Modernizing America’s Transmission Network

Modernizing the U.S. Energy System: Opportunities, Challenges, and the Path Forward
Find out more about the briefings in this series below:
June 04	Towards the Energy System of Tomorrow
June 11	Modernizing America’s Transmission Network
June 25	Leveraging Grid Edge Integration for Resilience & Decarbonization

The Environmental and Energy Study Institute (EESI) invites you to view our briefing series about the climate benefits of modernizing the nation’s energy system.

As renewable energy infrastructure is scaled up across the country, moving that energy from where it is generated to the people who will use it is critical to meeting the country’s decarbonization goals. Investments in the transmission network will not only build demand for renewable energy use, but will also create jobs, increase the grid’s efficiency, and lower costs for consumers. Panelists discussed what is needed to modernize the transmission network, including developing transmission infrastructure for offshore wind and increasing cooperation between states. The briefing also covered how the transmission network can be constructed and maintained to maximize ecosystem conservation, respect Tribal lands, and increase the resilience of neighboring communities.

HIGHLIGHTS

 

Dr. Debra Lew, Associate Director, Energy Systems Integration Group (ESIG)

• In 2020, the Energy Systems Integration Group (ESIG) formed a transmission plan by synthesizing common elements of recent studies examining how the United States can achieve 100 percent clean electricity.
• The goal is to enable clean electricity while maintaining affordability and reliability.
• The market share of clean electricity in the United States has increased from 28 percent in 2001 to 38 percent in 2019, but much larger investments (by an order of magnitude) must be made to reach 100 percent clean energy by 2035.
• Electrification [for example, switching to electric vehicles] will lead to significantly increased electricity demand, so the need for more transmission is high.
• It is estimated that at least 1,000 gigawatts (GW) of new wind and 1,000 GW of new solar will be needed to reach 100 percent clean energy by 2035. While distributed energy resources will help to reach this goal, they are not enough on their own. This is why modernizing the transmission network is so critical.
• Money can be saved in the decarbonization effort by planning and optimizing transmission at a national scale through a macro grid system.
• ESIG notes that a national high-voltage, direct-current macro grid composed of 50 percent renewables yields a benefit-to-cost ratio of 2.5, while an 85 percent renewable macro grid yields a benefit-to-cost ratio of 2.9.
• A national macro grid optimizes physical transmission, while also empowering the energy markets to better enable trade between regions.
• Transmission costs are very low when compared to the costs of other clean resources and infrastructure, and would remain low within a 100 percent clean energy economy.
• Transmission contributes to resource adequacy by smoothing weather variability at all time scales and by meeting reliability standards in a 50 percent wind/solar portfolio.
• Storage-only solutions remain significantly more expensive than transmission-only solutions.
• Though distributed energy resources are certainly part of the solution, there is still a need for utility-scale wind and solar generation if we are to reach clean energy goals cost effectively. Such centralized energy generation will require new transmission.
• ESIG recommends that the federal government should lead the transmission effort by creating a national transmission planning authority, proactively planning interlinked transmission zones for renewables, and designing and constructing a national macro grid network that can intelligently share electricity across the continental United States.

 

James Hoecker, Senior Counsel & Energy Strategist, Husch Blackwell

• Historically, the electric system in the United States has been a patchwork of utility service territories, and the grid has always been in a continual mode of transformation.
• This year marks the 25th anniversary of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's Order No. 888, which required public utilities to make transmission service open-access and non-discriminatory, making bulk power markets possible and highlighting the need for optimized transmission infrastructure.
• Transmission has recently become recognized as a public good after being left out of grid planning and cost allocation conversations for decades.
• In the intervening years, changes in electricity generation, new technologies, and new forms of demand have come on the horizon, and new studies indicate that the grid needs to be reevaluated with a fresh perspective.
• Problems hindering transmission modernization include the voluntary status of regional wholesale markets, states being the sole regulators of interstate infrastructure, lack of success in building large-scale transmission projects, and the lack of a planning entity and policy to govern transmission.
• Energy storage, new forms of generation, and demand responsiveness must be added to the modern grid to make it smarter, enabling it to move more power and manage more complex markets.
• Increasingly cost-competitive renewable energy will continue to play a major role in the process of making the energy grid cleaner.
• Increased electrification of the economy and the fact that renewable energy tends to be the most abundant where there are the fewest customers highlights the need for a much stronger, integrated transmission system that will support a cleaner economy.
• Substantial investments in the grid will be needed, with the transmission system alone requiring an estimated $300 to $700 billion by 2050, with at least $40 billion invested per year after 2035.
• The grid needs to be more integrated while also being expanded. Transmission technology is aging, and the grid itself is weaker in many areas in which renewable energy is increasing its presence.
• Transmission investments allow states to meet their clean energy public policy goals, connect different demographic markets, and assist the grid in adapting to an increased energy load.
• The United States is far behind many of its international competitors when it comes to making the grid national in scope. National transmission policy is needed to both support energy diversity, security, and reliability and to further enable an equitable transition process to a clean energy grid.
• A macro grid is a mechanism to make the grid national in scope. A high-voltage, direct-current overlay would tie disparate resources and markets together across states, regions, and major interconnections. This would enable the transmission of substantial amounts of bulk power at great distances within a shorter period, making the energy system more efficient. The American Council on Renewable Energy's Macro Grid Initiative outlines this concept in significant detail.
• The inherent barriers to the macro grid concept are planning and siting, which are already difficult to do between states and regions today. It is not uncommon to see 10 to 15 years pass from the time large-scale transmission infrastructure is planned to when it is eventually energized. Not only is this a waste of money and other resources, these wait times must also be reduced if we are to meet our clean energy goals within the next 20 years.
• Co-location of new transmission can shorten the siting process because it does not require the use of eminent domain. New transmission can be co-located with railroad rights-of-way, along existing highway systems, and with existing utility transmission rights-of-way. In the case of using existing utility transmission, old technology can be replaced; lines can be reconductored [Reconductoring means putting new conductor wires on towers already in use to increase the capacity of existing transmission]; transmission can be undergrounded; and new technology like dynamic line rating can be installed to make it possible to push more power through individual lines.
• The siting problem could also be solved by creating a reallocation regulatory authority with the power to oversee interstate transmission projects instead of states, which often cannot agree on what action benefits the region.
• It is necessary to educate citizens, stakeholders, and major load centers on the need to expand transmission in order to achieve widespread adoption.
• The key to transmission expansion is a national transmission policy that addresses the economic, health, and climate benefits yielded by greater access to renewables, and the social justice issues that come with developing infrastructure.

 

Mark Gabriel, President and Chief Executive Officer, United Power

• Billions of dollars are invested into grid modernization (e.g., intelligence, new technology, system visibility [the ability of system operators to gather data to understand the physical state of the electrical grid]) annually, but the challenge is that these investments are always balanced against the costs and impacts on rates and utility customers. So, system issues can occur—even in states with lots of resources, such as California and Texas.
• While the permitting process is slow, money is available to invest in transmission. The biggest thing we can do to further transmission expansion today is to guarantee line usage and commitments to the offtake of power. If there is no demand backed by a financial arrangement, a transmission system will not be constructed.
• To prepare for the exciting, long-term vision of transmission, we are examining what can be done within the next 18 to 46 months to rectify issues present in the existing energy system.
• The first thing we could do to improve the entire national energy infrastructure is to rebuild the seven AC/DC ties between the eastern and western grids, which would cost about $30 million over 18 months. Simply improving this 1980s technology would change the power dynamics and flow of the entire system to prevent disproportionate supply limitations from occurring between regions.
• Other potential short-term transmission projects include a 24- to 36-month expansion of the El Dorado Valley’s Mead Substation using additional wind and solar, and a 48-month project spanning the Intertie Project’s 275-mile transmission line gap between California and Arizona, for which funding has already been approved.
• Technology funding should prioritize national benefits rather than regional benefits and could include grid cyber-defense security for national assets, advanced sensing, and wildfire-fighting technology.
• The flawed state of incentives can be addressed by guaranteeing energy offtake as a backstop and paying higher rates of return for lines that encompass wider, untouched areas than for lines duplicated within existing infrastructure.
• A broad and deep energy market that spans time zones and weather conditions must be built.
• An offshore wind regional transmission organization must be created to coordinate all offshore wind planning and serve as a platform for trading and management.
• Transmission is best suited to fix the growing energy divide, particularly by supporting underserved communities. Today, there are at least 15,000 homes in the Navajo Nation that do not have access to electricity. The well-off can afford solar panels and storage to move their energy off the grid for a portion of the day, while the have-nots will be left paying the carrying cost of infrastructure.
• We should make the right plans going into the future so that we can have an energy system we can be proud of, but many things can be done between now and 2025 that will substantially improve the grid and ensure that everyone benefits from it.

 

Margaret O'Gorman, President, Wildlife Habitat Council

• The transmission and biodiversity crises are mutually tied, and neither will be solved unless both are addressed together. As we move through the energy transition process, it is necessary to understand that business as usual does not support an integrated approach, and will not create an equitable, ecologically, or economically sound future.
• The need for a modernized transmission network is inevitable, but the system must be considered beyond just transmission and should be acknowledged as a place where people live and where nature attempts to thrive.
• There is a risk of maladaptation, in which the energy transition process could exacerbate equity and ecological problems on the ground. This must be avoided at all costs.
• An awareness of the proven opportunity to modernize the grid and maximize co-benefits for the environment and communities is necessary, as it encourages community uplift to become part of the design for new infrastructure investments.
• Many studies around transmission corridors demonstrate a tangible value to biodiversity that can be compatible with operation constraints and reliability. These studies highlight that managing transmission rights-of-way is beneficial to pollinators and groundwater recharge.
• The field of Integrated Vegetation Management has been integral to managing transmission corridors and demonstrating cost savings in the long-term maintenance of the transmission system.
• More recently, attention is being given to the value of transmission corridors in the context of climate adaptation for biodiversity, as corridors allow wildlife to move to better adapt to the climate-altered shifts in their species range. Linkages can also be created on rights-of-way by minimizing obstacles and drastic changes in vegetation communities.
• Planning and maintaining a transmission network for the benefit of both reliability and conservation relies on the same management principles as systems managed solely for reliability, and involves promoting compatible species on the rights-of-way while controlling incompatible species.
• Tribal lands need to have a reliable energy distribution system, and managing transmission rights-of-way for the benefit of nature and the species on Tribal lands resonates with commonly-held values within indigenous communities. Making the transmission grid an asset on Tribal lands is possible, and could potentially foster an understanding and empathy for the communities that are bearing the brunt of transmission systems crossing into their lands.
• Communities that have historically borne the brunt of industry and old energy are areas that could strongly benefit from new designs, policies, and investments when it comes to the transition to a clean energy grid. These new investments should also consider how these neighborhoods will also bear an unfair burden from the impacts of a warming world. Investments in a new transmission system can also serve as an investment in green corridors and can help to address the health and vibrancy issues of many communities. Modernization is an opportunity to right historical wrongs in overburdened communities.
• Since transmission investments of the past were decoupled from the communities and ecologies in which they were made, an integrated strategy is required so that federal agencies, the private sector, and communities can work side-by-side to plan how they want the grid to work for them presently and in the future.
• We should work to increase joint policy thinking that considers co-benefits and supports the planning, design, and implementation of new transmission infrastructure so that everything comes together in a systematic approach. Stronger outcomes can be obtained through an integrated strategy that aligns with global, national, and local goals and priorities for equity and the environment. There is a lot of pre-existing knowledge regarding transmission, so as we move forward in the new policy framework, we need not reinvent the wheel.

 

Q&A

 

Offshore wind resources are available to us, but we are not yet taking advantage of them. And once we do, we will need a way to get that electricity to where it can be used. What does a well-designed offshore wind transmission network look like? Are the main challenges technological or policy-related?

• Lew: Practically everything is more of a policy challenge than a technological challenge. Concerning offshore, you have to be able to connect to the grid, and there are so many viable cable routing paths you could use, especially on the East Coast. The East Coast corridor contains some of the oldest grids in the country. If you are trying to shove too many megawatts into the old grid, you will need to make massive upgrades to that onshore system more rapidly. We should take a proactive approach, so we can get infrastructure built before new energy sources are put on line.

• Hoecker: There is a remarkable resource awaiting development offshore, and I think we will increasingly begin to develop it. Wind energy is ready to take off. Siting and permitting are always challenges, as the ocean is a very sensitive environment and that needs to be taken into account during the planning process. Still, these things can be built successfully. Future offshore grids could be dispatched and implemented as part of something like the PJM interconnection, just like any other resource [the PJM interconnection is a regional transmission organization that coordinates wholesale electricity movement in large parts of the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic].

• Gabriel: Offshore wind is a dream that exists, but right now the transmission component exists more in the field of dreams. We have got to figure out both the policy and economics. In addition to the technology expense, you often have economics running somewhat counter to the appeal of that offshore resource. A utility might have trouble investing, given that their rates of return are driven by on-shore investments. We need to figure out the economic policy that leads to the best decision. I have found that utilities are economically logical and environmentally sensitive. We need to figure out who is going to commit to the offtake. Someone has to want the power at the other end, not just in the theory of a study, but in the practicality of signing on the bottom line and committing for 30-40 years.

• O'Gorman: From the point of view of ecological impacts, the East Coast is a major migratory route for whales, and we have seen recent developments take into account migratory patterns. A benefit has been identified: offshore is loved by fishermen because it creates reefs. We also have the equity question of where offshore wind connects onshore and if those connection points are placed in historically burdened, coastal industrial communities. We must ensure that the intersection point does not increase the burden on those communities. Still, it amazes and amuses me that the United States is not further ahead in offshore development, especially when looking at the success of offshore in other countries.

 

Any thoughts from around the group about the feasibility of offshore wind while we are also using our coastlines for other forms of commerce?

• Hoecker: There has been a great deal of aesthetic objection to offshore wind, but I think that may be diminishing over time. But I know from the sports fishing world that having those infrastructures out there, in some cases, operates as an artificial reef and encourages fish populations. Ultimately, it may be a mixed bag.

 

Mark offered some ideas for near-term grid improvements in the next 12 to 48 months. We have a lot of existing transmission infrastructure weaving across the country today. Are there other things we can do to make the most of the existing infrastructure—to make it more reliable and resilient and longer lasting? Are there things we can do to make the land around our existing transmission infrastructure more sustainable?

• Lew: We use our rights-of-way poorly compared to much of the developed world, in terms of how many megawatts flow per foot of right-of-way space. We need to use our rights-of-way much more efficiently, and some new designs and technologies can enable us to do that. As we do that, we must also think about upgrading current infrastructure rather than just replacing it, to maximize right-of-way usage. These new grid-enhancing technologies could be employed to help us use existing rights-of-way better.

• Hoecker: I am a believer in using as much of the existing right-of-way infrastructure as possible. There are new technologies that rate line capacity differently using new sensors and enable re-conduction to improve efficiency. There are also existing transportation infrastructures like railroads that exist in silos that are quite different from the electric industry. We are trying to figure out how we can bring these two types of infrastructure together to think about how they can both profit. Some examples show we can serve the environment while being economically responsible by using existing infrastructure.

• Gabriel: We always have to figure out who gains and who pains. In my experience, it was difficult to lean on particular customer utilities to pay for line upgrades beyond the capacity they could see at that present moment or within the next few years. We should not build another 115 kilovolt (kV) line in this country. They should all be built at 345 kV or 500 kV. Figuring out the economics to implement these new technologies is a key component. Something else we should consider is that we are shuttering coal plants in areas with huge transmission capabilities, like the Navajo Generating Station, which is the perfect spot for a billion-dollar solar farm. We need to take advantage of existing infrastructure and add the technologies we need onto existing sites.

• O'Gorman: We think about the many coal plants that have left urban areas and have resulted in burdened communities being left behind. We should bring these upgrades there, bringing these neighborhoods benefits like clean air. Looking at transmission overall, we see a lot of small upgrades happening that are still ignoring the co-benefits for biodiversity. We are missing many opportunities by approaching upgrading from a perspective that only considers a single engineering solution. I know it is really difficult because of the way our government agencies function, but if we could think about weaving community and stewardship benefits into the fundamentals of the transmission philosophy, it would yield great ecological benefits.

 

Do highways have the same potential for transmission upgrades as railroads?

• Hoecker: The potential applies to highways, which is a much bigger system than railroads. Our interstate highways form a network that crosses many of the best areas for renewable wind and solar, and those rights-of-way can be utilized. However, they are subject to the rules and restrictions of the National Highway Administration and state departments of transportation, which are not the friendliest to additional infrastructure for several reasons. Still, a lot of the same reasons for locating transmission infrastructure along railroads can also apply to highways.

 

As we make planning, investment, and siting decisions, is there potential for exacerbating environmental injustices that decision makers need to be aware of?

• Hoecker: Even with state and federal regulation, certain facilities end up being located, for financial reasons, around and within burdened communities. This needs to be avoided or mitigated. My experience in the regulatory world is that we have gotten better over the years at addressing these concerns in the course of approving energy facilities. It would help immensely to have a national policy that addressed how to site facilities and take into account the interests of Tribal communities and others in sensitive regions.

• Gabriel: What I believe is happening today is that expanding economic adversity is being created by those who can afford solar panels, Teslas, and the other wonderful tools we talk about. The average family of four making $54,000 a year is being bypassed as environmental and economic benefits are given to higher-income people. To me, transmission represents an opportunity to bring in lower-cost clean resources, but we have to be careful about who pays for it. We have to shift the paradigm away from the kilowatt and megawatt-hour to something that properly weighs the value of the environment, and I think that transmission is a big part of the solution.

• O'Gorman: Habitat fragmentation is the biggest threat to biodiversity in the United States. Reducing further fragmentation by co-locating transmission along railroads or highways is very important. Regarding equity, for decades we have exported the costs of our lifestyles to communities that cannot afford it. We have an opportunity to stop exporting that cost. One way is to engage communities in meaningful conversation. In our work within these communities, we have learned that they want us to ask them what they want, rather than us making those assumptions on their behalf. To avoid adding to the burden of these places, we need to step back and engage with them in a way that is meaningful, listens to what they want, and responds appropriately.

 

Highlights compiled by Jaxon Tolbert