Rice University scientists use red phosphorus to detect lithium dendrites in Li metal batteries
GTI quantifies opportunity to produce low-carbon renewable natural gas (RNG) from wood wastes

Portland General Electric, NextEra Energy Resources to develop first major facility co-locating wind, solar and battery storage

Portland General Electric Company and NextEra Energy Resources, LLC, a subsidiary of NextEra Energy, Inc., plan to construct a new energy facility in Eastern Oregon combining 300 megawatts of wind generation with 50 megawatts of solar generation and 30 megawatts of battery storage.

The new project, called the Wheatridge Renewable Energy Facility, will be the first of this scale in North America to co-locate and integrate these three technologies, creating an improved zero-emissions resource and accelerating Oregon’s transition to clean energy.

The new facility, combined with PGE’s existing resources, will bring the company’s wind generation portfolio to a nameplate total of more than 1,000 megawatts (one gigawatt), available from five owned or contracted wind farms in the Northwest—enough power to serve the equivalent of 340,000 homes. The solar farm will be one of the largest in Oregon, while the battery storage facility will be the largest in Oregon and one of the largest in the United States.

With the addition of these new renewable resources, PGE expects to meet about 50% of its customers’ power needs with emissions-free generation.

Power from the facility will be generated by 120 wind turbines manufactured by GE Renewable Energy, Inc. The wind farm will be located just north of Lexington, Oregon, in Morrow County. The specific equipment to be used at the associated solar farm and battery storage facility is still to be determined.

Wheatridge will provide up to 300 jobs during construction of the wind site and up to 175 jobs during construction of the solar and storage sites. Approximately 10 full-time employees will operate the combined facilities once they’re commissioned for service.

Swaggart Wind Power, LLC began development and permitting of the Wheatridge wind farm in 2009. Swaggart is an affiliate of MAP Energy. The project was then acquired by a NextEra Energy Resources subsidiary in 2017. NextEra and PGE expanded the project scope to include solar generation and battery storage. PGE will own 100 megawatts of the wind project. A subsidiary of NextEra Energy Resources will own the balance of the project and sell its output to PGE under 30-year power purchase agreements. NextEra Energy Resources’ subsidiary will build and operate the combined facility. The split ownership and PPA structure will allow the two energy companies to share project risks and benefits.

The wind component of the facility will be operational by December 2020 and qualify for the federal production tax credit at the 100 percent level. Construction of the solar and battery components is planned for 2021 and will qualify for the federal investment tax credit. The tax credits help reduce the cost of the project over time, thus reducing costs to PGE’s customers. PGE expects to invest approximately $160 million for its owned portion of the project.

The Wheatridge project was the prevailing bid submitted in response to a request for proposals for renewable resources PGE issued in May 2018. The agreements signed by PGE and NextEra Energy Resources’ subsidiary will be subject to prudency review on customers’ behalf by the Oregon Public Utility Commission. The agreements are also subject to approval by NextEra Energy management, which is anticipated in March.



Combining Hydro/ wind/Solar REs and enough storage systems to supply clean energy 24/7 may be the best way to quickly phase out polluting CPPs. NGPPs while electrifying homes, offices, industries and vehicles.


300 MW wind, 50 MW PV, only 30 MW battery (with no mention of MWh)?!  This bears no resemblance to a "24/7 RE system".  At best, it papers over surges and sags in output over periods of minutes.


By combining 3 to 5 sources of different REs, a lot less storage is required for 24/7 operations. Secondly, surplus/excess REs could be used to make clean H2 to operate FCs to produce clean energy, to cover some of the peak demands.

Near future AI control systems could be programmed for the ideal mix and maximum efficiency.

The above mentioned system can be multiplied as many times as required?

By combining 3 to 5 sources of different REs

And what would those be, AlzHarvey?  You can scale wind and PV, and that's it.  Hydro is environmentally damaging and geothermal is extremely limited.  Of the sources which are limited to coastlines, OTEC has never beaten the cost problem, tidal hasn't really gone anywhere and people have been trying to make wave-energy systems work for decades but the oceans keep tearing them apart.

I swear, a Markov chain generator fed with your comments would make as much sense as you do.


Regardless of SAEP's continued objections, lower cost REs are growing at very fast rate in most countries (even in USA and Canada) and will keep doing so for many more years.

NPPs could grow and compete if the initial cost could be reduced by 2 or 3 times?


According to a recent Bloomberg Study, cost to produce clean electricity with smaller NPPs would not necessarily be much lower than with larger NPPs and would not compete favorably with new much lower cost REs.

New very large (12 and 15 MW) slow turning offshore and onshore wind turbines, installed in the right places, will be profitable at under 2 cents/kWh. New multi-layers wide band solar cells will have much higher efficiency (46% to 50%). Combining various RE sources can greatly reduce the size and cost of storage units required. A few million EVs with large battery packs and bidirectional charging facilities, will be a great opportunity to better manage energy distribution, supply and collection.

A new lower cost nuclear technology is required to significantly reduce initial cost and to revive the nuclear industry?


AlzHarvey, do you even remember what you post?  Coming back a day and a half after a complete evasion of the question put to you, to again not answer the question ("what would those be?"), is some combination of senility, stupidity and trollishness.  Neither have you mentioned a single reliable or storable alternative to unreliable wind and solar.

You keep talking about cheap RE.  Haven't you figured out yet that it doesn't matter if it's FREE, if you can't rely on it being there you have to have a full backup system, and if you want zero emissions it canNOT be fossil-powered?

A few million EVs with large battery packs and bidirectional charging facilities
Are nowhere near enough to handle the energy-storage needs of Canada, let alone the sprawling USA.  You've had this explained to you MULTIPLE times but you keep spouting the same old wrong crap.


SAEP continues to overlook trends and changing technologies. Current HEVs and PHEVs, with small battery packs, will be gradually phased out and replaced with all weather extended range BEVs/FCEVs by 2025/2035 or so. Those extended range electrified vehicles with 120 to 150 KW battery packs (or equivalent with H2-FC), often parked in private/public garages equipped with bidirectional charging facilities, will gradually become the largest sources of stored e-energy to balance the grid and REs.

Future batteries and FCs will last longer than the host vehicles and will be available to supply stored energy, on a contracted regular basis, and become a source of significant revenues for owners/users. Five (5) million such vehicles in USA will have significant results and 50 million would do much more.

SAEP continues to overlook trends and changing technologies.
AlzHarvey, you fail at numbers.  I have looked forward to 100% replacement of the N. American vehicle fleet, and found it wanting.
Current HEVs and PHEVs, with small battery packs, will be gradually phased out and replaced with all weather extended range BEVs/FCEVs by 2025/2035 or so.
AlzHarvey, you failed to understand the lesson I wrote you 2 months ago.  If you cannot understand the math, you have no business opining about any of it.  STFU you scientifically illiterate poseur.
Those extended range electrified vehicles with 120 to 150 KW battery packs
Are barely less inadequate than the Tesla P100-class packs I postulated then.  Going with "renewables" means having to cope with weeks to months of net energy deficit; going with nuclear means having YEARS of energy on-tap with every new fuel load.

You will not do the math, so STFU.  You have nothing worthwhile to say in this discussion.


Long term energy deficit is a matter of balancing supply and demand. That can be done in two complementary ways:

1) Decrease demands with energy consumption reduction programs.

1.1 Upgrade current building codes, replace all old ACs with very high efficiency Heat Pumps, replace existing inadequate windows and doors, improve ceilings, walls and floors insulation, ban or tax all private vehicles under 60 mpge, progressively increase Federal liquid fuel taxes and use the new revenues to subsidize electrified vehicles, etc, etc.

2) Increase supply with clean energy sources to meet new reduced demand.

2.1 Add a progressive pollution levy/fee on dirty energy supplies like CPPs, NGPPs, etc. Use the new revenues to further subsidize clean REs and essential storage facilities. Ban production and imports of ICEVs under 60 mpge. Toyota and Hyundai can already do it.

NB: There are 101 other ways to do it. We have to be smarter?

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Your Information

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)