RSS
The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) provided Federal funding to the Ohio Department of Development (ODOD) under the State Energy Program (SEP). ODOD proposes to provide $1,225,000 of its SEP funds to the Pettisville Local Schools (Pettisville). Pettisville would use these funds to design, permit, and construct a 750-kilowatt wind turbine at the Pettisville Pre-Kindergarten through Twelfth Grade School located at 255 Summit Street, Pettisville, Ohio.
The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) has provided Federal funding to the Illinois Department of Commerce and Economic Opportunity (DCEO) under the State Energy Program (SEP). DCEO is seeking to provide $5 million of its SEP funds to Monarch Wind Power (MWP), who would use these funds for the design, permitting and construction of 12, 1.6- megawatt wind turbines, for a combined generation capacity of 19.2 megawatts. This EA provides DOE and other decisionmakers the information needed to make an informed decision about the installation, operation, and eventual decommissioning of the proposed wind project. The EA evaluates the potential individual and cumulative impacts of the proposed project. For purposes of comparison, this EA also evaluates the impacts that could occur if DOE did not provide funding (the No-Action Alternative); under which DOE assumes the project would not proceed. The EA does not analyze other action alternatives.
Mojave Solar, LLC (Mojave Solar), solely owned by Abengoa Solar, Inc., submitted an application to DOE under the federal loan guarantee program pursuant to the Energy Policy Act to support construction of a 250‐megawatt (MW) net output solar power plant in San Bernardino County, California. The proposed solar power plant is located entirely on private land and is referred to as the Abengoa Mojave Solar Project (hereinafter referred to as AMSP). Additional facilities are required to distribute the solar power to the electrical grid, including a new substation, interconnection to the adjacent existing transmission lines, and fiber‐optic telecommunication lines linking various substations in the region. Southern California Edison (SCE) proposes to construct and operate these additional facilities. The telecommunication components, known as Special Protection System (SPS) upgrades, are evaluated in this environmental assessment (EA) as part of the proposed Project. The AMSP and the associated supporting infrastructure are hereinafter referred to as the “proposed Project.”
The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is proposing to issue a loan guarantee to Agua Caliente Solar, LLC (Applicant) for the design and construction of the Agua Caliente Solar Project (Project) located in Yuma County, Arizona. Agua Caliente Solar, LLC submitted an application to DOE under the federal loan guarantee program pursuant to the Energy Policy Act to support construction of a 290 megawatt gross output photovoltaic (PV) solar power plant. The Agua Caliente Solar Project would utilize a PV technology using cadmium-telluride solar panels.
The United States (US) Department of Energy (DOE) is proposing to issue a loan guarantee to Sempra Generation (Sempra) to develop the Mesquite Solar Energy project, a nominal 400-megawatt (MW) solar energy generating facility consisting of a solar field of ground-mounted photovoltaic (PV) panels, an electrical collection system that converts generated power from direct current to alternating current, a substation, and a generation-tie (gen-tie) power line to deliver the generated electricity from the project site to an existing off-site electrical switchyard. The facility would generate an estimated 889,665 megawatt-hours (MWh) of electricity per year.
The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) is proposing to issue a $241 million loan guarantee to Diamond Green Diesel, LLC (Diamond) to support construction of a biomass-based diesel facility adjacent to the existing Valero St. Charles Refinery (VSCR) in Norco, Louisiana. DOE has prepared this Environmental Assessment (EA) to comply with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) (42 USC 4321, et. seq.), Council on Environmental Quality regulations for implementing NEPA (40 CFR Parts 1500-1508), and DOE Implementing Procedures (10 CFR Part 1021). The EA examines the potential environmental impacts associated with the proposed action and No Action Alternative to determine whether the proposed action has the potential for significant environmental impacts. The information contained in the EA would enable DOE to fully consider the potential environmental impacts of issuing a loan guarantee for the Diamond project.
The U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) has prepared a draft Environmental Assessment (EA) to analyze and describe the potential environmental impacts associated with the: University of Maine’s Deepwater Offshore Floating Wind Turbine Testing and Demonstration Project Gulf of Maine.
This Environmental Assessment (EA) examines the potential environmental impacts of the Proposed Action and the No-Action Alternative; identifies unavoidable adverse environmental impacts of the Proposed Action; describes the relationship between local short-term uses of the environment and the maintenance and enhancement of long-term productivity; and characterizes any irreversible and irretrievable commitments of resources that would be involved should DOE decide to implement its Proposed Action.
The proposed dollars are requested for machinery and equipment purchases relative to a new solar project coming to the renewable energy park site. The improvements include funding through a grant to the community and loan to the company for the purchase of equipment. Additionally, the company associated with the proposed development will be investing $250 million in additional equipment, machinery and building improvements. These improvements will help bring 500 jobs, with the proposed development located at 1000 N. Graham Road.
Barr Engineering, Minneapolis engaged Truescape in May 2010 to: 1) Provide a series of TrueViewTM2 “human field of view” survey controlled photo simulations from pre-determined viewpoint locations to assist with the assessment of the potential visibility of a proposed turbine, and 2) Simulate two different height options for the turbine tower, being 80m vs. 100m.