Iowa State University Ames, IA July 5, 2011 Wind on the Wires – Wind and Transmission Issues Beth Soholt Wind on the Wires [email protected].

Iowa State UniversityAmes, IA

July 5, 2011

Wind on the Wires – Wind and Transmission Issues

Beth SoholtWind on the Wires

[email protected]

Background on Wind on the Wires• Non-profit Advocacy Organization launched in 2001 to overcome the

barriers to bringing wind energy to market in the Midwest.• Members include non-profit environmental organizations, tribal

representatives, farm groups, wind developers and manufacturers, American Wind Energy Association, businesses that provide goods and services to the wind industry.

• Work in 3 areas: – Technical – work with electric utilities and Midwest Independent

System Operator (MISO – regional “grid” operator) on transmission planning for wind, market and operational rules that treat wind fairly

– Regulatory – actively participate in cases where states are approving new transmission lines that will deliver wind energy and other dockets that affect wind development

– Policy education/outreach/advocacy – work with governors, state regulators, legislators, local elected officials, regional groups, colleague organizations, general public on wind and transmission issues

• Support – Foundation grants and member contributions

Wind on the Wires Footprint

4

MISO State RES Requirements

5

• MISO existing wind: ~9,000 MW• MISO State RESs: ~25,000 MW• MISO-wide 20% wind: ~50,000 MW• MGA 30% by 2030: 75-100,000 MW

Projected RPS Requirements in MISO States

6

Wind on the Wires Overview

• Technical/Transmission–We speak MISO!• Transmission Planning including MTEP, CMVP• Wind Integration, Markets, Operations, Tariff

Development• AC, PAC, MSC, RSC, task forces, work groups• RECB, IPTF• FERC filings – Cost Allocation, DIR, Queue Reform, RSG• MISO Board including System Planning Committee,

Markets Committee

Wind on the Wires Overview

• Regulatory– Contested case proceedings and dockets before state

Public Utilities Commissions, Public Service Commissions• 3 large transmission cases

– SW Minnesota 825 MW case - 92 mile 345 kV line from South Falls to Lakefield Junction

– BRIGO – 3 new 115 kV lines in Buffalo Ridge area– CapX 2020 – 600 miles of new double-circuit ready 345 kV

• RPS implementation/rulemaking – IL, IN, MI, MN, MO • Utility Integrated Resource Plans• Siting issues

Wind on the Wires Overview

• Policy/Legislative/Education/Outreach– Policy development– Legislative education/advocacy in 9 states• IA, IL, IN, MI, MN, MO, ND, SD, WI

– Common issues:• Creating a market for wind development• Clear and consistent rules• Debunk myths (wind is not reliable and is too

expensive)• Siting and setbacks – wind farms, transmission lines

Regional Generation Outlet Study (RGOS)• Developed transmission portfolios needed to implement Renewable

Portfolio Standards or goals at the least cost for consumers while continuing to reliably serve load.

• RGOS summary (full report posted November 19, 2010): – Renewable energy: ~ 40 GW of total wind (~28.5 GW new & ~11 GW ‘existing’)– Iterative development of transmission plans; options include 345 kV, 765 kV, and

HVDC; analysis included power flow, production cost models (PROMOD), and business case / value metrics

– The three transmission overlay plans represent potential investment of $16B to $22B (2010 dollars) over the next 20 years and consist of new transmission mileage of 6,400 miles to 8,000 miles

– RGOS identified a set of Starter Projects considered viable for near term development; The estimated cost for this starter set is approximately $5.8 Billion (2010 dollars), $4.4 billion of which is within the Midwest ISO borders

11 Source: Midwest ISO BOD System Planning Committee, April 19, 2011

12

2011 Candidate MVP Project List

Source: Midwest ISO CMVP Technical Study Task Force, November 10, 2010

13

Eastern Interconnection Planning Collaborative (EIPC)

• EIPC proposal covered entirety of “Topic A”– Establishment and funding of a multi-constituency Stakeholder process– – open participation, meeting space, professional facilitators, etc.– Funding for study work – Planning Authority and Consultant costs for

performing technical studies– Funding for NGO participation on Steering Committee and Stakeholder

Working Group as described in the FOA– Funding for Stakeholder meetings, webinars, etc. that are open to all parties

• EISPC proposal covered “Topic B”

14

Eastern Interconnection Planning Collaborative (EIPC)

Key Objectives1. Integration and analysis of approved regional plans2. Development of possible interregional expansion scenarios to be

studied3. Development of interregional transmission expansion options

Source: EIPC Revised Statement of Project Objectives2/16/10

15

16

Eastern Interconnection Planning Collaborative (EIPC)

Draft Futures to be Studied1. Business as Usual2. Federal Carbon Constraint: National Implementation3. Federal Carbon Constraint: State & Regional Implementation4. Aggressive Energy Efficiency, Demand Response, Distributed

Generation, and Smart Grid5. Federal RPS: National Implementation6. Federal RPS: State & Regional Implementation7. Nuclear Resurgence8. Combined Federal Climate and Energy Policy Future