Renewable Energy Solar Energy Wind Energy Geothermal Energy Bioenergy Hydropower

Texas PUC Approves Wind Transmission Plan

July 24, 2008 | 6 Comments

Do you like this news?

Bookmark

Feed

Austin, Texas [RenewableEnergyWorld.com] The Public Utility Commission of Texas (PUC) has chosen to pursue a transmission scenario that will eventually transmit a total of 18,456 megawatts (MW) of wind power from West Texas and the Panhandle region to metropolitan areas of the state.

"With its decision to approve new, large investments in transmission lines for renewable energy, Texas is not only ensuring that consumers will reap the benefits of more wind power, it is also showing the way forward for the nation."

-- Randall Swisher, Executive Director, AWEA

The plan selected by the PUC is estimated to cost US $4.93 billion, or approximately US $4.00 per month per residential customer, once construction is complete and costs are reflected in rates. It is expected that the new lines will be in service within four to five years.

Earlier this year, the Electric Reliability Council of Texas (ERCOT), the agency that oversees the state’s electric grid, responded to a PUC order to provide several scenarios to the commission. The four scenarios contained a total of 12,053, 18,456, 24,859, and 24,419 MW of installed wind generation distributed among five Competitive Renewable Energy Zones (CREZs) in West Texas and the Texas Panhandle.

“With its decision to approve new, large investments in transmission lines for renewable energy, Texas is not only ensuring that consumers will reap the benefits of more wind power, it is also showing the way forward for the nation,” said Randall Swisher, Executive Director of the American Wind Energy Association (AWEA). “We need to improve the way the nation plans for transmission lines, both to increase electric system reliability and to tap our vast wind resource. Texas is pioneering a way to that by establishing 'Competitive Renewable Energy Zones' that identify corridors where transmission can be built and ways in which the lines will be funded.”

Wind Power

6 Reader Comments

Comment
1 of 6

tripp-bishop-28613

July 24, 2008

uh, MWh makes no sense there. If the lines could only transmit 18GWh of power that would be immensely underwhelming. In your rant where does time (hours) come into the equation? None of your variables are time dependent, so how could MWh be the unit that you're suggesting.

Well, they said that the cost was $4.93B so why don't you do the math instead of whinging about it.

Comment
2 of 6

r-t-55471

July 24, 2008

"transmit a total of 18,456 megawatts (MW) of wind power"

Don't you really want to use MWhrs? Watts are instantaneous (mega or otherwise). Perhaps the peak voltage is the amount the line can handle. The curent determines the watts and the resistance determines the current. The resistance also determines the current the line can carry before it melts, regardless of the voltage.

"$4.00 per month per residential customer"

For a year? For ten years? For ever?

In spite of the byline, is this just a news release from people who don't care about accuracy?

More questions than answers - pathetic.

Comment
3 of 6

paul-johnson-34828

July 25, 2008

Although the last thing I want to see is another increase in my electric bill, I have to say it is about time. There is too much potential there to be left untapped.

T. Boone is obviously going to do well with this, but I'm thankful he is bringing national exposure to the crisis.

Comment
4 of 6

jack-adams-152349

July 25, 2008

Thanks for a well written piece. I agree with first commenters question about $4/month - for how long. However, transmission lines are rated on instantaneous power handling capability. The rating is given in amps, which muliplied by the operating voltage gives the power.
Note that the $4/month cost could over time be more than offset by the relative price stability of wind, vs. oil.

Comment
5 of 6

jim-duncan-26685

July 26, 2008

Well T-bone had nothing to do with this decision, he is just a master of marketing by announcing his plan just before the PUC report was released.
But the PUC is to be chastised for, once again, doing a lot less than needs to be done to move Texas aggressively toward a renewable future.
And it's a fact, the state legislators repeated blocking of a more realistic RPS is another nail in the coffin for RE in Texas.
Not surprisingly, a group of utilities, led by Oncor (TXU) has pushed its way to the front of the line offering to build the transmission lines, now that public money is available, and snarling other competitors trying for the big juicy bone.
So as usual, the RE industry shuffles up, hat-in-hand, up to the state thanking them for the crumbs.
Jim Duncan

Comment
6 of 6

jeffrey-anthony-17535

July 26, 2008

To answer Art's question on the phrase "transmit a total of 18,456 megawatts (MW) of wind power", it is accurate as written, albeit in shorthand. The studies conducted in the Texas CREZ process analyzed the energy output (in megawatt-hours) from varying levels of installed capacity of wind projects (in megwatts). So the analysis fully accounted for the actual amounts of energy that would need to be transmitted by the level of wind project installations envisioned in each of the CREZ scenarios that were studied.

So the phrase could have been written more technically correct as "transmit [the energy that will be prouced by] a total of 18,456 megawatts (MW) of [installed capacity] wind power [projects]". That would be more technically correct, but longer. But the PUCT decision is based on analysis that fully accounted for the energy output of various levels of installed wind project capacity.

Jeffrey E. Anthony
American Wind Energy Association

Add Your Comment

Registered users, please make sure to Sign-In. We and others want to know your ideas and opinions. If you are not yet Registered -- it's quick and easy. Just click below.
Thanks!