Analyzing offshore wind collaboration opportunities for North and South Carolina
Abstract
Due to the strong presence of wind resources in the South Atlantic, the Carolinas
have emerged as the new frontier in the development of offshore wind energy. The two
states have moved in parallel, completing research and establishing committees to
explore their offshore wind potential. This paper presents the opportunities and challenges
for the Carolinas to collaborate in offshore wind energy planning. This is done using
a three-‐part approach. First, the paper reviews existing scientific literature to
describe the case for interconnecting wind farms. Secondly, it analyzes the existing
policy frameworks of the federal government and the two states. Lastly, it demonstrates
the utility of marine spatial planning and ArcGIS in siting offshore wind farms, transmission
lines and aiding in collaboration.
This paper concludes that in order to move forward with stronger collaboration the
Carolinas must streamline the policy realm, shift towards a regional perspective,
increase marine spatial planning initiatives, develop economic incentives and further
involve stakeholders. With respect to marine spatial planning, this study includes
a sample GIS analysis that provides three transmission configurations for the Carolinas.
These include i.) a backbone parallel to shore ii.) a backbone with onshore injection
at Georgetown and North Myrtle Beach, SC and iii.) a radial configuration that considers
Department of Defense exclusions.
Type
Master's projectPermalink
https://hdl.handle.net/10161/6601Citation
Ramirez de Arellano, Vanessa (2013). Analyzing offshore wind collaboration opportunities for North and South Carolina.
Master's project, Duke University. Retrieved from https://hdl.handle.net/10161/6601.Collections
More Info
Show full item record
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License.
Rights for Collection: Nicholas School of the Environment
Works are deposited here by their authors, and represent their research and opinions, not that of Duke University. Some materials and descriptions may include offensive content. More info