Home
Donate
Contact
SharePolicy Issues
Federal Policy Update |
While the NIETCs are still on the books, a new much larger threat looms. Recent legislative and policy trends represent new challenges ahead for those working to protect our land and water, wildlife and cherished historic sites from the instrusive expansion of transmission.
Most notably, in the past few years, major federal legislation has been introduced that would affect the way in which transmission projects are planned and approved. All the while, industry proposals for massive grid expansions are being promoted. These proposals along with intense industry lobbying and activity are effectively advancing the nationwide acceleration of transmission construction with little consideration of our landscapes, ecosystems and communities.
The Department of Energy is seeking proposals from transmission planners for new transmission analysis and planning for very large regions of the country, with a goal of increasing coordination across regions as grid expansions are planned. The new process mandates the involvement of states and other stakeholders, notably mandating that nongovernmental organizations are expected participants. In the east, this process will focus on identifying energy development zones, much as was done in the west under the Western Renewable Energy Zones (WREZ) work. The process in the west will continue to build upon the WREZ effort. (See Transmission Planning)
Related Resources
Land Trust Alliance Fact Sheet, The Case for Intelligent Planning and Siting of Transmission Lines— Avoidance or Mitigation of Protected Lands.
Smart Grid
A smart grid delivers electricity from suppliers to consumers using two-way digital technology to control appliances at consumers' homes to save energy, reduce cost and increase reliability and transparency. Such a modernized electricity network is being promoted by many governments as a way of addressing energy independence, global warming and emergency resilience issues. Smart meters may be part of a smart grid, but alone do not constitute a smart grid.
A smart grid includes an intelligent monitoring system that keeps track of all electricity flowing in the system. It also incorporates the use of superconductive transmission lines for less power loss, as well as the capability of integrating alternative sources of electricity such as solar and wind. The price of electricity fluctuates based on peak usage. The smart grid would employ "real time pricing", in which the cost of electricity to the end-user is in direct relation to the cost that the supplier pays to provide the electricity. The smart grid would have the capacity to notify consumers when the price of electricity changes and to properly bill consumers for the varying prices in electricity. When power is least expensive a smart grid could turn on selected home appliances such as washing machines or factory processes that can run at arbitrary hours. At peak times it could turn off selected appliances to reduce demand.
Proponents of a new, nationally controlled energy system say the federal government needs the authority to push through thousands of miles of new transmission lines -- a "new national grid" -- so we can link to potential renewable energy sources, like giant wind farms in the Midwest. Expanding on the National Interest Electric Transmission Corridors authorized in the 2005 Energy Policy Act, pending legislation would extend federal power to plan and site new, high voltage transmission.
The Obama Administration strongly supports the development of a smart grid and the construction of a long-haul power line system. The Administration is prepared to give the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) even more authority over grid expansion and cost allocation so that states utility commissions can not block proposed transmission projects due to opposition from affected landowners or ratepayer groups who contend they will get little benefit from new lines. (Source: Lobsenz, George. "Utilities Lining Up Against Administration on Transmission Siting", The Energy Daily, Feb 5 2010. Online. (http://theenergydaily.com/utilities_lining_up/)
According to the Piedmont Environmental Council (PEC), these lines would not only permit dirty coal-powered electricity to pass through these lines, but could mandate that that they carry coal because of a policy called "economic dispatch," which requires that the cheapest power get to markets first. In this method of reinventing the U.S. Electricity Grid, PEC President Chris Miller said, "there is a real potential that what you are expanding is the capacity to move coal-fired electrons, and that the cheapest power supplies, which are the dirtiest plants [that have been able to avoid investing in pollution control], will have access to markets they didn't use to." The Union of Concerned Scientists released a report in December 2008 that confirmed the potential of additional coal-fired electricity entering the Northeast, wiping out reductions in carbon emissions from the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative.
Related Resources
Achenbach, Joel. "The 21st Century Grid: Can We Fix the Infrastructure that Powers Our Nation?". National Geographic, July 2010 (Online).
National Geographic. "New Lines on the Grid". An interactive transmission map depicting regions suitable for certain types of energy production, proposed transmission lines and proposed power plants.
National Council on Electricity Policy, 2009. "Updating the Electric Grid: An Introduction to Non-Transmission Alternatives for Policymakers"
Piedmont Environmental Council. "Would Transmission Lines for Wind be used for Coal Instead"
Department of Energy. "The Smart Grid: An Introduction", 2009.
Center for American Progress. "A National Clean-Energy Smart Grid 101", 2009.
Center for American Progress. "Wired for Progress: Building a National Clean-Energy Smart Grid", 2009.
Wilrich, Mason. Massachussetts Institute of Technology. "Energy Innovation - Electricity Transmission Policy for America: Enabling a Smart Grid, End-to End". Working Paper, July 2009.
Brookings Institution. "Beyond the Smart Grid: Challenges in the Electricity Markets", September 11, 2009.
Union of Concerned Scientists. "Strong Federal Transmission Policy: A Key Component of a Clean Energy Future". April 2009.
Climate Change
Many proposed transmission projects are being characterized as necessary to accommodate renewable energy in to our nation’s energy grid and to achieve our climate policy goals. The argument goes that in order to reach our higher targets for renewable power, we must build new transmission lines to connect energy producing sites to population centers. The problem with this plan is it ignores the likelihood that heavily emitting fossil fuel plants may outcompete renewables in day-to-day grid operations, with the result that ‘renewable’ power lines actually accelerate greenhouse gas emissions andundermine climate change policies and programs. To avoid this, it is absolutely essential that robust, effective carbon control policies are established at the same time or in advance of any new transmission.
The same transmission lines across Pennsylvania once proposed as ‘superhighways for coal’ were later repurposed for Green Wires talking points. But we have not yet put in to place the accompanying policies to ensure that these lines would not exacerbate greenhouse gas emissions.
Related Resources
Piedmont Environmental Council. "Would transmission lines "for wind" energy be used for coalinstead?"
Union of Concerned Citizens. "Importing Pollution: Coal's Threat to Climate Policy in the U.S. Northeast", 2008.
PA Land Trust Association. "Increased Emissions from Increased Transmission, Another Inconvenient Truth", 2009.
PA Land Trust Association. "The Unintended Consequences of ‘Renewable’ Transmission", 2008.
Sassoon, David. "Transmission Superhighway on Track to Carry Cheap, Dirty Coal Power Northeast". David Sassoon's Blog, March 24, 2009.
Energy Efficiency
"This may sound too good to be true, but the U.S. has a renewable-energy resource that is perfectly clean, remarkably cheap, surprisingly abundant and immediately available. It has astounding potential to reduce the carbon emissions that threaten our planet, the dependence on foreign oil that threatens our security and the energy costs that threaten our wallets. Unlike coal and petroleum, it doesn't pollute; unlike solar and wind, it doesn't depend on the weather; unlike ethanol, it doesn't accelerate deforestation or inflate food prices; unlike nuclear plants, it doesn't raise uncomfortable questions about meltdowns or terrorist attacks or radioactive-waste storage, and it doesn't take a decade to build. It isn't what-if like hydrogen, clean coal and tidal power; it's already proven to be workable, scalable and cost-effective. And we don't need to import it.” - Michael Grunwald, Time Magazine, December 31, 2008.
Reducing the Footprint of Our Energy Policy
Efficiency, often overlooked as an energy resource, is unmatched by other options as a means for reducing our land use footprint as well as our carbon footprint. Energy that we don’t use is energy we don’t have to generate or transport. Reductions in energy use during times of peak demand have the greatest benefits in reducing the need for new energy infrastructure.
The untapped potential for energy efficiency is large, large enough to offset the need for new generation and transmission projects. This invisible power plant has been overlooked for too long. While other, more charismatic options capture the public attention, we have lost sight of the best option for a rapid shift to a homegrown, cleaner energy policy.
Energy efficiency is the option which maximizes our return on investment. Cheaper than all traditional and non-traditional options, efficiency is the one option which provides jobs growth while minimizing our energy costs, our climate policy costs, and our on-the-ground costs in community landscapes and habitat losses.
To get our energy policy right, we must get our planning right. If efficiency is the low hanging fruit, the win-win for land and energy policies, then we need to make efficiency a top tier, preferred resource in our energy strategy. Rather than discounting or ignoring efficiency opportunities, our planning should seek to make efficiency our First Resource among energy choices.
We have the tools at our disposal. We can begin to correct course today and take maximum advantage of the “too-good-to-be-true” option, energy efficiency. It’s available everywhere, in every community. It’s up to us and our leaders to choose the policies and actions to make this happen. Our choice is clear: other options consume land, cost more, and too frequently degrade the environment. Ask yourself – “Why wouldn’t we choose energy efficiency?”
The track record of energy efficiency programs is long and clear. Annual performance assessments of programs across the country demonstrate that these programs deliver, and do so cost-effectively. They can be deployed to flatten out growth curves, to provide greater planning flexibility in managing state energy resources, and to avert system performance problems in regional grids. Over the last three decades, California has used efficiency to provide substantial, large-scale energy resources. This success has come during economic booms and busts, and helped California recover from the debacle of brownouts and blackouts produced by the market manipulation of Enron and others. Efficiency programs delivered. They have delivered time and again for three decades.
Invisible Power Plant
Efficiency can eliminate the need for new generation and power lines. A readily deployable portfolio of efficiency programs could reduce Pennsylvania’s future energy use by 24% by 2025 (more aggressive policies could yield savings up to 33%). Stacked up against business as usual growth, it becomes clear that efficiency can – should – be a major strategy for meeting our energy needs. The figure below illustrates the possible achievements if we simply implement programs that have already proven successful and low cost in other states.
Related Resources
Plunkett, John. "Building Pennsylvania's Energy Future: Efficiency Means Real Gains, for Security, the Economy, and the Environment" Green Energy Ecomonics Group, September 12, 2007.
Brattle Group, The. "Quantifying Demand Response Benefits In PJM", January 29, 2007.
U.S. Department of State/ Bureau of International Information Programs. "Energy Efficiency: The First Fuel", eJournal USA, April 2009.
American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy. "Energy Efficiency: The First Fuel for a Clean Energy Future", February 2008.
Summit Blue Consulting LLC Report, 2007. (Piedmont Environmental Council)
Prindle, William, Anna Monis Shipley and R. Neal Elliott. "Energy Efficiency's Role in a Carbon Cap-and-Trade System: Modeling Results from the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative", 2006.
Environmental Protection Agency. "National Action Plan for Energy Efficiency".
Clean & Sustainable Energy
See Solar and Wind Energy
Related Resources
Sassoon, David. "Transmission Superhightway on Track to Carry Cheap, Dirty Coal Power to Northeast", Solve Climate, March 24, 2009 (online, http://solveclimate.org).
U.S. Department of State/ Bureau of International Information Programs. eJounral USA: Economic Perspectives - Clean Energy Solutions , July 2006.
U.S. Department of Energy. "20% Wind Energy by 2030: Increasing Wind Energy's Contribution to the U.S. Energy Supply". July 2008
American Wind Energy Association. "Green Power Superhighways: Building a Path to America's Clean Energy Future". White Paper.
Additional Policy Papers
National Interest Electric Transmission Corridor (NIETC)
Pennsylvania Land Trust Association. "The Impact of the Corridor: A Case Study from New York", March 10, 2008.
Pennsylvania Land Trust Association. "PJM Energy Markets Thrive Contrary to Forecast: Challenging Justification for Mid-Atlantic Corridor", March 10, 2008.
Observations by Andy Loza, Executive Director, Pennsylvania Land Trust Association. "National Interest Electric Transmission Corridor Threatens Pennsylvania Landowners, Local Control, Community Character, Public Health, Sensible Energy Policy, and National Security", January 30, 2008.
Pennsylvania Land Trust Association. "Re-examining the Need for the Mid-Atlantic National Interest Electric Transmission Corridor", January 16, 2008.
Pennsylvania Land Trust Association. "The Disconnect Between Transmission Corridor Data and Today's Energy Market", January 18, 2008.
