Print Friendly, PDF & Email

American wind power emerged from 2018 stronger than ever, now with the ability to power 30 million homes after eight percent capacity growth last year. The newly released U.S. Wind Industry Annual Market Report, Year Ending 2018 reveals U.S. wind power supports a record 114,000 jobs, over 500 domestic factories, and more than $1 billion a year in revenue for states and communities hosting wind farms. This growth is bringing economic development to all 50 states and farming and factory towns in need of new opportunity– wind is working hard for America!

Wind is also making our power system more reliable and affordable, and it pairs well with other future-oriented clean sources like solar, storage, and hydropower. Because Fortune 500 companies and utility customers are increasingly asking for combined products and services, we are thrilled to celebrate and explore the WINDPOWER 2019 theme, WIND +.


The vision behind this year’s theme is bringing together not just wind workers but stakeholders across other energy sectors, local communities, individual land owners, and corporate energy buyers. It’s up to us, the larger energy sector, to work together by collaborating and leading the way to the cleaner and more reliable power grid of the future.


This year’s program focuses on wind energy’s ability to thrive through innovation and collaboration while building alliances to propel the industry forward. A few sessions that incorporate our WIND + theme include:

  • The opening general session on “The Future Grid driven by Wind, Solar and Storage,”
  • “Innovating Offshore Wind Technology Leveraging Existing Offshore Energy Advances,”
  • “The Potential Wind + Storage Roadmap,” and
  • “Building the Lines to a Clean Energy Economy.”

Speakers include experts from BP, UL, Pattern, Siemens Gamesa, EDF Renewables, DNV GL, Bank of America Merrill Lynch, ERCOT, Goldwind, Vestas, EDPR, Ørsted, GE, TPI Composites, Enel, Shell, Apex, E.ON and the National Renewable Energy Laboratory. You can view the full agenda here.


The wind industry was founded by visionaries and it continues to embody an innovative and entrepreneurial spirit. And the U.S. wind industry has always recognized the value of working together with partners who help drive our progress forward. I look forward to meeting you in Houston and taking the next step towards powering the future, together!

Register now for WINDPOWER 2019!

April 24, 2019

Please forward your resume to This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Visit our website to apply

The Opportunity

We are currently looking for a customer service oriented individual to become our Technical Contracts Administrator for the Wind Industry. This person is the face of the company to the customer to manage their order flow. They are the liaison between production and the customer to ensure satisfaction and timely delivery within customer specifications. 


  • Review and confirm the accuracy of all Incoming and Receiving Reports (IRRs) received from shipping
  • Process customer inquiries, preliminary inquiries, requests for quotes, repair inquiries, invitations to bid and warranty claims in a timely fashion
  • Track and support the progress of all wind customer warranty claims fault analysis conducted by QA staff
  • Participate and attend weekly production, business development and, warranty progress meetings
  • Maintain and distribute weekly customer progress reports
  • Communicate effectively with all levels of staff within the organization in representing customer requirements to ensure customer expectations are met


  • 3 to 5 years’ experience in an industrial environment managing fix contracts
  • Previous experience using process flow systems
  • Post-secondary education or equivalent work experience
  • High level of commitment to customer service
  • Ability to prioritize workload and flexibility to manage multiple tasks
  • Strong team player with excellent communication and interpersonal skills

Start your career with Sherwood Electromotion Inc. today and be part of a team that rewards quality and integrity with competitive pay, employee benefits and, profit sharing.

While we appreciate all candidates who express interest only those selected for an interview will be contacted.

Note: We are few minutes walking distance from the new TTC Subway in Vaughan 

22 April 2019 Return to the Women in Wind Blog Share on facebook Facebook Share on twitter Twitter Share on linkedin LinkedIn Share on email Email Share on whatsapp WhatsApp Raising female representation at industry events: Switch List for spokeswomen in the energy sector   Last June, RenewableUK created the Switch List – a living

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

The University of Chicago (UCH) released a “working paper” this week examining renewable portfolio standards (RPSs). Unfortunately, it’s based on false pretenses and uses a questionable economic model to claim RPSs are substantially more costly to consumers than previously thought. While it is important to understand the effectiveness and impacts of these programs, the authors’ use of unrealistic assumptions and faulty logic leads to biased estimates that don’t align with real-world outcomes.

Renewable Portfolio Standards and their benefits

RPSs are state-level policies that require electric utilities to gradually increase the amount of renewable energy they deliver to their customers. They are proven policies with long track records of success. Evidence shows using more renewable energy to meet state electricity demand has a minimal impact on, and in many cases reduces, electricity prices.

Beyond electricity prices, RPSs have also been shown to bring far-reaching benefits to consumers, which the UCH paper fails to account for. For example, a 2017 Lawrence Berkeley National Lab (LBNL) report estimated existing RPS policies will generate $258 billion in health and environmental benefits from reduced air pollution and create 4.7 million job-years of employment. Factors like these are notably absent from the new paper.

The working paper, entitled “Do Renewable Portfolio Standards Deliver,” takes a simplified approach to a complex question. The authors argue that previous analyses of RPS cost impacts are not robust because they do not account for all costs associated with an RPS program. While it is true that a comprehensive “net-benefit” analysis would provide a clearer picture of RPS program costs and effectiveness, the authors stop painfully short of achieving this by looking only at costs while ignoring critical benefits of RPS programs.

Where the new paper falls short

The authors claim there are three key cost categories not included in prior RPS analyses. Unfortunately, all three of these categories are rooted in commonly misunderstood renewable energy myths.

First, the authors argue the intermittency of wind and solar energy resources requires the construction of “back-up” capacity, leading to greater costs for ratepayers. The truth is, grid operators already maintain reserve generation to back up all sources of energy, including large fossil fuel and nuclear plants that can unexpectedly trip offline, causing a rapid drop in available capacity. In fact, grid operator data from Texas has shown that the cost of reserves needed to back up conventional power plants is far larger than the cost to back up wind generation.

Furthermore, using their sophisticated controls and power electronics, modern wind and solar plants can provide many of the grid reliability services as conventional power plants. Grid operators have a century’s worth of experience balancing changes in electricity supply and demand, and because wind’s output can be predicted reasonably well 24 to 48 hours ahead of time, it’s much easier to accommodate changes in wind than when a large, centralized power plant unexpectedly fails.

Second, the authors point to increased costs from added transmission infrastructure needed to support RPS-incentivized renewable energy development. While it is true that strengthening our grid resources comes at a cost, evidence shows transmission upgrades more than pay for themselves in the long run due to increased reliability, reduced congestion and many other economic benefits. For example, when the 2018 Polar Vortex brought record low temperatures to the Midwest, interregional transmission lines delivered electricity from PJM to MISO, helping to keep the lights and heat on in MISO during peak demand hours. This shows the value of the geographic diversity of energy sources paired with a well-connected grid, creating a more resilient overall system.

Transmission also benefits all energy sources and gives consumers access to the lowest-cost power while enhancing reliability. The American Society of Civil Engineers rates the country’s electric grid an unacceptable D+, hardly adequate to support a competitive economy and today’s modern technology. Transmission expansion and grid updates are necessary across the board, and the University of Chicago paper ignores this reality.

Lastly, the authors claim that increased renewable energy development leads to premature retirement of coal and nuclear plants, which in turn imposes costs on ratepayers. Although it is true that premature retirements may come at a cost, market data shows that it is often low natural gas prices, and not renewable energy development, that renders coal and nuclear plants less competitive.

Besides using the faulty logic explained above to justify their analysis, multiple economists quickly identified serious flaws and unrealistic assumptions used in the analysis, which cause the RPS cost estimates to be inflated. For example:

It appears to me that the paper analyzes effects (on generation mix, CO2 emissions) on a per-state basis. But RPS laws don't work that way. Most have regional effects, since they don't generally have state-specific requirements.

— Ari Peskoe (@AriPeskoe) April 22, 2019

Treating all RPS policies as same & estimating their average effect is a bit like treating 29 patients with a dozen similar but distinct drugs, each using different doses, and then trying to say something about the average effect of all of the treatments. What does that tell us?

— JesseJenkins (@JesseJenkins) April 22, 2019

Was it one particular drug that was most effective, while others had no effect? Did some drugs hurt while others helped? Looking at an average treatment effect for heterogeneous treatments makes it impossible to say.

— JesseJenkins (@JesseJenkins) April 22, 2019

By design, an RPS does not hand pick a technology; rather all renewables are able to compete, incentivizing cost reductions and efficiency gains. As a result, RPS policies encourage the growth of additional homegrown electricity sources that diversify our energy portfolios, spur local economic development, reduce pollution, cut water consumption, and save consumers money.