Ten years ago I worked on a rural electrification project in Bangladesh, funded by USAID, which was called Rural Power for Poverty Reduction (RPPR.) This was a fairly comprehensive project, with several technical components that covered a range of needs in delivering electricity to that developing nation – distribution, generation, and renewable energy – each with its own appropriate place and cost. Now you should understand that I’m an electrical engineer with a specialty in the transmission and distribution of electrical power, on which I’ve largely focused during my twenty-year career; I can model, analyze, plan, and design transmission and distribution lines, and then I can specify the materials and even get those lines built if needed. But, for this broader project in Bangladesh, we also had short-term specialists for the generation (Jim) and for the renewable energy (Andrew) components. The specialists set up the programs in their area of expertise, while briefly in-country, and I learned from them and then carried the projects forward in their absence (being the resident advisor.)
At one point in my 2-1/2 years as the Engineering and Operations Advisor in Bangladesh, Jim and Andrew were in-country at the same time – occupying desks in my office – and somehow the topic of conversation turned to Global Warming. Andrew was for it, Jim was against it. To my uninformed ears, they both sounded very knowledgeable on the subject, both tossing conflicting data and theories back and forth. Their argument was with each other and not aimed at me, so I was as ignorant on the subject at the end of the debate as before – all I knew is that the jury was apparently still out on the matter and that some day I would have to revisit this topic, get informed as to the facts, and decide what was truly correct.
Now, ten years later, Utah Governor Jon Huntsman has formed a Blue Ribbon Advisory Council (BRAC) on Climate Change and has tasked them to study the science of Global Warming and recommend pertinent policies, as needed, to address the issue. What this lame committee has done so far is to ignore the available science and instead lap up the flawed “conventional wisdom” on the subject and then recommend the acceptance of California’s onerous CO2 emission laws and propose to impose what is called a “Renewable Portfolio Standard” (RPS = a law mandating that electric utilities buy a significant percentage of their electricity from expensive but “renewable” power sources, like solar or wind, but NOT hydro.) Given that these policies have already been determined to double everyone’s electricity rates, the Utah Rural Electric Association asked me to comment on the imposition of a Renewable Portfolio Standard in Utah. Following is what I wrote to the BRAC on that subject:
There are several significant points to seriously consider when discussing something as expensive and unnecessary as mandating a Renewable Portfolio Standard:
1. The first ten to twenty points of contention are cost, cost, cost, etc. For example, a solar power system costs a minimum of $10/watt, and probably something more like $14/watt when you consider the cost of installation, while a natural gas generator costs a maximum of $1/watt, which cost goes down considerably as you increase the size to something over 10MW. The members of our cooperative simply can't afford to and won't stand for increasing their power costs by some twenty times more than what they are today and any politician or bureaucrat that thinks otherwise should start looking for a real job.
2. After you get past the mountain of additional costs, then it's no molehill when you start to surmount the issue of what renewable resources are physically available. Here in Sunny Southern Utah we certainly have plenty of sunshine, but that's only during the daytime and sometimes people like to use electricity at night. In fact, fully half of our annual peaks in power consumption happen after dark. And while you can store energy temporarily in batteries, neither lead/acid nor nickel/cadmium are renewable resources. Plus, there is no generation quality wind resource available in Southern Utah – even in Hurricane where the wind seems to be always blowing. Dixie did a study in connection with the State energy office 5 years ago by installing three wind meters at three different sites and found that the wind in the area was not steady enough to produce efficient power. And the very same people who are pushing this renewable energy agenda are undoubtedly the same group who complain about the hydro-electric dams (like Glen Canyon) that we already have, so they're not going to let us build more (even if there were another Glen Canyon to dam.) And certainly they can’t seriously propose that our members, which include a significant amount of retirees on fixed incomes, be forced to pay extra to import our energy from some other state when we have perfectly good clean coal right here in Utah.
3. Each of the co-ops in Utah already has a significant percentage of renewable energy in our portfolios with our hydropower allocations from Colorado River Storage Project. The co-ops as a whole purchase 100 out of 800 MW’s of renewable hydro energy already, which is a significant amount.
4. Dixie, and the other members of Deseret, are already offering “green” power as an option to members who choose to pay a premium to participate. Under our “Green Way” program members can elect to purchase blocks of “green” power and the extra dollars collected go toward the development of renewable resources.
5. Dixie, and the other members of Deseret, is already offering a Net Metering tariff to allow any of our members to install their own renewable energy sources and then net out their own power usage (even allowing them to sell us energy off-peak, when the value is low, and take it back out on-peak, when the value is significantly higher.)
6. If the State of Utah were serious in their promotion of renewable energy, they should put their money where their mouth is and raise income taxes so they can offer some substantial Tax Credits and Rebates that encourage home and business owners to install renewable energy generation sources. Utah has in the past offered a paltry $2000 tax credit toward the installation of a solar home system, which covered about 2-3% of the cost of installation. They should consider something more aggressive, like in the state of New Jersey where they offer up to $4.40/watt (over 30% of the total cost.) Obviously a program like this would cost real money, which would require real tax revenue increases, and would likely cost the sitting governor and legislature their jobs, but at least they'd be promoting the renewable energy program honestly.
7. Another sign that the state government were serious about developing renewable energy would be to devote some significant amount of money to research and development of new, improved, more efficient, and more economical technologies. Of course, research and development are not cheap and would come with the same financial and political costs associated with increasing taxes and spending as in item #6 above.
8. Ultimately, since Dixie and the other members of Deseret are member owned and democratically controlled cooperatives, the membership should be allowed to vote to determine if they really want to pay significantly higher electricity rates in order to pay for some “renewable” component in their energy portfolio in addition to their hydropower purchases. Of course, we already offer that option to the small minority that flunked math class (see #4 above.)
Please let me know if you have any further questions or concerns on this topic.
Sincerely,
Colin W. Jack, P.E.
At one point in my 2-1/2 years as the Engineering and Operations Advisor in Bangladesh, Jim and Andrew were in-country at the same time – occupying desks in my office – and somehow the topic of conversation turned to Global Warming. Andrew was for it, Jim was against it. To my uninformed ears, they both sounded very knowledgeable on the subject, both tossing conflicting data and theories back and forth. Their argument was with each other and not aimed at me, so I was as ignorant on the subject at the end of the debate as before – all I knew is that the jury was apparently still out on the matter and that some day I would have to revisit this topic, get informed as to the facts, and decide what was truly correct.
Now, ten years later, Utah Governor Jon Huntsman has formed a Blue Ribbon Advisory Council (BRAC) on Climate Change and has tasked them to study the science of Global Warming and recommend pertinent policies, as needed, to address the issue. What this lame committee has done so far is to ignore the available science and instead lap up the flawed “conventional wisdom” on the subject and then recommend the acceptance of California’s onerous CO2 emission laws and propose to impose what is called a “Renewable Portfolio Standard” (RPS = a law mandating that electric utilities buy a significant percentage of their electricity from expensive but “renewable” power sources, like solar or wind, but NOT hydro.) Given that these policies have already been determined to double everyone’s electricity rates, the Utah Rural Electric Association asked me to comment on the imposition of a Renewable Portfolio Standard in Utah. Following is what I wrote to the BRAC on that subject:
There are several significant points to seriously consider when discussing something as expensive and unnecessary as mandating a Renewable Portfolio Standard:
1. The first ten to twenty points of contention are cost, cost, cost, etc. For example, a solar power system costs a minimum of $10/watt, and probably something more like $14/watt when you consider the cost of installation, while a natural gas generator costs a maximum of $1/watt, which cost goes down considerably as you increase the size to something over 10MW. The members of our cooperative simply can't afford to and won't stand for increasing their power costs by some twenty times more than what they are today and any politician or bureaucrat that thinks otherwise should start looking for a real job.
2. After you get past the mountain of additional costs, then it's no molehill when you start to surmount the issue of what renewable resources are physically available. Here in Sunny Southern Utah we certainly have plenty of sunshine, but that's only during the daytime and sometimes people like to use electricity at night. In fact, fully half of our annual peaks in power consumption happen after dark. And while you can store energy temporarily in batteries, neither lead/acid nor nickel/cadmium are renewable resources. Plus, there is no generation quality wind resource available in Southern Utah – even in Hurricane where the wind seems to be always blowing. Dixie did a study in connection with the State energy office 5 years ago by installing three wind meters at three different sites and found that the wind in the area was not steady enough to produce efficient power. And the very same people who are pushing this renewable energy agenda are undoubtedly the same group who complain about the hydro-electric dams (like Glen Canyon) that we already have, so they're not going to let us build more (even if there were another Glen Canyon to dam.) And certainly they can’t seriously propose that our members, which include a significant amount of retirees on fixed incomes, be forced to pay extra to import our energy from some other state when we have perfectly good clean coal right here in Utah.
3. Each of the co-ops in Utah already has a significant percentage of renewable energy in our portfolios with our hydropower allocations from Colorado River Storage Project. The co-ops as a whole purchase 100 out of 800 MW’s of renewable hydro energy already, which is a significant amount.
4. Dixie, and the other members of Deseret, are already offering “green” power as an option to members who choose to pay a premium to participate. Under our “Green Way” program members can elect to purchase blocks of “green” power and the extra dollars collected go toward the development of renewable resources.
5. Dixie, and the other members of Deseret, is already offering a Net Metering tariff to allow any of our members to install their own renewable energy sources and then net out their own power usage (even allowing them to sell us energy off-peak, when the value is low, and take it back out on-peak, when the value is significantly higher.)
6. If the State of Utah were serious in their promotion of renewable energy, they should put their money where their mouth is and raise income taxes so they can offer some substantial Tax Credits and Rebates that encourage home and business owners to install renewable energy generation sources. Utah has in the past offered a paltry $2000 tax credit toward the installation of a solar home system, which covered about 2-3% of the cost of installation. They should consider something more aggressive, like in the state of New Jersey where they offer up to $4.40/watt (over 30% of the total cost.) Obviously a program like this would cost real money, which would require real tax revenue increases, and would likely cost the sitting governor and legislature their jobs, but at least they'd be promoting the renewable energy program honestly.
7. Another sign that the state government were serious about developing renewable energy would be to devote some significant amount of money to research and development of new, improved, more efficient, and more economical technologies. Of course, research and development are not cheap and would come with the same financial and political costs associated with increasing taxes and spending as in item #6 above.
8. Ultimately, since Dixie and the other members of Deseret are member owned and democratically controlled cooperatives, the membership should be allowed to vote to determine if they really want to pay significantly higher electricity rates in order to pay for some “renewable” component in their energy portfolio in addition to their hydropower purchases. Of course, we already offer that option to the small minority that flunked math class (see #4 above.)
Please let me know if you have any further questions or concerns on this topic.
Sincerely,
Colin W. Jack, P.E.
