Transmission

The burgeoning wind industry in America's Upper Midwest could be at risk of shutting down if a new transmission policy by a local grid operator goes through, according to a pair of wind advocacy groups.

Even worse — the plan could put the nation's renewable energy goals in jeopardy.

The American Wind Energy Association (AWEA) and Wind on the Wires (WOW) have filed a protest with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) to stop a proposal by the Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator (MISO) — one that would dramatically change the way costs are distributed for new transmission lines.

Specifically, the plan would force energy generators to bear a 90 percent share of new transmission costs in the region, wind farm developers included.

Currently, generators and utilities split the price paid, 50-50.

On January 18, the second to last day it was in power, the Bush administration finalized 6,000 miles of energy corridors for new transmission lines in 11 Western states.

Ideally, those lines would carry renewable energy to the cities. Instead, the corridors were drawn to promote fossil fuel use, 11 environmental groups and Colorado's San Miguel County allege in a lawsuit filed this week against the Departments of Interior, Energy and Agriculture, the Bureau of Land Management and the Forest Service.

The agencies did not consult local organizations or look to include areas rich in renewable energy sources, says Katie Renshaw, associate attorney at EarthJustice, which filed the lawsuit in U.S. District Court in California.

“If you juxtapose the corridors on a map with existing and proposed coal plants, they’re all served," Renshaw says.

"This case is saying that the agencies need to step back, rethink this process, and say, ‘What is the purpose of these corridors? Should it be to perpetuate dirty energy? Or take the opportunity to move towards clean, 21st-century energy sources?'”

The outcome is important, and not just for the 3.2 million acres affected in the West. The same process for finalizing the energy corridors in those 11 states will be used to determine how energy corridors are drawn in the other 39 states.

A battle is brewing in Congress over a climate and energy issue that is pitting the U.S. Senate and states west of the Mississippi against the U.S. House and states east of the mighty river.

It's a fight over expansion of the electric grid – the building of a new "transmission superhighway" – with boosters claiming you can't have a clean energy future without it, and more cautious skeptics saying it could be a huge waste of money that would hurt both the economy and the climate.

A scene from this unfolding political drama was performed before Rep. Ed Markey of Massachusetts last week, who held a hearing on the future of the grid in his House Subcommittee on Energy and Environment and set the stage with his opening comments.

The landmark climate bill he has co-sponsored with Rep. Henry Waxman of California calls for the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) to report back to Congress within three years with recommendations for grid development. Markey said:

Some believe we should go further, by substantially expanding federal authority to plan and site new transmission lines. That includes overriding state decisions to reject proposed lines and using federal eminent domain authority if necessary. I think we need to look closely and skeptically whether such a step is warranted at this juncture.

Markey urged caution (see complete statement, attached below) as did many others who testified, including Christopher Miller, president of the Piedmont Environmental Council:

"Current and proposed transmission policies may produce a transmission grid that is over-built, overly complex and subject to reliability problems, and encourages increased reliance on fossil-fuel generation rather than distributed renewable generation, energy efficiency, conservation, and load management."

Nevertheless, action on federal transmission policy is picking up steam, with various proposals under consideration in both the House and the Senate, driven more by politics than policy wisdom.

Thanks to federal funding and pending legislation, momentum is building behind a national transmission superhighway meant to propel America to a repowered clean energy future, but the end result in the Northeast may be just the opposite.

The rules proposed to help the nation tap abundant wind and solar resources in Western states will effectively open vast new markets in New England and Mid-Atlantic states to the cheapest, dirtiest power from aging coal plants in the Midwest and Appalachia.

Further, transmission legislation now before the Senate or about to be introduced excludes support for lines that would reach offshore wind resources along the Atlantic coast. The constant ocean winds, relatively shallow water and proximity to heavily populated cities make offshore wind one of the most promising sources of clean energy in the nation.

Lawmakers behind the legislation are from Western states, and they are thinking first about tapping solar and wind energy in the Southwest and upper Midwest. That leaves utility companies, which have had a clear edge in writing the complex rules, supporting onshore corridors in the East that also happen to provide an easier path to profitability for their aging coal plants.

“There’s enormous financial incentive for the oldest and dirtiest coal plants to access markets through transmission,” said Chris Miller, President of the Piedmont Environmental Council (PEC). “Unless we have a change in transmission rules, all this work on the national grid will mostly result in just more coal-fired power.”