Power Link(s)
Emblematic 123-mile Line from Imperial Valley to San Diego
SDG&E’s Power Link is to slated to stretch 123 miles from solar farms of Imperial County to San Diego, where it will deliver power for 685,000 homes. It’s been called the most rigorously reviewed infrastructure project in the state’s history*. It’s certainly been a lightning rod for environmental opposition.
Personally, I don’t get it.
My understanding of the processes involved in the planning and obtaining of approval for the addition of any new transmission lines to the grid is that they are exorbitantly onerous.
Citing the history of the transmission lines that connected the Tehachapi Pass wind farms to Los Angeles, as reported by Thomas L. Friedman in “Hot, Flat, and Crowded,” it appears that the power companies choose their best route according to geography. Then they go to battle for as much as a dozen years. The battle involves environmental reviews and jurisdictional hurdles between stake holders, including state and federal land agencies and also the national forests. Much of the battle has to do with the fact that utilities are intent upon routing new transmission lines through pristine landscapes. So it really takes a dozen years? Isn’t there something to be said for avoiding conflict?
Conflict is expensive in a number of ways.
Costs almost always go up. If the original projected cost of a transmission line is two billion dollars, how much more will the project cost a dozen years later? Surely there would be savings to be had if the project encounters less (or no) opposition and could be implemented more quickly. Not only would the cost of construction pencil out much nearer to original projections, but that would also put the transmission lines into service many years sooner - which probably has an even greater monetary value.
So you ask, how could we reduce opposition and lower regulatory hurdles?
How about the obvious: whenever and wherever possible, new transmission lines should be sited along existing power corridors. Where there are no existing power corridors, the lines should follow highways.
The advantages are many:
- There’s little rationale for environmental opposition to a project that runs down a corridor already marred by an existing phalanx of transmission towers, or an existing highway, or a combination of both.
- Environmental review and permitting could and “should” be simplified and streamlined for transmission projects that follow existing corridors.
- Existing corridors include ready road access, both for construction and maintenance which also reduces cost.
- Recently, some of Southern California’s most devastating wildfires were caused by transmission lines that sparked into overgrown brush. To avoid future liabilities, power companies will need to clear the undergrowth at or near transmission lines. It would be far less expensive for them to maintain brush abatement along fewer, but more intensely utilized corridors.
- Simplified approval means reduced litigation and permitting costs which result in reduced project costs.
- Expedited permitting means that construction costs are kept closer to original estimates.
- Fast track permitting that leads to quicker construction would also translate into earlier utilization, which also has a monetary value.
- The cost savings outlined above would, in all but the most extreme cases, outweigh the potential for additional expense of longer transmission lines necessitated to follow existing corridors.
- The smart grid would be here sooner, instead of later.
So why don’t we get smarter about planning and mapping? Smarter utility planners would get their smart grid quicker and at less total cost - benefiting not only the utilities but also both to the rate payers and the environment.
–
*I wonder if that’s utility co. hyperbole or if it really has attained more attention and closer examination than projects like the Diablo Canyon of the 1970’s.
This entry was posted on Sunday, February 22nd, 2009 at 4:58 pm and is filed under Climate Change, Economy, Energy, Environment. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.