By Thomas Ashley
Shutdowns and
cutbacks of Vermont wind farms in January, July, and early October by
the New England Independent System Operator (ISO) were hard to
understand, harder to accept, and served to pull back the curtain
(Wizard of Oz style) on who ultimately has the authority to decide what
power can and can’t be generated and utilized in Vermont.
For
proponents of renewable energy, the shutdowns and curtailments acted as a
shot across the bow—angering many and leaving more wondering what the
ISO was and why it would favor electricity generated from finite fossil
resources.
ISO New England is a not for profit company that is
responsible for ensuring the reliable availability of electric power to
users in Vermont and the other five New England states. If more power
is needed than is available, brownouts or blackouts occur. If more
power is generated than is needed, the system becomes overloaded and
costly damage to equipment can occur. Effectively, the ISO must
instantaneously match supply and demand.
Integrating intermittent
wind power into this matching process can be challenging, especially
with the difficulty of accurately forecasting wind power generation.
However, the reasons cited for the curtailment of wind farms on Georgia
Mountain and Lowell Mountain were an excess of power in the New England
electric grid (Georgia and Lowell); and inadequate electric transmission
capacity (Lowell).
Curtailment in the former case means that the
ISO is valuing Vermont’s wind power below that of fossil power
sources. Curtailment in the latter case speaks to a need for Vermont to
upgrade its transmission system. A 2013 survey of U.S. utilities by
the consulting firm Black and Veatch found “improved grid system
operator policies” to be the most important method for integrating
renewable power behind only renewable power’s Holy Grail of energy
storage.
Vermont can encourage (or mandate) its utilities to
develop renewable energy storage capacity. By being able to store
renewable energy and controllably release it into the grid as needed,
Vermont can make its renewable power inherently predictable. Notably,
California has recently taken this step (but allowed enough time until
enactment for storage costs to come down).
Developing renewable
energy storage capacity is expensive—so too can be increasing
transmission capacity—but critical. Developing a smarter grid with
regular demand-side management can seem invasive, and local microgrids
are a new paradigm. Nonetheless, all of these methods will be necessary
to meet Vermont’s renewable energy development goals and to move
Vermont along the path to energy independence.
Making these
investments and encouraging our Public Service Board, elected officials,
and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to keep the pressure on to
classify wind generation as “must take” power should begin to bear
fruit and help coax this wizard to become wonderful. Indeed, let’s turn
up the wind—not give ISO New England excuses for shutting it down.
http://theenergycollective.com/cleanenergyleadershipinstitute/319251/vermont-wind-power-why-must-take-wouldnt-be-mistake
No comments:
Post a Comment