TY - JOUR
T1 - Economic Analyses of the Seadrift Wind-Aided Wastewater Treatment Plant Operations
AU - Abena Mbarga, Ange H.
AU - Rainwater, Ken
AU - Song, Lianfa
AU - Cleveland, Theodore
AU - Ross Williams, W.
N1 - Funding Information:
Different organizations contributed to the project. First, GrantWorks (www.grantworks.net) helped with grant applica- tions as well as overall contract administration. GrantWorks then hired Wind Energy Consulting and Contracting, Inc. (http://weccsolutions.com; WECC), for the preliminary wind study at the proposed site. WECC also performed an economic analysis of the potential savings the city could obtain from the turbine. GrantWorks also completed an environmental assessment to ensure that whooping cranes, which pass near Calhoun County on their yearly migration, would not be threatened by the turbine. The study, submitted to the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ), showed that because the turbine was low enough to avoid disrupting bird migration, and because the turbine is a stand-alone, rather than a wind farm, the risk to birds was low.
Funding Information:
The city of Seadrift purchased the wind turbine to help meet the WWTP energy demand by displacing some of the grid energy. Hence, city administrators applied for and received SECO (State Energy Conservation Office) grants totaling $464,000, grants from the Texas Department of Agriculture (TDA) totaling $236,000, and an additional TDA environmental planning grant of $23,000. The city itself paid $19,500 for the project. Total funds were about $742,500. The turbine cost $610,878, with additional costs for an access road, a connection fee, engineering, and general contract administration. The city has no operation and maintenance (O&M) cost, as the maintenance is the vendor’s responsibility for 5 years per the contract with the city. A one-time interconnection fee of $10,451 was necessary to allow the turbine to feed excess electricity (i.e., not used by the WWTP) back to the grid. Note that the wind turbine can only operate while the grid is functioning to avoid electrocution of maintenance utility workers because of power going from the wind turbine to the grid. Other costs include an access road cost of $18,150, engineering costs of $51,112, and contract administration costs of $51,200. Total costs incurred were about $741,791. Figure 2 shows clearly that the project was financed mostly through external funds, as the city only provided about 3% of the total funds for the project.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2021 Ange H. Abena Mbarga, Ken Rainwater, Lianfa Song, Theodore Cleveland, and W. Ross Williams.
PY - 2021/2/1
Y1 - 2021/2/1
N2 - Seadrift is a city located on the Texas Gulf Coast with a population of 1,364 people as of the 2010 U.S. Census. In 2012, the city started operating a $610,878 wind turbine, dedicated to its wastewater treatment plant. The city contributed only 3% of the funds for the project, with the balance from state agencies or the state of Texas. The city hoped to save $25,500 yearly using wind energy to displace some of the plant’s electrical demand. The plant’s average load is 0.05 million gallons per day, requiring 236,000 kilowatt-hours (kWh; 8.05x108 British thermal units [BTU]) yearly. From 2012 to 2015, Seadrift saved $15,928 per year, with yearly wind energy production of 155,738 kWh (5.31x108 BTU) and net present value of $211,493 at the city level. Yet, the project’s applicability to other locations is limited. Indeed, when considering the project’s total cost and return, the economic results, driven by a lower than predicted wind speed, are negative. Still, the study serves as a valuable tool to aid government agencies and rural communities in devising alternative and sustainable solutions to water-energy nexus challenges in Texas and beyond.
AB - Seadrift is a city located on the Texas Gulf Coast with a population of 1,364 people as of the 2010 U.S. Census. In 2012, the city started operating a $610,878 wind turbine, dedicated to its wastewater treatment plant. The city contributed only 3% of the funds for the project, with the balance from state agencies or the state of Texas. The city hoped to save $25,500 yearly using wind energy to displace some of the plant’s electrical demand. The plant’s average load is 0.05 million gallons per day, requiring 236,000 kilowatt-hours (kWh; 8.05x108 British thermal units [BTU]) yearly. From 2012 to 2015, Seadrift saved $15,928 per year, with yearly wind energy production of 155,738 kWh (5.31x108 BTU) and net present value of $211,493 at the city level. Yet, the project’s applicability to other locations is limited. Indeed, when considering the project’s total cost and return, the economic results, driven by a lower than predicted wind speed, are negative. Still, the study serves as a valuable tool to aid government agencies and rural communities in devising alternative and sustainable solutions to water-energy nexus challenges in Texas and beyond.
KW - Renewable energy
KW - Wastewater
KW - Water
KW - Water-energy nexus
KW - Wind energy
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85125957007&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.21423/twj.v12i1.7096
DO - 10.21423/twj.v12i1.7096
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85125957007
SN - 2160-5319
VL - 12
SP - 42
EP - 57
JO - Texas Water Journal
JF - Texas Water Journal
IS - 1
ER -