Home
Energy Self-Reliant States,
by John Farrell and David Morris, clearly demonstrates that there is no
reason for any state in the union to resist transition to the New
Energy economy on the grounds it lacks resources to profitably
participate and successfully compete.
The study looks at New
Energy potentials in each state. It estimates not technical potentials
but commercial potentials. It concludes that all of the 36 states that
now have Renewable Electricity Standards (RESs) or New Energy goals can
meet them with their own in-state resources. 64% of those states could
meet their entire electricity needs with in-state resources and 14%
more could meet 75% of their electricity needs with in-state resources.
A
cost-benefit analysis suggests regional and local generation of New
Energy is the most efficient way to transition to a New Energy economy,
especially when the impact of New Energy development on local and state
jobs and revenues is added to the calculation.
Dan Juhl,
Minnesota community wind developer: I live out on the Buffalo Ridge...I
look out my window and I see hundreds of wind turbines. When I look at
those turbines I'm happy and I'm sad... Most of those turbines are
owned by our friends, the foreign multinationals. Out of two counties
in Minnesota we export about 80 million dollars a year to France,
Florida, Italy, Portugal, Spain. All of our energy future is going out
the door when we could be turning that into something real for us.
COMMENTARY
Some
argue that the key to fully developing U.S. New Energy potential is a
national high voltage New Energy transmission superhighway to deliver
resources from the remote regions where New Energy is abundant to the
urban load centers where there is a ravenous and virtually insatiable
appetite for energy.
Only such a national New Energy
transmission superhighway can deliver the Southwest’s sun, the Midwest,
Great Lakes and Offshore Atlantic coast winds, the Mountain West’s
geothermal and the Pacific Coast’s ocean power to cities around the
nation.
click to enlarge
It
is true that energy-abundant regions generate power at the lowest
costs. PV-generated electricity in Nevada 20% cheaper than PV-generated
electricity in Iowa and 35% cheaper than in Pennsylvania. North Dakota
wind generated electricity is 30% cheaper than Ohio wind generated
electricity.
Most of the time, however, these price variations
smooth out when the cost of transporting the electricity is included in
the calculation. Example: The cost of North Dakota wind generated
electricity – after including the cost of
constructing new
transmission and the cost of electricity losses during the 1,000-mile
transmission – puts the ratepayer’s price at the same or a higher price
as locally generated electricity and minimal regional transmission
upgrades.
click to enlarge
Over
40 states plus D.C. could meet 25% of their electricity needs with
rooftop solar photovoltaic energy. Most of those states will produce
even more of their electricity from solar with ground photovoltaic
arrays and have more than adequate land to do so.
The advent of
the widespread use of battery electric vehicles represents both a
higher level of demand for electricity and the potential to add
abundant distributed storage capacity that will further facilitate the
use of intermittent wind and solar energy generated electricity.
The
need in the area of transmission may not be a national system but
upgraded regional transmission, subtransmission and distribution
systems.
click to enlarge
State
and local programs are leading the way toward innovation. Efficiency
Vermont has proven the efficacy of aggressive conservation. Berkeley
has developed a breakthrough finance program for rooftop solar PV.
Many
state programs acknowledge the importance of keeping New Energy
development local. Ohio’s RES requires half of its mandate to be met by
in-state production. Colorado and Missouri multiply in-state generation
1.25 times as part of its standartd. Minnesota’s New Energy plan
incentives local wind development. Washington state incentives solar
projects using in-state manufactured panels and has increased
incentives for community-based solar development.
No state has
yet achieved more than 10% of its generation from New Energy sources
and it very well could be some time before even the states with the
capacity to generate 100% of their power from their New Energies can
build the infrastructure to do so. Besides building solar panels, wind
turbines, wave-tide-current installations and drilling geothermal
plants, the development of regional transmission upgrades and making
real the potential for large-scale storage will likely be necessary.
click to enlarge
~12 states have adequate New Energy commercial potential to exceed their own energy demand.
31 of the 50 U.S. states have adequate commercial New Energy potential to entirely meet their electricity demand.
10 states can meet at least half of their electricity demand with their own New Energy.
Southern
states from Kentucky to Louisiana have the least commercial New Energy
potential. Yet even those states could meet 25% or more of their
electricity needs with their New Energy resources.
click to enlarge
Onshore
wind dominates the Northwest, Midwest and New England. Solar PV is the
most abundant New Energy source in the inland Southeast and Southwest.
Offshore wind is the biggest source in the mid-Atlantic states.
The
report’s authors describe their estimates as “conservative” because
there are technologies that are available but were not included in the
calculations like ground mounted PV, concentrating solar power plant
technology, and low temperature geothermal.
Of those who
misunderstand New Energy’s potential, many also fail to realize how
significant a reduction in energy demand the implementation of
effective Energy Efficiency will make. Energy Efficiency is a necessary
and inevitable adjunct to the building of a New Energy infrastructure
and the emergence of a New Energy economy.
click to enlarge
By
assuming the implementation of Energy Efficiency, the report can assume
no increase in electricity consumption despite economic and population
growth. A very aggressive efficiency program at the state and local
levels could even reduce total energy demand.
If every state
simply matched California’s electricity intensity (electricity use per
dollar of GDP per person), most would get overall reduced demand, at
least in the short-term.
Will all this cost too much?
Using
available state specific cost data for wind and rooftop solar and
“reasonable” estimates for the other New Energies and Energy Efficiency
implementations, the report makes a “very rough estimate” of the costs
of electricity self-reliance.
click to enlarge
Caveats:
1-While
the report assumes very aggressive Energy Efficiency implementation and
a 20% drop in demand, overall energy demand reductions are actually
rare (though it has happened in this recession as well as in
California, New York and D.C., where aggressive policies were
implemented).
2-The report assumes states will choose the lowest
cost new generation but they may make pursue supply diversification or
other ends.
3-The estimated prices assume present federal incentives and could change with changing future policies.
Included in the estimates:
1-Capital and financing,
2-Operations and maintenance,
3-Fuel costs, and
4-Federal tax credits.
5-Levelized costs without profit margins intended to approximate comparable to wholesale electricity prices.
click to enlarge
Most notable conclusions about costs:
1-Western
states will have the lowest costs for transition because they will
implement greater efficiency gains and they have adequate conventional
geothermal and onshore wind to be fully self-sufficient.
2-California
will lead the transition because has had the most aggressive Energy
Efficiency in the U.S. since the 1980s as well as some of the best New
Energy resources. 3-Arizona will follow close behind California because
of its abundant solar PV resource.
3-Cost will be low in the Midwest because of abundant onshore wind.
4-The Southeast will encounter higher costs in getting to energy self-reliance because it must develop offshore wind to do so.
5-The Northeast will likely only get to self-reliance through the aggressive development of solar PV.
6-
Outliers: Indiana, Vermont, and Maine have greater onshore wind
resources than their neighbors and will therefore get to energy
self-sufficiency at lower costs.
click to enlarge
In
its conclusion, the report asserts that energy self-sufficiency is
“well within the technical and financial capability of most states”
through the use of solar PV, wind, geothermal and other New Energy
resources as well as the ingenuity of ever-increasing efficiency.
States
have been and are expected to continue being the driving force behind
the transition to energy self-sufficiency. Their role going forward
will in part be driven by the pursuit of their share of the $1 trillion
expected to be invested in developing New Energy infrastructure over
the next 2 decades. That money will produce “profound economic and
social benefits.”
Example: Plains states that can expand their
wind power to provide 20% of their electricity will create nearly
158,000 jobs, 20,000 of which will be permanent wind installation jobs,
and over $1.6 billion a year in local economic benefits.
click to enlarge
Widely
distributed energy self-sufficiency will serve as a safety valve
preventing an event like the 2003 East Coast blackout in which a tree
branch fell on an electric line in Ohio and 12 states were in the dark
for days.
In addition, local ownership of the energy
infrastructure confers responsibility and self-reliance on project
owners which tends to motivate higher levels of efficiency and
innovation.
The transition to energy self-sufficiency must
begin with a shift in federal and state energy policies to reflect the
shift in priorities.
Example: Instead of a New Energy
superhighway, for the next 10 years while the New Energy infrastructure
is built, policy would be more effective if it is aimed at maximizing
Energy Efficiency and conservation and effectively using existing
transmission, subtransmission, and distribution lines and incentivizing
the development of distributed New Energy generation.
click to enlarge
QUOTES
-
From the study: “In 2009, the nation is involved in a vigorous and far
reaching debate about the scale of future energy systems. As we shift
from fossil fuels to renewable energy a new question looms before us.
Will we embrace a centralized renewable energy future characterized by
greater federal involvement in planning, or will we meet local and
state needs with local and state-based strategies? The ubiquitous
nature of renewable energy argues for a decentralist energy approach…”
-
From the study: “Even as FERC and Congress and environmental groups,
spurred by independent renewable power producers (some of the biggest
of whom are subsidiaries of regulated utilities) rush to pre-empt state
authority and accelerate the construction of a new $100-200 billion
interregional transmission network, the case for state-focused planning
has never been stronger.”
click to enlarge
-
From the study: “For it is at the state, not the federal level, that
comprehensive, least cost energy planning is used. It is at the state –
not the federal or multi-state regional level – that efficiency, demand
reduction, distributed generation and other commercially available
strategies are often evaluated together. It is at the local level that
new technologies like smart grids, electric vehicles, distributed
storage, and rooftop solar will have their major impact…”
click to enlarge
-
From the study: “…Perhaps the most important reason to make states the
principal actors in energy planning is that their collective economic
self-interest is consistent with the national interest Every state
could create thousands of new jobs and hundreds of millions, perhaps
billions, of dollars in economic development through a vigorous
strategy of energy efficiency and renewable energy.”
- From the
study: “The potential is clear – most states can be energy independent
by relying on homegrown, renewable resources. At least thirty-one could
satisfy 100 percent of their electricity needs from in-state renewable
energy (assuming sufficient distributed storage or distributed
generation capable of generating on demand). At least 40 states could
satisfy supply half their electricity with domestic renewable
resources…And significant improvements in energy efficiency could
significantly increase these numbers…
posted by Herman K. Trabish
Energy Self-Reliant States
John Farrell and David Morris, October 2009 (The New Rules Project)
