Does Transmission Construction Need to Accelerate?
The Case for Faster Transmission Buildout Is Complicated
๐๐ผ๐ฒ๐ ๐๐ฟ๐ฎ๐ป๐๐บ๐ถ๐๐๐ถ๐ผ๐ป ๐ฐ๐ผ๐ป๐๐๐ฟ๐๐ฐ๐๐ถ๐ผ๐ป ๐ป๐ฒ๐ฒ๐ฑ ๐๐ผ ๐ฎ๐ฐ๐ฐ๐ฒ๐น๐ฒ๐ฟ๐ฎ๐๐ฒ?
Consensus is seems to be yes. But ๐ฑ๐ผ๐ฒ๐ ๐ถ๐ ๐ฟ๐ฒ๐ฎ๐น๐น๐?
Studies from Princetonโs REPEAT Project and NREL ๐๐๐ด๐ด๐ฒ๐๐ ๐๐ต๐ฒ ๐ฟ๐ฎ๐๐ฒ ๐ผ๐ณ ๐๐ฟ๐ฎ๐ป๐๐บ๐ถ๐๐๐ถ๐ผ๐ป ๐ฒ๐ ๐ฝ๐ฎ๐ป๐๐ถ๐ผ๐ป ๐บ๐๐๐ ๐ฎ๐ฐ๐ฐ๐ฒ๐น๐ฒ๐ฟ๐ฎ๐๐ฒ ๐ฏ๐ ๐ฎ-๐ฏ๐ ๐ผ๐ฟ ๐บ๐ผ๐ฟ๐ฒ ๐๐ฒ๐ฟ๐๐๐ ๐๐ต๐ฒ ๐ฟ๐ฎ๐๐ฒ ๐ผ๐ณ ๐ฐ๐ผ๐ป๐๐๐ฟ๐๐ฐ๐๐ถ๐ผ๐ป ๐ณ๐ฟ๐ผ๐บ ๐๐ต๐ฒ ๐น๐ฎ๐๐ ๐ฑ๐ฒ๐ฐ๐ฎ๐ฑ๐ฒ (depending on scenario). That amounts to 50-70k miles by 2035 in the REPEAT study.
But estimates vary widely depending on assumptions. The NREL study provides a host of scenarios that help frame the discussion (see the chart below).
๐Three demand scenarios (arranged horizontally) are considered, ranging from a โLow Demandโ (๐ฌ.๐ต%/๐๐ฟ from 2021-2050), to โMid Demand" (๐ฎ.๐ฌ%/๐๐ฟ load growth), to โHigh Demandโ (๐ฎ.๐ณ% /๐๐ฟ).
๐Three policy scenarios (arranged vertically) are considered, ranging from โ๐๐๐ฟ๐ฟ๐ฒ๐ป๐ ๐ฃ๐ผ๐น๐ถ๐ฐ๐ถ๐ฒ๐โ (as of June 2023), to โ๐ต๐ฌ% [๐ฟ๐ฒ๐ฑ๐๐ฐ๐๐ถ๐ผ๐ป ๐ถ๐ป ๐ฝ๐ผ๐๐ฒ๐ฟ ๐๐ฒ๐ฐ๐๐ผ๐ฟ ๐ฒ๐บ๐ถ๐๐๐ถ๐ผ๐ป๐] ๐ฏ๐ ๐ฎ๐ฌ๐ฏ๐ฑโ, to โ๐ญ๐ฌ๐ฌ% ๐ฏ๐ ๐ฎ๐ฌ๐ฏ๐ฑโ.
๐ช๐ต๐ฎ๐ ๐ฑ๐ผ ๐๐ต๐ฒ ๐๐ฐ๐ฒ๐ป๐ฎ๐ฟ๐ถ๐ผ๐ ๐๐ฒ๐น๐น ๐๐?
๐๐ ๐ก๐ค๐๐ ๐๐ง๐ค๐ฌ๐ฉ๐ (๐ฃ๐๐ฌ ๐๐๐ฉ๐๐ง ๐ ๐๐๐๐ฃ๐ ~๐๐ก๐๐ฉ ๐๐ค๐ง ๐ ๐๐๐๐๐๐ ๐ค๐ง ๐ข๐ค๐ง๐) ๐๐๐จ๐๐ฅ๐ฅ๐ค๐๐ฃ๐ฉ๐จ, ๐๐ฃ๐ ๐๐ ๐ฅ๐ค๐ก๐๐๐ฎ ๐๐ค๐๐จ ๐๐๐ ๐ฅ๐ช๐จ๐ ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐ฅ๐ค๐ฌ๐๐ง ๐จ๐๐๐ฉ๐ค๐ง ๐ฉ๐ค ๐ ๐ฃ๐๐๐ง (๐ค๐ง ๐๐๐จ๐ค๐ก๐ช๐ฉ๐) ๐๐ก๐๐ข๐๐ฃ๐๐ฉ๐๐ค๐ฃ ๐๐ฃ ๐๐ข๐๐จ๐จ๐๐ค๐ฃ๐จ by 2035, then the top left scenario may apply. ๐๐ป๐ฑ ๐๐ต๐ฒ ๐ฝ๐ฎ๐ฐ๐ฒ ๐ผ๐ณ ๐๐ฟ๐ฎ๐ป๐๐บ๐ถ๐๐๐ถ๐ผ๐ป ๐ฐ๐ผ๐ป๐๐๐ฟ๐๐ฐ๐๐ถ๐ผ๐ป ๐บ๐ฎ๐ ๐ก๐ข๐ง ๐ป๐ฒ๐ฒ๐ฑ ๐๐ผ ๐ฎ๐ฐ๐ฐ๐ฒ๐น๐ฒ๐ฟ๐ฎ๐๐ฒ.
While this scenario is not my base case, ๐ถ๐ ๐ถ๐ ๐ฎ๐น๐๐ผ ๐ป๐ผ๐ ๐๐ต๐ฎ๐ ๐ณ๐ฎ๐ฟ ๐ณ๐ฒ๐๐ฐ๐ต๐ฒ๐ฑ, ๐ฒ๐๐ฝ๐ฒ๐ฐ๐ถ๐ฎ๐น๐น๐ ๐ถ๐ณ ๐๐ผ๐ ๐ฎ๐ฑ๐ฑ ๐ถ๐ป ๐ฎ ๐ด๐ฟ๐ผ๐๐ถ๐ป๐ด ๐ฎ๐ฝ๐ฝ๐ฒ๐๐ถ๐๐ฒ ๐ณ๐ผ๐ฟ ๐ฐ๐ผ๐น๐น๐ผ๐ฐ๐ฎ๐๐ฒ๐ฑ ๐น๐ผ๐ฎ๐ฑ๐, ๐๐ต๐ฒ ๐ผ๐ป๐ด๐ผ๐ถ๐ป๐ด ๐ฑ๐ฟ๐ถ๐๐ฒ ๐ณ๐ผ๐ฟ ๐ฒ๐ณ๐ณ๐ถ๐ฐ๐ถ๐ฒ๐ป๐ฐ๐, ๐ฎ๐ป๐ฑ ๐ฏ๐ฒ๐ต๐ถ๐ป๐ฑ ๐๐ต๐ฒ ๐บ๐ฒ๐๐ฒ๐ฟ ๐ด๐ฒ๐ป๐ฒ๐ฟ๐ฎ๐๐ถ๐ผ๐ป ๐ฎ๐ป๐ฑ ๐๐๐ผ๐ฟ๐ฎ๐ด๐ฒ ๐๐ผ๐น๐๐๐ถ๐ผ๐ป๐.
What do you think:
โช๏ธ๐ฟ๐ค๐๐จ ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐ฅ๐๐๐ ๐ค๐ ๐ฉ๐ง๐๐ฃ๐จ๐ข๐๐จ๐จ๐๐ค๐ฃ ๐๐๐ซ๐๐ก๐ค๐ฅ๐ข๐๐ฃ๐ฉ ๐ฃ๐๐๐ ๐ฉ๐ค ๐๐๐๐๐ก๐๐ง๐๐ฉ๐?
โช๏ธ๐พ๐๐ฃ ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐๐ง๐๐ ๐ข๐ช๐๐๐ก๐ ๐ฉ๐๐ง๐ค๐ช๐๐ ๐๐ฉ ๐ฉ๐๐ ๐๐ช๐ง๐ง๐๐ฃ๐ฉ ๐๐ค๐ฃ๐จ๐ฉ๐ง๐ช๐๐ฉ๐๐ค๐ฃ ๐ฅ๐๐๐?
โช๏ธ๐๐๐๐๐ ๐๐๐๐ ๐จ๐๐๐ฃ๐๐ง๐๐ค ๐๐ค ๐ฎ๐ค๐ช ๐ฉ๐๐๐ฃ๐ ๐๐จ ๐ข๐ค๐จ๐ฉ ๐ก๐๐ ๐๐ก๐ฎ?
The truth of the matter is we don't "need" any more transmission at all. What we need is reliable generation closer to the load... you know, like we used to have before it became fashionable to shut down all reliable generators.
The reason for more transmission is that unreliable resources are hundreds of miles from the load and the lack of reliability means shuffling power from all over the place in an impossible attempt to make unreliable generation somewhat more reliable.
Before we get to building transmission we need to look at where the consumption is located and then put in the plan to deliver electricity from the closest generator. Of course we need more generation. Of course we are behind in the planning!! But we also need to look at the components needed to deliver the electricity - one biggie us we need transformers, and we should be manufacturing these components in the USA. IMHO there is too much focus on generation and not enough on delivery. In the generation there is far too much wind and solar. Somehow the economics of electricity had been overlooked, and Iโve never found a politician that understood the cycle from generation to consumption.