Part of Grid Network »

The Transmission Professionals special interest group covers the distribution of power from generation to final destination. 

Post

Transmission and lackluster renewable adoption

image credit: Photo 24650084 / Energy © Huating | Dreamstime.com
Henry Craver's picture
Small Business Owner Self-employed

As a small business owner, I'm always trying to find ways to cut costs and boost the dependability of my services. To that end, I've become increasingly invested in learning about energy saving...

  • Member since 2018
  • 607 items added with 299,370 views
  • Feb 24, 2022
  • 304 views

Scrolling through my power feed this morning, I came across this article about the United State's lackluster renewable progress last year. According to the article, the U.S. installed just under 28 gigawatts (GW) of wind, solar, and energy storage capacity, which is half of what would be needed annually to hit Biden's 2035 targets. The article correctly pinpoints two big causes of the renewable slowdown last year: Covid-19 restrictions that hindered wind projects and sanctions against China that made it harder to get silicon needed for solar. However, the article doesn't mention the consistent hurdle to renewal adoption in America: transmission. 

Renewables have exploded the past decade in the country, but the power lines needed to transport the energy from where it's generated to where it's consumed have lagged behind. This is reflected in climbing electricity bills, despite generation being cheaper than ever. Here's how it was explained in a post at CanaryMedia.com:

“Two trends are clear. First, the cost of generating power has declined significantly — from 6.8 cents per kilowatt-hour in 2010 to 4.6 cents per kWh in 2020, using 2020 inflation-adjusted figures. That’s due largely to falling natural gas prices and the growing share of power coming from wind and solar. With renewables making up the vast majority of new generation capacity, the generation share of utility costs is likely to continue declining over the coming decade. 

At the same time, the costs of the infrastructure needed to deliver power rose from 2.6cents per kilowatt-hour in 2010 to 4.3 cents per kWh in 2020 — nearly equal to the cost of generating the power itself. Delivery costs have in fact been rising steadily since 1998, according to the EIA — an outgrowth of the need for new grid infrastructure to replace aging lines and equipment and accommodate new wind and solar power farms, as well as for new technologies such as smart meters to modernize the utility system. And according to multiple studies, the U.S. will need much bigger grid investments in future years to accommodate the massive growth in renewable energy that will be required to decarbonize the power sector.”

Our transmission disaster is also captured by a stat reported last year in an Atlantic article on the topic: “Since 2009, China has built more than 18,000 miles of ultrahigh-voltage transmission lines. The U.S. has built zero.”

Ouch.

Henry Craver's picture
Thank Henry for the Post!
Energy Central contributors share their experience and insights for the benefit of other Members (like you). Please show them your appreciation by leaving a comment, 'liking' this post, or following this Member.
More posts from this member
Discussions
Spell checking: Press the CTRL or COMMAND key then click on the underlined misspelled word.
Julian Silk's picture
Julian Silk on Feb 24, 2022

The Folks who want more transmission, which is indeed necessary for renewable energy to increase its market share, have to deal with the failure of New England (Maine) voters to accept the Clean Energy Connect line from Quebec.  The Sierra Club argued against it in 

 

https://www.sierraclub.org/maine/blog/2021/06/cmp-corridor-what-it-and-w...

but really provided no significant alternative that would increase transmission.  

Bob Meinetz's picture
Bob Meinetz on Feb 24, 2022

That leaves Sierra Club in a tight spot, doesn't it? They want a bright new renewable world but speak from a land of denial, where there are no land use impacts, no dead eagles, no razed forests, or natural gas or coal plants to provide backup power.
 

"Nuclear power is the only alternative we have to destroying the environment with oil and coal."

- Ansel Adams

Former Director, Sierra Club

 

Adams is rolling over in his grave.

Get Published - Build a Following

The Energy Central Power Industry Network is based on one core idea - power industry professionals helping each other and advancing the industry by sharing and learning from each other.

If you have an experience or insight to share or have learned something from a conference or seminar, your peers and colleagues on Energy Central want to hear about it. It's also easy to share a link to an article you've liked or an industry resource that you think would be helpful.

                 Learn more about posting on Energy Central »