Preparing the grid: Head of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Jon Wellinghoff wants to ready the nation's grid for renewable energy.
Image: FLICKR/PAUL KELEHER
More In This Article
-
The Best Science Writing Online 2012
Showcasing more than fifty of the most provocative, original, and significant online essays from 2011, The Best Science Writing Online 2012 will change the way...
Read More »
The new acting chairman of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission wants to use "creative mechanisms" within the agency's authority to promote energy efficiency and renewable energy.
As the head of FERC, Jon Wellinghoff said he will prioritize infrastructure efficiency and the integration of renewable energy into the grid, and will support the use of distributed and demand-side resources, which he described as "very underutilized in this country."
"These are very consistent with the new administration's goals," Wellinghoff told reporters at a Platts Energy Podium event yesterday. The acting FERC chief said he would meet with Energy Secretary Steven Chu and Carol Browner, the White House coordinator for energy and climate policy, next week.
Distributed and demand-side resources includes energy efficiency, residential solar panels, combined heat and power, and plug-in electric vehicles – areas over which FERC has very limited direct authority, as their use is largely left to state regulators, regional operators and the market to determine. Renewable energy generation is also relatively out of the purview of FERC.
Wellinghoff said FERC has some options, though, notably from incentives provided under the 2005 Energy Policy Act and its authority over tariffs set by the regional independent system operators and regional transmission organizations (ISOs/RTOs).
The integration of renewable energy into the grid is an important underlying issue to address if the United States is to fully utilize these sources of clean power. First, transmission lines to reach the remote sources of energy must be built – stirring up questions over siting and cost allocation. Wellinghoff said he is interested in exploring expanded federal siting authority (E&ENews PM, Feb. 12).
FERC has already exercised incentive power granted in the 2005 energy law to grant higher return rates for the construction of about 10 transmission lines that it felt were important and would likely not be built otherwise. But Wellinghoff and fellow Democratic Commissioner Suedeen Kelly have not always agreed with their Republican colleagues on what projects should receive the incentive treatment.
Wellinghoff said he expects to approve more incentive rate cases, but he will maintain strict requirements for them, including some combination of the following: an extraordinary voltage, which tends to be more expensive to build but goes longer distances; promotion of renewable energy sources; and utilization of smart-grid technologies.
"I hope we can work with fellow commissioners to come to some consensus proposal on incentives," Wellinghoff said.
Other areas where FERC can flex some muscle are in the interconnection of transmission lines to the grid. It is typically a "first come, first serve" process, but Wellinghoff said he would look at changing the order to accommodate "anchor" renewable energy suppliers – similar to natural gas "anchor shippers" – that could buy a majority of the capacity. This would bring project cash up front, addressing a barrier for companies looking to build transmission.
See what we're tweeting about
9 Comments
Add CommentCoal fired power stations are designed for constant loads. If you wonder why off peak electricity is cheap it is because if they don't sell it is waste. As long as the bulk of the electric supply comes from coal fired plants we shall keep on wasting huge amounts of power. You can not do anything to the grid if the plants generating the bulk of the electricity can not lower input energy to lower output.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisDoes the long distance transmission necessarily have to be the usual HV towers, or can part of it be buried? If parts could be buried, akin to natural gas piplines, that could make building lines easier, since they would have fewer NIMBY problems.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisrumpole
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisLong Distance transmission lines are usually at a voltage of 115KV or above; and would not be buried because of the cost and maintenance associated with a buried line. If I recall correctly, the installation cost of a buried 115KV line is 3 to 5 times the cost of an overhead line (depends upon terrain and other impediments); and the subsequent maintenance over the life of the line (50 years plus) is also substantially higher. As the voltage of the line increases, the costs again increase because the insulated cable, terminations, vault sizes, etc. etc. also cost more.
Therefore, although it is possible, utilities would not normally bury a high voltage transmission line because of the initial installation costs, and subsequent maintenance costs over the life of the transmission line.
Noone would today build long distance power lines using 115 KV. Modern grids use 400 or even up to 800 KV and DC for no other reason than that this reduces the power loss.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWhen you light up a bulb, only 1.4% of the energy source consumed by the power station is converted to light. Grid electricity is mainly leaked as heat! The solution is do generate electricity yourself. Solar panels are more efficient than the grid. It would be more efficient to use gas or petrol lamps to make better use of energy sources, than to convert them to the grid.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisfaderullan
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe question was "Does the long distance transmission have to be the usual HV towers...". HV is normally defined as any voltage above 69KV with 115 KV being the first standard voltage listed in ANSI/IEEE standard 141. I was not attempting to explain what voltages were acceptable for present day HV transmission systems as the "long distance" in the question was not even identified in miles/KM; I was only attempting to explain why you would not place HV systems underground.
eco-steve
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSolar panels are not more efficient than the grid. Solar panels (solar to electricity) only have a maximum efficiency of 15 to 20%. This is a very low efficiency, which is why all the major research on solar cells is attempting to increase this efficiency value.
Hydroelectric power plants have a minimum efficiency of 85% (potential of the water to electricity); coal fired power plants have an efficiency of 40 to 50% (coal to steam to electricity). I believe the voltage of the HV transmission lines is decided by the amount of power to be transmitted, the distances involved, and the acceptable losses related to the two aforementioned items. The accepted losses would probably be in the 10 to 15% range. However, I would ask "faderullan" to confirm because he seems to be more conversant on HV transmission lines.
However, even if you take a coal fired plant (45% efficient), and run it into an HV transmission line with 15% losses; this arrangement still has an overall efficiency of 30%, which is higher than the solar panel efficiency.
One additional point, the incandescent light bulb you feed with your solar panel mounted on your house will still be very inefficient (as you stated). So you are correct in stating that inefficiency (of appliances/lighting/motors) is a major problem.
I the citizen of Russia.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisExcuse please that I do not know nasty words on English.
I would apply all them in relation to the misters from imperous structures, ecological offices and enterprises, where make the equipment for generation of the electric power.
To me has bothered to write the letters in all instances that the way of transformation of a thermal energy of an environment in an electrical current is open.
The fragment converters is made and he works strictly under the formulas.
It is necessary to expect, that with application of this opening, the panel of thermal converters of equal cost and areas with the solar panel will give out in the afternoon and night not less than 100 kw of an electrical current.
To all chiefs laziness to learn details, or all such stupid?
Or at you, as well as Russia, the chiefs are not able to read the letters?
• Juriy vetto@nm.ru
scientific earthling
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisCoal fired power plants are not designed for constant loads. They can cycle down to 40% of their boiler capacity before they have to shut down. This means a 250MW coal plant (a normal size for coal fired plants) can decrease its power output to 100 MW before it is required to shut down.