The $2.5 Billion U.S. Power Line That No State Can Stop

[jpak]

Source: Bloomberg News

A $2.5-billion transmission line carrying wind power to the U.S. Southeast is coming -- whether state regulators there like it or not.

On Friday, the U.S. Energy Department used a decade-old statute to clear Clean Line Energy Partners LLC’s 705-mile (1,134-kilometer) power line for construction over any objections from the states involved.

The Energy Department’s approval of the line, proposed to carry 4,000 megawatts of power from the wind-rich Oklahoma panhandle through Arkansas and into Tennessee, marks the first time the 2005 statute has been used to bypass state approval and push through an interstate transmission project.

“Moving remote and plentiful power to areas where electricity is in high demand is essential for building the grid of the future,” Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz said in a statement. “Building modern transmission that delivers renewable energy to more homes and businesses will create jobs, cut carbon emissions, and enhance the reliability of our grid.”

<more>

Read more: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-03-25/the-2-5-billion-u-s-transmission-line-that-no-state-can-stop

[angstlessk]

1. I think that is good news

who is trying to block renewable energy from reaching their states?

[safeinOhio]

12. Coal industry

[kristopher]

16. More likely owners of local generation plants

It could be coal, nuclear or natural gas.

Wind depresses prices for most traditional sources of generation.

[Yallow]

26. Make The Carbon Burners Pay For Externalities

If we paid the true cost of burning carbon, wind and solar would be practically free in comparison.

Pass the devastation and bills for our sicknesses onto future generations.

[kristopher]

29. The wind industry is maturing rapidly.

It is already the least expensive option bar none. A carbon tax would help accelerate things (as well as help people pay for their personal transition hopefully), but even now, in the past couple of years we're seeing a lot of coal plants and coal production shutting down.
Frankly we've just won the economic argument for renewables and now it's only a matter of rolling the stuff out.

China is going bonkers.

China Is on an Epic Solar Power Binge
China aims to vastly increase its already world-leading solar capacity by 2020, but it is motivated by more than just fighting climate change.
by Richard Martin March 22, 2016

It’s worth taking a minute to appreciate the sheer scale of what China is doing in solar right now. In 2015, the country added more than 15 gigawatts of new solar capacity, surpassing Germany as the world’s largest solar power market. China now has 43.2 gigawatts of solar capacity, compared with 38.4 gigawatts in Germany and 27.8 in the United States.

According to new projections, it seems that trend is going to continue. Under its 13th Five Year Plan, China will nearly triple solar capacity by 2020, adding 15 to 20 gigawatts of solar capacity each year for the next five years, according to Nur Bekri, director of the National Energy Administration. That will bring the country’s installed solar power to more than 140 gigawatts. To put that in context, world solar capacity topped 200 gigawatts last year and is expected to reach 321 gigawatts by the end of 2016.

Of course, China is also the world’s largest carbon emitter...

https://www.technologyreview.com/s/601093/china-is-on-an-epic-solar-power-binge/

[forest444]

2. I hope someone's keeping an eye out for potential acts of sabotage.

Particularly the kind where the local governor's office is quick to describe it as a "senseless and inexplicable act."

[riversedge]

3. It is past time for every one to get on line with this. We all know our outdated electric

grid is in bad shape. Move forward.

[Hortensis]

43. Part of Obama's push to have 28% of US power renewable-sourced by 2030.

That's almost a third and very impressive, and it's using Federal eminent domain power to clear out smaller interests that are blocking these big Solutions. 4X more electricity than Hoover Dam and less expensive . Very large and aggressive, of course, means lots of opponents. Everything from environmental groups to the Koch brothers. A 730-mile line from Wyoming to Las Vegas is also in the works.

The Sierra Club backed a similar line in Missouri that was shot down by state/local agencies, but now this may clear the way to return to the Missouri project, which would replace coal as the main power source for those areas.

[WhiteTara]

4. Here in Arkansas, we just shut down such a powerline

because of the ill effects on the environment. I wonder if we will have to fight such a monster again.

[PuppyBismark]

6. What were the "ill effects on the environment?"

Just asking.

[WhiteTara]

10. See my post number 7

it will explain much. Briefly this is the oldest mountain range in the world and is home to many rare and endangered species, as well as a migratory path for birds and pollinators. This is called karst geology with limestone caverns and caves riddling the entire mountain. The poles sink into the ground at least 60 feet and require (as wide as 2 football fields) a "scorched earth" approach to keeping the lines clear. The scenario is a nightmare. www.SaveTheOzarks.org for more info

[angstlessk]

13. If the alternative is to blast the hell out of the mountains in WV for dirty coal

It sounds worth it!

[WhiteTara]

14. I think that distributed energy is a good alternative to

both destructive forms of power.

[sinkingfeeling]

36. This line is going north of Van Buren to Wilson in Mississippi County.

[oldandhappy]

7. I would like to know more about this.

I know some of this is coming our way eventually. I do not want you to have to go back over all you have done but I would sure appreciate any links related to your fight. Are there emissions from the line? Well, anything you can send me will be appreciated. Thank you.

[WhiteTara]

8. For one thing this is the oldest mountain range in the world

and it has karst geology with vast limestone caverns and caves. The biodiversity is extensive with some very rare and endangered species with rivers running abundantly. There was no environmental study done and major flaws were found in the maps and paperwork. For an extensive summary go to SaveTheOzarks.org and you will find a wealth of information.

[oldandhappy]

9. Thanks. Your area sounds lovely and beautiful. Will check the site.

[WhiteTara]

11. It is. You should visit sometime

before it is destroyed.

[oldandhappy]

15. yea. got it.

sad

[Yallow]

27. Paid For 100% By Big Coal, and Big Fracking

Another 20 years of carbon burning, and the Ozarks may look like the wasteland on Road Warrior.

I'm just sayyyyin....

[sinkingfeeling]

37. Not going through there. North of Van Buren to Wilson.

[Hestia]

28. Plus this powerline is a pass-through. Ark. will get no benefit from any energy through these lines

[cprise]

31. Most grids are regional in size

Are you saying the lines terminate at a different grid?

[sinkingfeeling]

35. Then why are environmentalist applauding this line that will bring something other

than coal-fired energy?

[WhiteTara]

5. This may "sound" good, but this is the way of the past

not the future. Distributed energy is the way to handle this not hundreds of miles of power lines.

[jeff47]

17. We can't do 100% distributed yet.

We don't have sufficient storage technology.

As a result, we're going to need "the grid" and large interconnects for a long time.

[kristopher]

19. Yes we can.

If that is your view, storage in such a system isn't what you think it is. Not trying to be provocative but the degree to which that canard is in the public mind just wears on me at times.

[jeff47]

20. We really can't.

At the moment, we've got basically 3 workable storage technologies.

1) Pumped Hydro. Requires a very large artificial lake. And thus is inherently non-distributed.

2) Thermal (ie. molten salt). Requires a very large plant to be efficient, and thus is inherently non-distributed.

3) Batteries. We can't make nearly enough Tesla Powerwalls, even if we ignore the high price and the massive price increase when we suddenly vacuum up all lithium production. Lead-acid storage requires a lot more space, and a lot more tending to the deep cycle batteries that are used. And we'd run into similar problems getting enough lead - there aren't actually a lot of lead mines anymore, because we've become so efficient at recycling old lead-acid batteries.

There's some very interesting battery research going on, such as aluminum-air batteries. But those are not even out of the lab yet, much less available in a scale to install in a distributed power grid.

So we still need something to supply power on calm nights, and we can't currently rely on storage. That means we either need small local generators (way less efficient than larger generators) or large grid interconnects so we can bring power in from somewhere where the wind is blowing.

[kristopher]

21. Well that's the PopSci version.

It really isn't correct though. Its a view that's more a product of misinformation building on intuition than of actual knowledge. Think about it - would anyone want to put the thought in people's mind that we can't switch away from carbon? Is there any group or groups that might hope to retard interest in a transition???

Storage is a small part of moving forward and we are at least a decade away from the point where it might constrain development - if it ever does. The bottom line is that there are a lot of ways to deal with variable renewables, and storage is only one of them. The determining factor as to what approach we us is, and always will be, what is most cost effective.

Here is a sample of the way it's evaluated.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0378775312014759

We model many combinations of renewable electricity sources (inland wind, offshore wind, and photovoltaics) with electrochemical storage (batteries and fuel cells), incorporated into a large grid system (72 GW). The purpose is twofold: 1) although a single renewable genera- tor at one site produces intermittent power, we seek combinations of diverse renewables at diverse sites, with storage, that are not intermittent and satisfy need a given fraction of hours. And 2) we seek minimal cost, calculating true cost of electricity without subsidies and with inclusion of external costs. Our model evaluated over 28 billion combinations of renewables and storage, each tested over 35,040 h (four years) of load and weather data. We find that the least cost solutions yield seemingly-excessive generation capacity—at times, almost three times the electricity needed to meet electrical load. This is because diverse re- newable generation and the excess capacity together meet electric load with less storage, lowering total system cost. At 2030 technology costs and with excess electricity displacing natural gas, we find that the electric system can be powered 90%–99.9% of hours entirely on renewable electricity, at costs comparable to today's—but only if we optimize the mix of generation and storage technologies.

If I may, let me be clear about my point is. We don't have to wait. I'm not saying things won't get better or that we are an an end point in technology - just that we don't have to wait for the technologies you mentioned.

[jeff47]

22. Quote where I talked about needing fossil fuels.

I didn't. So stop the condescending bullshit.

Especially when your oh-so-knowledgeable solution is exactly what I was saying we should do. Large grid interconnects to bring in renewable energy when it's not available locally. Just what do you think " incorporated into a large grid system (72 GW)" means?

If I may, let me be clear about my point is. We don't have to wait.

Quote where I'm saying we need to wait. Again, we can do it now with large grid interconnects. We can't do it now with "everyone has their own solar panels and windmills" because we can't handle intermittency....you know, exactly what your article says.

Lastly, you should probably look up what the anode is on the batteries you champion before deriding carbon. 'Cause the anode on a lithium battery is carbon.

[kristopher]

23. OK I reread you post

We can't do 100% distributed yet.
We don't have sufficient storage technology.
As a result, we're going to need "the grid" and large interconnects for a long time.

Did you consider that this comes across differently than you meant it?

I should have picked it up on your second post, but I was building on the ambiguity of this one and I'm tired to boot.

Peace.

[jeff47]

24. It only comes across different if you assume "the grid" can only be powered by fossil fuels.

And "the grid" does not give a shit what makes the electrons move.

[kristopher]

25. No Jeff, it comes across as someone saying that the present system is here to stay.

No assumptions like ""the grid" can only be powered by fossil fuels" are required for that reading.

[cprise]

33. I've been meaning to ask you

Have you've seen any Saudi fingerprints on the anti-net metering movement?

[cprise]

30. There are more options than that

And citing lead-acid batteries is so... last decade. They aren't in the running now.

Various battery chemistries in productions and commercial trials are plummeting in cost.. essentially replaying the cost reductions of wind and solar.

There are offshore underwater pressure vessels (pumped air instead of pumped hydro) and distributed thermal storage (icebear conditioning units for warm climates) that are available. Even fuel cells are likely to become an option if reported gains in efficiency bear out.

What you may also be missing is that renewable penetration into the market can go to at least 40% without significant storage capacity. To go higher than that, the storage capability of EVs may do most of the job. That's why you don't see renewable advocates panicking over the variability/storage problem -- its already quite tractable and probably the biggest obstacle right now besides the war on net metering is the stall in EV sales due to depressed gasoline prices.

[jeff47]

38. Again, those chemistries are not at the point where they could be put

into every house. For example, aluminum-air looks very good for this role, but they aren't in production at all, much less at massive scale.

There are offshore underwater pressure vessels (pumped air instead of pumped hydro)

Not gonna work for Oklahoma. Leaving us again with the need for large grid interconnects.

distributed thermal storage (icebear conditioning units for warm climates)

Air conditioning is not the only power consumption.

Even fuel cells are likely to become an option if reported gains in efficiency bear out.

Still runs into the large-plant-is-more-efficient-than-individual-households.

To go higher than that, the storage capability of EVs may do most of the job.

I'd like to actually drive to work in the morning, instead of consuming the EV battery overnight.

Also, this runs into the same problem as putting something like a Powerwall in every house - we can't currently make enough, for a low enough price to support a rollout at the scale necessary. But we can currently make really big wind turbines, and run large grid interconnects to distribute that power from windy places to calm places.

If we're talking about a really distributed system, that's going to require something we can more-or-less put in every house.

Most likely we're going to have a "hybrid" system where some houses have power generation/storage, supplemented with things like large wind farms and grid interconnects.

[cprise]

40. Not everything will be distributed

And there only need be one or two really good distributed technologies to make the kind of qualitative difference in power relations that you appear to be seeking.

Air conditioning is not the only power consumption.

Well, we can't have it all in one package. Nevertheless, its still a big deal that is under-appreciated (alas, HVAC has no sex appeal).

Re: Batteries....

For about every 25 announcements about lab breakthroughs these days, there's an announcement about grid installations like these:

http://www.technologyreview.com/news/534096/grid-batteries-for-wind-solar-find-first-customers/

http://www.technologyreview.com/news/527516/a-battery-made-of-iron-could-improve-the-economics-of-solar-and-wind-power/

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2015/11/09/this-could-be-the-biggest-sign-yet-that-the-battery-revolution-is-here/

There have been some stories about storage projects being built in Germany, as well as the 'power block' home units using re-used laptop batteries.

I think home storage will be important, but it will come mostly from a mixture of HVAC storage and re-used EV batteries, and EVs themselves. BTW Texas is said to be trialing a vehicle-to-grid storage scheme for EVs now.

[kristopher]

18. Both are needed.

Distributed energy resources need to be integrated across broad geographic areas, they are desirable because they reenforce and back-up each other. Without the redundancy the benefits are greatly diminished and costs are significantly increased.

[Sunlei]

32. If "Arkansas and four other states buy hydroelectric power from federal dams" why do they need this?

Shouldn't the entire state/area closest to the windfarm on "Oklahoma panhandle" be connected first to that power before power is sold far away.?

Is this a matter of more "private profits" to be made (using billions of OUR Federal funds) rather then common sense?

[Turbineguy]

39. ".... enhance the reliability ...."

No, that will never do. They must be able to say... "The turrists cut off yo power, warmed yo beer and endangered yo gun collection by lack of A/C!"

[valerief]

41. What statute? Energy Policy Act of 2005?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_Policy_Act_of_2005

[bananas]

42. Yes

http://www.chattanoogan.com/2016/3/26/320864/Alexander-Hits-DOE-Plan-To-Take-Part.aspx

Alexander Hits DOE Plan To Take Part In Clean Line Wind Power Project

Saturday, March 26, 2016

<snip>

This marks the first use of Congressional authority conferred to DOE as part of Section 1222 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 with the objective of promoting transmission development.

DOE officials said, "Congress passed this provision when it was becoming clear that our nation’s transmission 'infrastructure was beginning to show its age and needed modernization. Congress recognized the need for a modern and resilient grid that could accommodate increasing demands for power with newly available resources. Based on our thorough review of the Clean Line project, it satisfies the goals for which Congress established DOE’s authority."

“Moving remote and plentiful power to areas where electricity is in high demand is essential for building the grid of the future,” Secretary Moniz said. “Building modern transmission that delivers renewable energy to more homes and businesses will create jobs, cut carbon emissions, and enhance the reliability of our grid.”

The project will, if built, address infrastructure challenges outlined in the 2015 Quadrennial Energy Review (QER), which focused on Energy Transmission, Storage and Distribution Infrastructure. The QER acknowledged the importance of establishing transmission lines to facilitate remote generation development of renewable energy. The QER found that new long-distance transmission capacity like Clean Line has the potential to enable lower-carbon electricity, enhance system reliability and operate at a reasonable cost to consumers, the DOE said..

<snip>

DOE said, "Through its rigorous review and lengthy negotiations to build in protections for landowners and the local communities, the processes insisted upon by the Department go well beyond the provisions established by Congress in Section 1222. Before obtaining land for the project from landowners, commercial viability will need to be demonstrated. This means Clean Line will need to execute significant firm transmission service agreements and complete key technical studies required by the Southwest Power Pool, Midcontinent Independent System Operator and Tennessee Valley Authority."

DOE said the announcement "marks the conclusion of a review process that began in 2010 that included 15 public meetings and provided multiple opportunities for the public to submit written comments as part of the review process. As a result, protections for taxpayers, ratepayers and land owners have been put in place:

•The federal government will only exercise eminent domain as a last resort — after the project has met significant milestones to prove its viability — and the process will provide every opportunity for the land owner to maximize the value of their land in a transparent and fair manner;

•DOE will enter an agreement with Clean Line that ensures that all of DOE’s costs will be paid by Clean Line in advance and that Clean Line will contribute two percent of project revenues to offset the cost of federal hydropower infrastructure improvements;

•In response to public input, the Clean Line project will include a 500 megawatt converter station in Arkansas to ensure that consumers in the state can benefit from the renewable energy delivered by the project;

•Protections have been built into the participation agreement to ensure that no liability falls on the ratepayers if the project were ever to fail;

•And, Clean Line will also make payments to counties in Arkansas and Oklahoma for land and assets owned by the federal government that would otherwise be taxable."

[valerief]

44. Thanks. nt