Person E represents one of the largest breweries in Minnesota. With unprecedented revenue and double-digit profits expected this year, she needs to invest $1.2 million to relieve her company’s tax liability. This company’s long-term vision aligns with First National Bank’s forward-thinking energy conservation efforts and they would like to invest in an alternative energy solution. Given today’s technology and the advances in alternative systems, where can she invest their $1.2 million to protect the environment and decrease reliance on current energy solutions?

Note: When you calculate the readily-available tax rebates, the value of the investment is much greater.

For comprehensive information on state, local, utility, and federal incentives that promote renewable energy and energy efficiency, please visit http://www.dsireusa.org.

With this commitment and resources, this entire business could be using alternative energy sources, including solar for hot water, wind energy for electricity, and biofuels for heating and power production. 

The space may not be available in the immediate vicinity, but investing in a wind farm may be worth discussion. Farmer, co-op and locally owned wind projects typically range from 200 kW to 2 MW, and require an investment beginning at $500,000. These projects can yield very significant income to their owners.
(Source: Wind Logics at www.windlogics.com.)

With an annual average wind speed of 15.5 mph, a single Turbowind T400-34^TM produces 996,000kWh of energy. If this amount of electricity were to be produced by a coal or gas plant, 2,019lbs and 106lbs of CO2 would be emitted respectively.

Biomass use strengthens rural economies, decreases America's dependence on imported oil, avoids use of MTBE* or other highly toxic fuel additives, reduces air and water pollution, and reduces greenhouse gas emissions.

Co-firing involves substituting biomass for a portion of coal in an existing power plant furnace. It is the most economic near-term option for introducing new biomass power generation. Because much of the existing power plant equipment can be used without major modifications, co-firing is far less expensive than building a new biomass power plant. Compared to the coal it replaces, biomass reduces sulfur dioxide (SO2), nitrogen oxides (NOx), and other air emissions. After "tuning" the boiler for peak performance, there is little or no loss in efficiency from adding biomass. This allows the energy in biomass to be converted to electricity with the same efficiency (in the 33-37% range) of a modern coal-fired power plant.

*Methyl tertiary butyl ether -- an octane booster used for gasoline blending

For more information, please visit the U.S. Department of Energy web site on Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy: www1.eere.energy.gov/biomass.

Back to the top