|
Mark Hanson: Review options before building new
power lines
By Mark Hanson
There are three things that can be said about transmission lines: They're ugly, they're expensive, and some of them are necessary.
The critical question that needs to be answered about American Transmission Co.'s proposal for Dane County is whether it is a 20th or 21st century plan. Our 20th century energy infrastructure was characterized by large, remote power plants generating electricity only and moving the power to users over lengthy transmission lines. Energy costs to fuel the plants were declining when prices were adjusted for inflation. The state and nation finally placed some limits on air pollution and other environmental impacts as we moved later into the century and we were willing to live with the emissions we didn't control. We weren't thinking about global climate change. The 21st century energy infrastructure will be different. As we grapple with climate change and face increasing energy costs, we'll face the reality that natural gas is too valuable to burn in a 40 percent efficient power system. We'll be increasingly choosing cogeneration (simultaneous production of electricity, heat and cooling) with efficiency at 80 percent. Cogeneration will occur in large plants and small units, even household size. We'll be looking to a diversity of energy sources including biofuels and other renewables, and when using coal, figuring out how to sequester the carbon dioxide.
One needs look no further than the new UW-Madison/MGE plant on Walnut Street for an example of cogeneration. For a glimpse of emerging small-scale generating technologies (microturbines, small turbines, reciprocating engines and fuel cells) we can look to programs in New York state. The way we use energy in the 21st century is already changing rapidly. We are now building new commercial buildings that use 30 percent to 50 percent less electricity than would be the case in just meeting Wisconsin's dated commercial building energy code. Advanced metering systems and real-time pricing will allow us to move from 20th century average prices and instead use actual prices based on hourly changes in cost. We'll have the ability to control our power use accordingly, turning down power use when costs are high. These four methods to reduce peak load - efficiency, distributed generation, real-time pricing and callable load programs - may sound like pie in the sky, but they are for real. New York state is taking these matters seriously. Its Energy program reports a reduction of 466 megawatts of peak load demand from efficiency measures and another 593 megawatts of callable load reduction, and these savings continue to grow. Recent calls for ATC to step back and conduct an independent study of transmission needs are warranted. ATC's Report on Electric Reliability in Dane County, posted on its Web site, states: "The ability to consider an integrated package of these alternatives (supply-side and demand-side) as a potential viable means to defer or avoid the proposed transmission projects had not been able to be performed. There is reason to believe that typically such an integrated set of alternatives may well represent the best alternative to a proposed transmission project." We deserve such a study before plunking down $150 million to $200 million or more on transmission lines. In undertaking such a study, here are my top five questions, none of which appear to have been considered in the ATC study. 1. How much peak demand reduction will occur as Wisconsin updates its Commercial Building Energy Code in the next couple of years? 2. How much peak demand reduction would occur if MGE and the other utilities implement a commercial lighting program that works with customers in new and existing buildings to meet the ASHRAE 90.1-2004 lighting standards? 3. How much peak demand reduction will occur in Dane County with the state's decision to reduce energy use 10 percent in all state facilities, including the UW-Madison? 4. How much transmission capacity could we avoid if we sited natural gas-fired cogeneration in southwest Dane County at the Epic campus or in other commercial buildings, in place of back-up generators only? 5. How much peak demand reduction would occur with an aggressive demand management program? I think the citizens of Dane County want to embrace a 21st century energy infrastructure if we're going to be investing $150 million to $200 million (or more?). So ATC, what future is in your plan? It's time to take a hard look at these questions. If an integrated package of alternatives can't be studied because "there is no apparent or identifiable framework or locus of authority, other than perhaps the PSCW, that could require such a result" (as the ATC report claims), the Wisconsin Public Service Commission must step in and mandate it. Mark Hanson works for a Wisconsin firm that designs and constructs commercial buildings. He is co-chair of the Advisory Group for New York State's Energy Program.
|
|
|
Customer Service
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|