A report on the technological and political feasibility of powering Massachusetts with Wind Energy. Created for Brown University's Pre-College Online Renewable Energy Engineering Course.

1. Powering Massachusetts With Wind
By: Catherine Zhang
Shrewsbury High School
Summary
Completely powering MA using wind would require 25,509 offshore wind turbines,
requiring 65 square miles of space
Use strong yet lightweight composite materials for blade
Possibility for Generators: Permanent Magnet Alternators
Challenges of obtaining necessary space, effect of offshore wind farms on fishing industry,
public support, cost
More feasible goal: Using Wind Energy to Power 20% of MA’sElectricity
MA Energy Profile
Total Energy Consumption (2011): 408,130,722 MWh
Energy Consumption per capita (2011): 62 MWh
o 46th in Nation
Major Sources of Energy
1. Natural Gas
2. Fuel
3. Coal
4. Renewable
Major Sources of Electricity
1. Natural Gas (68%)
2. Coal (11%)
3. Renewable- Biomass and Hydroelectric (6.2%)
Renewable- Biomass and Hydroelectric (6.2%)

2. Wind Turbine Design
Offshore Horizontal-Axis Wind Turbines (HAWTs) with blade radius of 150 ft, height of 295 ft
Wind Turbine Blade:
Material needs to be as light as possible for given stiffness and strength needs
o Solutions: Composites
 Glass Fiber Laminates (Current)
 Carbon Fiber Laminates (Future)
o Variable Blade Pitch, Blade Twist, Thin Airfoil Shape, and Thin Tip Shape needed to
3
maximize power output
Wind Turbine Tower:
Material needs to be strong enough to support blades, nacelle, generator and stiff
o Current Material: Steel
o Future: Composites- Glass Fiber/Concrete Duplex
Wind Turbine Generator:
Permanent Magnet Alternators
o Efficient- About 70% efficient
o Do not need a controller
Details
Offshore HAWTs (in Red Zone on Map)
Needed: 25,509 Wind Turbines
Each Wind Turbine Produces 1.6 x 104MWh
Annually
Takes up 65 square miles offshore space

3. Challenges and Solutions
Challenges:
Cost:
o Offshore wind turbines are 2.7 times more expensive than onshore wind turbines
o Offshore Wind: $221/MWh vs. Natural Gas: $28.16/MWh
 10 times more expensive
Effect on Industry
o Fishing and Shipping Industry: Will need to create safety zones as in the UK to
safely navigate
o Will affect and limit where industry can fish
Effect on Wildlife
o Birds can get caught in the blades
o Marine Life can be affected by noise, magnetic field, radiation
Public Support
o Cape Wind faced vocal resistance from locals, who argued that the noise affected
their health, the environment
Instability
o Wind power only produces energy when it is windy—inconsistency
Engineering Solutions:
Offshore Wind Turbines: Although this does not solve the effect on wildlife, at over 100
km from shore, it nullifies the arguments about health issues to humans and effect on
local real estate
Composite Materials: Composites are more lightweight yet strong and stiff. These
materials would be the optimal application for wind turbines as they require less
maintenance, and are therefore cheaper in the long-term
Greater Efficiency: By increasing blade radius, tower height, and designing the blade
well, we can not only reduce the price of wind power, but reduce the number of
turbines needed
Developing better methods of storing wind energy to compensate for non-windy days
Feasibility
Although I believe that wind energy is a clean alternative energy source compared to current
fossil fuels, completely powering Massachusetts with wind energy is infeasible. The cost,
space, and political debate (fishing industry, public support) are insurmountable obstacles to
wind energy. Though engineering and material breakthroughs will make wind energy
cheaper and more viable, as of now, I believe that MA should instead try to use offshore wind
turbines to power at least 20% of its electricity.