Texas, USA -- Building transmission to accommodate utility-scale renewable energy generation in the U.S. is seen as essential by much of the renewable energy industry. But can it be justified? Doing so will necessarily involve constructing some of the longest stretches of wire ever undertaken in this country. Much of the best wind and solar resource is located quite distant from the load. Ultimately, thousands of miles of huge power lines will have to be built. It is not illogical to ask whether investment in such massive infrastructure "costs too much and provides too little." It is also not illogical to answer "no," not if the value proposition is laid out appropriately and a well crafted policy and regulatory approach can be established that effectively addresses the issues.
Opponents to large remote installations in the renewable energy arena suggest that focusing on distributed renewable generation and minimizing utility-scale development is the right thing to do. There are, it is said, more than enough rooftops and open spaces near the load for solar to provide plenty of energy while offering many advantages over remote wind or solar plants. Besides, the damage large installations and transmission lines do to wildlife and the environment is unacceptable. Government policies should be focused on encouraging the de-centralized renewables approach.
No comments:
Post a Comment