1.5 MW or 2.0 MW wind turbine would be suited to WFF’s needs (Iberdrola, 2009). NASA initially evaluated both 1.5 MW and 2.0 MW wind turbine models and determined that they were very similar in their design, configuration, and cost—the primary difference being the amount of power generated. Therefore, NASA would install a wind turbine that would produce up to the electrical output of a 2.0 MW wind turbine. General specifications of a 2.0 MW turbine commonly available in the United States are shown in Table 3 to provide representative information for evaluation of environmental impacts in this EA. Any 2.0 MW wind turbine model NASA would use would have very similar specifications to those shown in Table 3. 8
Residential-Scale Turbines Table 3: Basic Data for 2.0 MW Wind Turbine Representative 2.0 MW Wind Turbine Model 1 Rated power, single turbine 2.0 MW Rated power, 2 turbines 4.0 MW Cut-in wind speed 3.5 meters/second Proposed Action and Alternatives Cut-out wind speed 25 meters/second – 10 minutes Rated wind speed 14 meters/second Wind class IIa Blade length 42.5 meters (139.5 feet) Total height (to tip of blade) 120.5 meters (395.3 feet) Capacity factor 2 25 to 30% Equipment life expectancy 25 years Annual production at WFF 5 GWh/year 1 Gamesa, 2009; 2 Iberdrola, 2009 General specifications for the smallest wind turbine commercially available in the United States, a 2.4 kW model, are shown in Table 4. As opposed to the utility-scale wind turbines, these residential-scale turbines would not contribute substantially to the percent of energy generated from renewable sources at WFF because of their small power output. They would help offset power use at individual buildings, but their primary purpose would be to provide outreach and education to WFF employees and the public about wind energy. Table 4: Basic Data for 2.4 kW Wind Turbine Representative 2.4 kW Wind Turbine Model 1 Rated power 2.4 kW Cut-in wind speed 3.5 meters/second Rated wind speed 13 meters/second Blade diameter 3.72 meters (12 feet) Total height (to tip of blade) 22 meters (72 feet) Capacity factor 25 to 30% Equipment life expectancy 25 years Annual production at WFF, single turbine 6 MWh/year 2 1 Southwest Windpower, 2010 2 MWh = megawatt-hours 9
Page 1 and 2: DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT WALL
Page 3 and 4: DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT ALTE
Page 5 and 6: INTRODUCTION Executive Summary This
Page 7 and 8: Executive Summary increase the over
Page 9 and 10: Executive Summary Resource Proposed
Page 15 and 16: TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Page 17 and 18: TABLE OF CONTENTS 5.2.1 Post-Constr
Page 19 and 20: TABLE OF CONTENTS Figure 4: Potenti
Page 21 and 22: ACHP Advisory Council on Historic P
Page 23 and 24: NPS National Park Service NRHP Nati
Page 25 and 26: Mission, Purpose and Need, Backgrou
Page 28 and 29: Mission, Purpose and Need, Backgrou
Page 30 and 31: 1.4.2 Need Proposed Action and Alte
Page 34: Proposed Action and Alternatives 2.
Page 37 and 38: Residential-Scale Turbines Proposed
Page 40 and 41: This page intentionally left blank.
Page 42: Proposed Action and Alternatives mo
Page 45 and 46: 2.3 PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVE
Page 48: This page intentionally left blank.
Page 51 and 52: Decommissioning Proposed Action and
Page 53 and 54: turbines because these costs would
Page 55 and 56: SECTION THREE: AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT
Page 60: Affected Environment The Virginia S
Page 63 and 64: Affected Environment FIRM Community
Page 68 and 69: 3.1.4 Climate Change Table 8: Calen
Page 70 and 71: Wind Affected Environment For Wallo
Page 72 and 73: Affected Environment The Accomack C
Page 74 and 75: Affected Environment On the souther
Page 76 and 77: Affected Environment phoeniceus), B
Page 78: Affected Environment The Saxis Wil
Page 81 and 82: Affected Environment For the once-p
Page 83 and 84:
Affected Environment less common, w
Page 85 and 86:
Affected Environment were also obse
Page 88 and 89:
This page intentionally left blank.
Page 90 and 91:
Affected Environment Over the entir
Page 92:
3.2.4.1 Birds Henslow’s Sparrow A
Page 95 and 96:
Affected Environment Monitoring was
Page 97 and 98:
Loggerhead Shrike Affected Environm
Page 99 and 100:
Affected Environment known or recor
Page 101 and 102:
Table 17: Occupational Distribution
Page 103 and 104:
Affected Environment Chincoteague I
Page 106:
Page 109 and 110:
3.3.6 Transportation Affected Envir
Page 111 and 112:
Affected Environment Photograph 2:
Page 114 and 115:
Page 116 and 117:
Proposed Action Environmental Conse
Page 118 and 119:
Environmental Consequences The inst
Page 120 and 121:
Alternative Two Environmental Conse
Page 122:
Environmental Consequences The func
Page 125 and 126:
Environmental Consequences Based on
Page 127 and 128:
Environmental Consequences Table 22
Page 129 and 130:
Environmental Consequences Based on
Page 131 and 132:
Alternative One Environmental Conse
Page 133 and 134:
Environmental Consequences conceiva
Page 135 and 136:
Environmental Consequences wetland
Page 137 and 138:
Environmental Consequences of magni
Page 139 and 140:
Environmental Consequences is the a
Page 141 and 142:
Environmental Consequences (TREC).
Page 143 and 144:
Environmental Consequences why bats
Page 145 and 146:
Environmental Consequences determin
Page 147 and 148:
Environmental Consequences While a
Page 149 and 150:
Gull-Billed Tern Environmental Cons
Page 151 and 152:
Environmental Consequences In addit
Page 153 and 154:
Environmental Consequences staff. T
Page 155 and 156:
Proposed Action Aboveground Resourc
Page 157 and 158:
Alternative One Aboveground Resourc
Page 159 and 160:
4.4.4 Transportation No Action Alte
Page 162 and 163:
Page 164 and 165:
Environmental Consequences site tha
Page 166 and 167:
Environmental Consequences 2) Placi
Page 168 and 169:
Environmental Consequences projects
Page 170 and 171:
Environmental Consequences Although
Page 172 and 173:
4.6 PERMITS, LICENSES, AND APPROVAL
Page 174 and 175:
Mitigation and Monitoring 5.2.1 Pos
Page 176 and 177:
Mitigation and Monitoring would be
Page 178 and 179:
Page 180 and 181:
Agencies, Organizations, and Person
Page 182 and 183:
NASA WFF Technical Library Building
Page 184 and 185:
Name Organization Other Organizatio
Page 186 and 187:
References Cohen, J.B., S. Karpanty
Page 188 and 189:
References Kunz, T.H., E.B. Arnett,
Page 190 and 191:
References Richardson, D.L. 1992. H
Page 192 and 193:
References USFWS. 2009c. Northeaste
show all

Alternative Energy Draft EA - NASA Visitor Center at Wallops Flight ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?