// JANUARY 2022 North Carolina Offshore Wind Cost-Benefit Analysis
// JA N UA RY 2 0 2 2North CarolinaOffshore WindCost-Benefit AnalysisPrepared by Southeastern Wind CoalitionAuthors // Jaime Simmons, Program ManagerDiana Godlevskaya, Program AssociateKatharine Kollins, PresidentIn Partnership with E2North Carolina Offshore Wind Cost-Benefit Analysis // A
Table of ContentsAbout and Acknowledgements.1Acronyms.2Executive Summary.3Introduction.5Background.5Methods.8Cost Inputs.8Offshore Wind Production Projection Inputs.8Electricity Cost Inputs.9Transmission Cost Inputs.9Benefit Inputs.10JEDI Results.10Transmission Benefit Inputs.10Structure of the Analysis. 11Costs. 11Benefits. 11Results.12Additional Considerations.13Jobs.13Emissions Reductions.14Federal Priorities, Subsidies, and Funding.14Offshore Wind Cost Declines.15Electricity System Benefits.16Land-Use and Permitting Constraints.17APPENDIX A // Input Data forJEDI Model — Project Data. 23APPENDIX B // Input Data forJEDI Model — Project Costs. 25APPENDIX C // Input Data forJEDI Model — Local Content. 28Transmission Planning.18Local Manufacturing Content.19New York.19Massachusetts.20Additional Considerations.20Electricity Cost Trends.21Conclusion.22APPENDIX D // Input Data forIMPLAN Model — OnshoreTransmission Upgrades.31APPENDIX E // DEC and DEP WeightedAvoided Cost Calculation. 34APPENDIX F // Cost-Benefit Calculations. 36North Carolina Offshore Wind Cost-Benefit Analysis //
About the SoutheasternWind CoalitionThe Southeastern Wind Coalition is a 501(c)3 that works toadvance the land-based and offshore wind industry in theSoutheast. We focus on providing fact-based information onthe economic and environmental opportunities of wind energy,and encourage solutions that result in net economic benefitsto residents and ratepayers. For more information about theSoutheastern Wind Coalition visit www.sewind.org.About E2E2 is a national, nonpartisan group of business leaders, investorsand other professionals who advocate for smart policies that aregood for the environment and good for the economy. With ninechapters working at the state, local and federal levels across thecountry, E2’s 11,000 members and supporters bring the businesscase for climate action. Collectively, E2 members have founded orfunded more than 2,500 companies, created more than 600,000jobs, and managed more than 100 billion in venture and privateequity capital.For additional insight into E2’s reports, including our clean energyemployment reports, visit e2.org/reports. For more informationabout E2 and its advocacy work, visit www.e2.org.AcknowledgmentsThe authors would like to extend thanks to BW Research, whoprovided a peer-review of this work.North Carolina Offshore Wind Cost-Benefit Analysis // 1
AcronymsACPAmerican Clean Power AssociationAEOAnnual Energy OutlookATBAnnual Technology BaselineAWEAAmerican Wind Energy AssociationBOEMBureau of Ocean Energy ManagementCAPEXCEPCapital expendituresClean Energy PlanCFCapacity factorCO2Carbon dioxideDECDuke Energy CarolinasDEPDuke Energy ProgressDOEU.S. Department of EnergyEIAU.S. Energy Information AdministrationEOFAAFERCExecutive orderU.S. Federal Aviation AdministrationFederal Energy Regulatory CommissionFTEFull-time equivalentGWGigawattIPPIndependent power producerITCInvestment tax creditJEDIkVJobs and Economic Development Impact modelKilovoltkWhKilowatt-hourLCOELevelized cost of orth Carolina Transmission Planning CollaborativeNatural gas combustion cycleNautical mileNational Offshore Wind Research and Development ConsortiumNRELNational Renewable Energy LaboratoryO&MOperations and maintenanceOEMOriginal equipment manufacturerOPEXPPAPVRFPROWRTOSAMSEWCSMART POWERWEAOperating expendituresPower purchase agreementPhotovoltaicsRequest for proposalsRight of wayRegional Transmission OrganizationSystem Advisory ModelSoutheastern Wind CoalitionSoutheast and Mid-Atlantic Regional Transformative Partnership for Offshore Wind Energy ResourcesWind energy areaNorth Carolina Offshore Wind Cost-Benefit Analysis // 2
Executive SummaryOver the next decade offshore wind is expected toplay a significant role in decarbonizing the U.S. electricsector, and especially along the East Coast. Whenstates are considering offshore wind goals, they willcertainly evaluate the myriad of associated costs andbenefits. This analysis was developed to help decisionmakers quantify some of the economic development andenvironmental benefits associated with offshore wind.This analysis calculates the costs and benefitsassociated with a single 2.8-gigawatt (GW) offshorewind project off the coast of North Carolina in operationby 2030. Both a base scenario, assuming a standardamount of local manufacturing/supply chain content, anda high local content (or “high”) scenario, were developed.The analysis found that in bothscenarios, the theoretical 2.8GWoffshore wind project provides a neteconomic benefit to North Carolina.FIGURE ES. 1 // Net economic impact: cost-benefitcomparison for 2.8GW offshore wind project( in millions)Net Economic Impact2030 — Base2030 — High 3,781 4,581The high scenario assumes 100% local content forboth the blades and offshore substations of a single2.8GW theoretical project. Content assumptions arebased on findings from the March 2021 offshore windsupply chain study conducted on behalf of the NorthCarolina Department of Commerce, which indicatesthese components being most likely to locate productionin-state. While not within the scope of this calculation,it is important to highlight the compounded value thatnew or expanded offshore wind supply chain capabilitieslocated in North Carolina will create. In addition to1providing economic benefit to the state through projectsdeveloped off the coast of North Carolina, offshore windmanufacturers will also supply components for projectsalong the Atlantic coast or potentially across the countryor the globe — generating continued economic benefitto the state, absent the cost of generating electricity.Timing and market demand are essential whenevaluating this compounded benefit. Due to thenascency of the domestic supply chain and asdepicted through the first wave of manufacturinglocation announcements1,2,3, Tier-1 original equipmentmanufacturers (OEMs) and their sub-componentsuppliers are more likely to establish facilities in statesthat are creating demand for their product. The longer astate waits to make commitments to development, theless likely they are to attract larger manufacturers.Benefit figures for the analysis were derived from theresults of the National Renewable Energy Laboratory’s(NREL) Jobs and Economic Development Impact (JEDI)model. The modeling inputs were informed by industrystandards and datasets, as well as North Carolinaspecific data including potential transmission injectionpoints, existing wind energy area characteristics, andsupply chain strengths detailed in the March 2021 reporttitled Building North Carolina’s Offshore Wind SupplyChain published by the North Carolina Departmentof Commerce. Benefits specifically for onshoretransmission upgrades were calculated through IMPLANmodeling. Cost inputs were calculated using projectionsfor capacity factor (CF), levelized cost of energy(LCOE), and technical lifetime from NREL’s 2021 AnnualTechnology Baseline (ATB), findings from the NorthCarolina Transmission Planning Collaborative’s offshorewind injection study, and a weighted calculation of DukeEnergy Carolinas and Duke Energy Progress’ avoidedcost rates.An additional output from JEDI modeling scenariosare full-time equivalent (FTE) positions created duringboth construction and operations and maintenance(O&M) phases. An FTE of 1.0 represents one full-timeworker. The economic value of FTE’s is included in thecalculated benefit.Governor Phil Murphy. (2020, December 21). Governor Murphy Announces 250 Million Total Investment in State-of-the-Art Manufacturing Facility to Build WindTurbine Components to Serve Entire U.S. Offshore Wind Industry [Press release]. State of New Jersey.2Port of Albany. (2020, January 14). Port of Albany Selected as the First Offshore Wind Tower Manufacturing Site in the Nation in Partnership between Marmen Inc,Welcon A/S and Equinor Wind [Press release].3Siemens Gamesa Renewable Energy. (2021, Oct 25). Unmatched in the U.S.: Global Leadership Grows: Siemens Gamesa solidifies offshore presence in U.S. withVirginia blade facility [Press release]. /10/offshore-blade-facility-virginia-usaNorth Carolina Offshore Wind Cost-Benefit Analysis // 3
FIGURE ES. 2 // FTE Positions CreatedJobs DuringConstruction(job years)O&M Jobs (annual)2030 — Base2030 — High27,62130,990923923FTEs are categorized by specific activity duringconstruction, operation and maintenance (O&M), as wellas induced jobs created by spending of wages fromjobs created in the prior two categories. The majorityof FTE’s created through both construction and O&Mare within the manufacturing supply chain and supportservices. These jobs are representative of a supply chainthat will provide materials and components for offshorewind projects beyond the theoretical project within thisanalysis, creating significant job creation beyond that ofthe project modeled.Additional factors can contribute to both the costsand the benefits of offshore wind. Tax incentiveslike the Investment Tax Credit (ITC) and emissionsreductions valued through the social cost of carbon,can be quantified. Other factors such as electricitysystem benefits and land-use constraints can also bequantified, but require more specific project detailsthan this analysis provides and are therefore addressedqualitatively to provide a more complete picture of thebenefits North Carolina can derive from offshore wind.FIGURE ES. 3 // Economic Benefits to North Carolina( in millions)2030 —Base EconomicBenefitITC Extensionto 2030EconomicBenefit withITC Extension 3,781 2,148 5,929FIGURE ES. 4 // Quantifiable Benefits ( in millions)EconomicBenefit withITC ExtensionBenefitsSocial Cost ofCarbonTotalQuantifiable 5,929 8,367 14,296North Carolina Offshore Wind Cost-Benefit Analysis // 4
IntroductionBackgroundRecently codified in state-level legislation, North Carolinahas asserted the carbon-reduction goal of 70% by2030 and to achieve carbon neutrality by mid-century4.To that end, the Governor’s administration, the NorthCarolina General Assembly, and Duke Energy have allendeavored to examine pathways to reliably and costeffectively decarbonize the state’s electric grid5,6,7,8. Whileoffshore wind has occasionally been an element of thesediscussions, due to relative cost and nascency of theU.S. offshore wind industry, it hasn’t been evaluated as aprimary tool for decarbonization.The offshore wind industry was established in the early1990’s and has grown to over 35GW of global installedcapacity in 202010. The only large-scale renewabletechnology with a generating profile that can correspondwith peak load hours, and be complementary to onshorewind and solar, offshore wind is a necessary componentto a carbon-free, reliable grid. Additionally, themanufacture, installation, and maintenance of offshorewind projects have delivered substantial economicbenefit to Europe, where global deployment to datehas focused11.Absent from any of the decarbonization modeling orstakeholder processes conducted in the state since2018 is the consideration of the economic benefits thataccompany offshore wind. According to the AmericanWind Energy Association (AWEA), now the AmericanClean Power Association (ACP), an estimated 30GWof offshore wind deployment in the U.S. by 2030 couldgenerate as much as 57 billion in economic output9.As such, the inclusion of these benefits is critical whenunderstanding the full value of the technology.Consideration of offshore wind deployment in theU.S. has taken shape over the past decade and beganto materialize with the development of the country’s firstoperating offshore wind farm, Block Island, in 2016.The industry has continued to advance with ademonstration-size project off the coast of Virginia,over 35GW of state-level development or procurementcommitments, and in 2021, an announcement fromPresident Biden to pursue 30GW of offshore winddeployment by 203012.This analysis determines both the costs and benefitsof a theoretical 2.8-gigawatt (GW) offshore windproject developed off the coast of North Carolina inoperation by 2030 using industry-standard practices,data, and modeling tools. The costs and benefits aremeasured against one another to determine the neteconomic impact.European governments have long acknowledged theunique benefits of offshore wind, and as with manynew industries, its initial cost premium. Through variousnational and multi-governmental initiatives includingresearch, investment, industrialization, and subsidization,the European offshore wind market has realizedsignificant cost reductions since inception13,4Energy Solutions for North Carolina, H. bill 951, N.C.G.A. (2021–2022). https://ncleg.gov/BillLookup/2021/h9515Konschnik, K., Ross, M., Monast, J., Weiss, J., & Wilson, G. (2020). (rep.). Power Sector Carbon Reduction: An Evaluation of Policies for North Carolina (pp. 1–245).Nicholas Institute for Environmental Policy Solutions, Duke University.6North Carolina Department of Environmental Quality (2019, October). North Carolina Clean Energy Plan: Transitioning to a 21st Century Electricity lean-energy-plan/NC Clean Energy Plan OCT 2019 .pdf7Matsuda-Dunn, R., Emmanuel, M., Chartan, E., Hodge, B. M., & Brinkman, G. (2020, January). Carbon Free Resource Integration Study (NREL/TP-5D00-74337).National Renewable Energy Laboratory. https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy20osti/74337.pdf8An Act to Modernize North Carolina's Generation and Grid Resources and Rate Making and To Invest in Critical Energy Infrastructure for The Benefit of Customers,H. bill 951, N.C.G.A. (2021-2022). https://ncleg.gov/BillLookup/2021/h9519American Wind Energy Association (2020, March) U.S. Offshore Wind Power Economic Impact Assessment. /sites/6/2020/03/AWEA Offshore-Wind-Economic-ImpactsV3.pdf10Global Wind Energy Council (2021, September 9) ffshore-wind-2021-updated-1.pdfWind Europe (2021, February). Offshore Wind in Europe: Key trends and statistics 2020. “Every new wind offshore wind turbine generates 15m of economicactivity. cs-2020/1112The White House (2021, March 29) Biden Administration Jumpstarts Offshore Wind Energy Projects to Create Jobs. eate-jobs/13Schnettler, J., & Segal, K. (2020, April). Cost-Benefit Analysis of Offshore Wind in the Kitty Hawk Wind Energy Area. N/A. Retrieved July 2021, from https://books.google.com/books/about/Cost benefit Analysis of Offshore Wind i.html?id ibXVzQEACAAJNorth Carolina Offshore Wind Cost-Benefit Analysis // 5
with the first unsubsidized projects, Vattenfall’sHollandse Kust Zuid 3 & 4, set to be built by 202214.According to the UK’s “Cost Reduction MonitoringFramework” (CRMF), most of these cost reductions area result of the commercialization of larger, more efficientturbines, with supplemental reductions gained throughefficiencies within the value chain15.As the next wave of a now-established industry,commercial-scale offshore wind projects currentlyunder development are leveraging the progress madeto date in offshore wind technology — Vineyard Wind I,which will be the U.S.’s first commercial-scale wind farm(scheduled to be in operation by 2023), has announcedits selection of GE Renewable Energy’s 13-megawatt(MW) Haliade-X turbine16. By comparison, the averagecapacity for turbines installed globally in 2020 was8.2MW17.While the U.S. is primed to capitalize on technologyadvancements made abroad, given the size of turbinecomponents and associated transportation costs, aconsiderable pipeline of offshore wind projects merits adomestic supply chain.Because this supply chain doesnot yet exist in the U.S., thecontinued growth of offshore winddevelopment across the countryhas the potential to create anentirely new sector of the economy,specifically in states and regionswhere development is anticipated.The 30GW of planned development recently announcedby the current Administration will generate more than 12 billion per year in capital investments, and morethan 77,000 direct and induced jobs18. Establishing adomestic supply chain will further decrease the costof offshore wind, as a robust network of suppliers inclose proximity to development will create logisticsefficiencies19.North Carolina has taken measured strides to developan offshore wind industry. In October 2018, GovernorRoy Cooper’s Executive Order (EO) 80 directed thecreation of a state Clean Energy Plan, which indicatedmultiple offshore wind objectives, including the creationof a regional offshore wind collaborative, a study ofthe state’s supply chain and infrastructure as it relatesto offshore wind, and the advancement of legislativeand regulatory actions to foster development of NorthCarolina’s offshore wind resources20. The first two havesubsequently been accomplished — the Southeast andMid-Atlantic Regional Transformative Partnership forOffshore Wind Energy Resources (SMART-POWER) wassigned by the Governors of North Carolina, Virginia, andMaryland to reduce regulatory barriers and regionallypursue offshore wind development21. Next, a study ofthe state’s supply chain and port infrastructure waspublished in March 2021 which outlined the state’sunique benefits in contributing to the offshore windindustry’s manufacturing supply chain22.14Vattenfall. (2019, July 10). Vattenfall wins tender for Dutch offshore wind power [Press release]. shore-wind-power15Cost Reduction Monitoring Framework — Quantitative Assessment Report (2016, December 19). UK Offshore Wind Programme Board, the Offshore Wind IndustryCouncil, the UK Department of Energy and Climate Change, and the Crown Estate. [P. 16]. Quantitative-Report-Print-Version.pdf16Vineyard Wind. (2020, December 1). Vineyard Wind Selects GE Renewable Energy as Preferred Turbine Supplier for America’s First Utility Scale Offshore WindProject [Press release]. referred-turbine-supplier17Wind Europe. (2021, February).18The White House. (2021, March 29).19Musial, W. (2018, February). Offshore Wind Resource, Cost, and Economic Potential in the State of Maine. National Renewable Energy Laboratory. Q. (2019, October). NC Clean Energy Plan.Governor Roy Cooper (2020, October). Maryland, North Carolina, and Virginia Announce Agreement to Spur Offshore Wind Energy and Economic Development[Press release]. ind-energy-and-economic21BVG Associates (2021, March). Building North Carolina’s Offshore Wind Supply Chain: The roadmap for leveraging manufacturing and infrastructure advantages.North Carolina Department of Commerce ker-Reports/Report North-Carolina-OSW-Supply-ChainAssessment BVGAssociates asPublished-Mar3-2021.pdf22North Carolina Exec. Order No. 218, Advancing North Carolina’s Economic and Clean Energy Future with Offshore Wind (2021, June 9). Offshore-Wind.pdf23North Carolina Offshore Wind Cost-Benefit Analysis // 6
In June 2021, Governor Roy Cooper signed EO 218,which set forth an offshore wind development goal of2.8GW of offshore wind by 2030 and 8GW by 204023.Governor Cooper’s EO mirrors those previously madeby Governors and state legislatures along the Atlanticcoast24,25,26, reflecting the understanding that offshorewind is an essential technology in reaching state,utility, or national carbon-reduction goals as well as theappetite for capturing as much of the multi-billion-dollarsupply chain as possible that has yet to be establisheddomestically.As demonstrated by the recentannouncements of the location ofTier-1 manufacturing facilities27,28,29,state-level commitments to developoffshore wind have been a primarydriver in securing these investments.24To support anticipated demand, additional Tier-1 aswell as sub-component Tier-2 and Tier-3 manufacturingfacilities will be constructed across the country inthe coming years. With the location of new offshorewind manufacturing still largely up for grabs and givenGovernor Cooper’s 2021 offshore wind development EOas well as the state’s examination of decarbonizationpathways, this analysis was conducted to support theconsideration of offshore wind’s ability to cost-effectivelycontribute to reaching North Carolina’s carbon-reductiongoals. Additionally, the high scenario helps to show howan early demonstration of North Carolina’s commitmentto offshore wind development can dramatically impactthe state’s economic benefit from both a single projectand additional projects along the Atlantic coast.An Act To Promote Energy Diversity, H. bill 4568, The 192nd General Court of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts (2015-2016). https://malegislature.gov/Bills/189/H456825New Jersey Exec. Order No. 8 (2018, January 31). ommonwealth of Virginia Exec. Order No. 43, Expanding Access To Clean Energy And Growing The Clean Energy Jobs Of The Future (2019, September Jobsof-the-Future.pdf26Governor Phil Murphy. (2020, December 21).2728Port of Albany. (2020, January 14).29Siemens Gamesa Renewable Energy. (2021, Oct 25).North Carolina Offshore Wind Cost-Benefit Analysis // 7
MethodsThis analysis quantifies the anticipated costs andbenefits of the development of 2.8GW of offshore windalong the North Carolina coast by 2030 as set forth byGovernor Cooper’s EO 80 and derives the net economicbenefit of the theoretical project. To demonstrate thevalue of a localized supply chain that North Carolinacould possibly recruit should the state actively pursuemajor offshore wind manufacturers, a high local content(or “high”) case was conducted as well.class. Given the prioritization of offshore wind by theBiden-Harris Administration and therefore the likelyaccelerated trajectory of the industry, an “advanced”scenario, which “assumes a supply chain that generatesefficiency gains above the level of the past few years”32is possible. However, the analysis utilized the “moderate”scenario, which anticipates the use of 15MW turbinesthat are currently being developed and tested by majormanufacturers such as Vestas33, GE34, and SiemensGamesa35.Cost InputsThe analysis incorporates 2021 ATB projections forcapacity factor (CF), technical lifetime, and levelizedcost of energy (LCOE)36. The CF is represented by apercentage and demonstrates the amount of electricitythat is generated on average when compared to thecapacity rating of the project. For example, if a 100MWwind farm has a CF of 50%, the actual amount ofelectricity being produced will average 50MW over thecourse of a year. The 2021 ATB’s Class 5 “moderate”offshore wind CF projection for 2030 is 46%.Offshore Wind Production Projection InputsThe primary cost inputs used in this calculationwere derived from the National Renewable EnergyLaboratory’s (NREL) 2021 Annual Technology Baseline(ATB). The ATB is a widely utilized data set thatincorporates analyses from multiple national laboratories,Department of Energy (DOE) offices, and other industryreports, and details current and projected cost andperformance data for multiple electricity generationtechnologies. For offshore wind, the 2021 ATB providesprojections for Class 1 through 14 resource classes,classes 1–7 representing fixed-bottom technology, andclasses 8–14 representing floating technology. Classesare further divided by wind resource, or average windspeeds, with a lower class representing a higher averagewind speed. Based on the average water depths ofthe existing wind energy areas off the coast of NorthCarolina30 as well as the average wind speeds over thisarea, as calculated by NREL31, this analysis utilizedthe Class 5 cost projections. Projections also capturevariances in anticipated technology innovations andcost drivers, which are demonstrated in “conservative”,“moderate”, and “advanced” scenarios for each resource30The technical lifetime utilized in the 2021 ATB is 30 years,which according to NREL is consistent with currentindustry trends37.LCOE is a commonly used metric for the cost ofelectricity produced over the lifetime of a project. LCOEincludes capital expenditures (CAPEX), operationsexpenditures (OPEX), and CF to determine averagecost to produce a kWh. Due to the variances infinancing structures and operations for different typesof generation, LCOE is a metric that is used to moreeasily compare costs across generation technologies.The 2021 ATB’s Class 5 “moderate” LCOE projection for2030 is 55/MWh. Details on the assumptions behindLCOE can be found on the ATB website.Marine Cadastre National Viewer. MarineCadastre.gov. (n.d.). Measurement of existing Wilmington E WEA. l Renewable Energy Laboratory [map]. (2011). United States — Annual Average Offshore Wind Speed at 90m. Retrieved from ional Renewable Energy Laboratory. (2021). 2021 Annual Technology Baseline — Electricity — Offshore Wind. NREL. Retrieved July 24, 2021, from https://atb.nrel.gov/electricity/2021/offshore wind32Vestas. (Feb 10, 2021). Vestas launches the V236-15.0 MW to set new industry benchmark and take next step towards leadership in offshore wind [Press ews?n 3886820#!grid 0 content 0 Container33GE Renewable Energy. (n.d.). World’s Most Powerful Offshore Wind Platform: Haliade-X. Retrieved July 24, 2021, from hore-wind/haliade-x-offshore-turbine34Siemens Gamesa. (2020, May 19). Powered by change: Siemens Gamesa launches 14 MW offshore Direct Drive turbine with 222-meter rotor [Press release]. al Renewable Energy Laboratory. (2021). 2021 Annual Technology Baseline — Electricity — Data. NREL. Retrieved July 24, 2021, from https://atb.nrel.gov/electricity/2021/dat3637NREL 2021 ATB, Offshore Wind. (2021).North Carolina Offshore Wind Cost-Benefit Analysis // 8
Electricity Cost InputsTo approximate the wholesale cost of electricity forNorth Carolina, this analysis utilized the 2020 avoidedcost rate schedules for Duke Energy Carolinas (DEC)and Duke Energy Progress (DEP)38. North Carolina iscomposed of vertically integrated monopoly utilities,therefore wholesale costs of electricity are nottransparent nor available. Avoided cost is a biennialcalculation determined by the North Carolina UtilitiesCommission that includes confidential cost detailsfrom DEC and DEP as well as forward-looking fuelassumptions to determine the compensation structurefor independent power producers (IPPs). A
North Carolina Offshore Wind Cost-Benefit Analysis // 1 About the Southeastern Wind Coalition The Southeastern Wind Coalition is a 501(c)3 that works to advance the land-based and offshore wind industry in the Southeast. We focus on providing fact-based information on the economic and environmental opportunities of wind energy,
KLOPFER v, NORTH CAROLINA. Syllabus. KLOPFER v. NORTH CAROLINA. CERTIORARI TO THE SUPREME COURT OF NORTH CAROLINA. No. 100. Argued December 8, 1966.-Decided March 13, 1967. Petitioner's trial on a North Carolina criminal trespass indictment ended with a declarati
Feb 19, 2022 · Miami-Dade County Daily Covid-19 Hospital Report Category 02/05/2022 02/06/2022 02/07/2022 02/08/2022 02/09/2022 02/10/2022 02/11/2022 02/12/2022 02/13/2022 02/14/2022 02/15/2022 02/16/2022 02/17/2022 02/18/2022 Beds Acute Care Beds Beds that may be converted to Acute Care Beds IC
National Bank of the Republic of North Macedonia Statistics Department Skopje, 31 January 2023 Press Release Significant developments in interest rates of banks and savings houses1: . 12.2021 1.2022 2.2022 3.2022 4.2022 5.2022 6.2022 7.2022 8.2022 9.2022 10.2022 11.2022 12.2022 in % on annual level
services necessary to construct and maintain the Arctic/Offshore Patrol Ships (AOPS), Joint Support Ships (JSS), Polar Icebreaker, and Offshore Fisheries/ Offshore Oceanographic Science . National Shipbuilding Procurement Strategy OFSV Offshore Fisheries Science Vessel OOSV Offshore Oceanographic Science Vessel . Recent Ice-Classed Offshore .
Offshore wind farm status GW 10.4 7.7 2.6 2.3 1.7 0.3 25.0 % 42% 31% 10% 9% 7% 1% 100% UK Germany Netherlands Belgium Denmark Rest of Europe Total Turbines 2,292 1,501 537 399 559 112 5,400 Triton Knoll west offshore substation and jackup vessel Neptune 04 Offshore wind operational report 2020 05 Offshore wind operational report 2020 Offshore .
Wadesboro, North Carolina W adesb or, N th C lin XXX Washington, North Carolina W as h ing t o, N rC l XXX Case Studies IV: Small towns adjacent to a metropolitan area or an interstate highwayC as eS tu d iIV: m l o wnj c rp hg y XXX Davidson, North Carolina* Davidson, North Carolina* XXX X Farmville, North Carolina
Aquaculture in North Carolina Catfish North Carolina Catfish Farms, By County, 2000 Mountain Piedmont Coastal Plain ˇˆ ˆ . Aquaculture in North Carolina Catfish By Year 2, net returns before tax to the farmer's labor, land, and capital is 42,520, or 850 per water acre.
ASTM C 40 Surface Moisture CSA A23.2-11A ASTM C 70 As directed by the Engineer. Relative Density and Absorption CSA A23.2-6A ASTM C 128 MRB-A211 One test per material. Material Finer than 75 µm ASTM C 117 MRB-A204 One test per sample. Title: Microsoft Word - Specification 1001 _I_ Supplying and Placing Granular Backfill.doc Author: jbetke Created Date: 3/8/2010 3:23:55 PM .
