Today the Strib had a good editorial about ‘Fixing the grid: Don’t compromise the future.’ The word seems to be getting out. People are understanding that corporate greed for the profits of bulk power transactions is what is causing the system’s instability – they’re overloading the grid to its breaking point.
“Deregulation of wholesale markets has made it profitable to move large amounts of power across long distances – encouraging operators to ignore NERC rules, for example about overloading lines,” so the Strib editors say. That is echoed in the N.Y.Times article, which reported early warning from the industry, that in “July 2001 the North American Electric Reliability Council, an industry group formed to monitor transmission after a blackout in 1965, told Congress that “the grid is now being used in ways for which it was not designed.”
Overloads have been the theme of the major outages and ‘incidents’ such as those July 11, 1997; June 25, 1998; and July 11, 1999, which have been cited as justification for the Arrowhead transmission line. It was a factor in this month’s blackout too. “Because the state had relatively light internal demands, it was exporting lots of power to Ontario. But when the border was sealed,” Cambridge Energy says, “that large flow of power had nowhere to go, and it sparked the abrupt New York shutdown“.
Massive transmission is not the answer – as industry reports and pundits agree, there is a glut in generation, reserve margins are at their highest ever, and the market for electricity is down. Deregulation is not the answer, wholesale deregulation, market manipulation, and corporate greed is a major contributing factor. Read what Greg Palast says on the recent power failure.
It’s scary that Schwarzenegger once met with Ken Lay to figure out how to solve the California energy crisis. What did Kenny recommend? Massive deregulation. Wonder who Arnold is listening to now.
Closer to home, Rep. Ray Cox’s position of “I won’t claim to have answers to America’s energy problems or future needs” is not the right approach. The House Regulated Industries Committee needs members who do understand. In his blog on August 21, 2003, entitled ‘Electricity,’ he suggests we need to improve our ‘distribution system’ and cites Southwest Minnesota’s supposed inability to transport wind energy on Buffalo Ridge 
– but doesn’t address the PUC docket which reveals other motives for building transmission in SW MN. Ask Lignite Vision 21 (see map, p. 5)
Ray’s co-authoring of the Mesaba coal (“Two Lobbyists and a wife”) bill, H.F. 964 is nothing to brag about – not only is it the piece that got expanded nuclear waste storage through the legislature, but it set utility policy back 30 years and committed us to a central station model that doesn’t have to show need for the generating capacity – and why should it when the bill gave Mesaba a captive market in Xcel! More on this handout to former NSP lobbyists Tom Michelletti and Tom Weaver to come…
So ‘Wind Transmission’ and ‘Two Lobbyists and a Wife’ are not sound energy policy? What do we do?
First, we have to educate ourselves and define the problem. For an overview of transmission operation and control, see EPRI’s presentation to NARUC.
For an overview of where we are now, see NERC’s Reliability Assessment 2002. Review ME3’s Transmission Page, and Distributed Generation Page, and Examples of Major Bulk Electric System Outages
Second, take a hard look at this latest blackout. Try the New York Times series:
1) Experts Retrace a String of Mishaps Before the Blackout
2) Energy Bill Draws a Deeply Split Utilities Lobby
3) New Kind of Electricity Market Strains Old Wires Beyond Limits
And of course, read “Seeing the Light: Regaining Control of Our Electricity System” by David Morris, Institute for Local Self Reliance.
To be continued…