Paul Kjellander, Administrator of the Idaho Office of Energy Resources gave an update on transmission projects that cross the state. The Gateway West project by Idaho Power that crosses southern Idaho into Wyoming is the furthest along. The BLM is looking at the Environmental Impact Statement. Another Idaho Power transmission project, the Boardman-Hemingway project, has had some fits and starts but now there is good progress.
Another project has been permitted since 1996. Ellis Power took over the corridor before the internment camp at Minidoka became a National Historic Site. Ellis Power looked for an alternate route around the camp but there are efforts to add more land to the site. Objections to the route based on viewshed have been raised. The issue seems to be a way to stop the transmission line because the “viewshed” already includes a K-V line and distribution lines. It does, however, appear that there has been positive movement lately.
The Forest Service, BLM and the National Park Service have different approaches when it comes to transmission lines. Kjellander noted a need for a more unified and streamlined process for the utilities, stressing that transmission is vital to development of renewable energy.
With regard to transmission project, Kjellander noted that “bugs and bunnies, varmints and vermin" as protected by the ESA will be key issues.
He also noted that FERC backup authority is included in the Waxman-Markey bill but would only apply to the western states.
Kjellander pointed out that we cannot access a lot of federal land, but federal land will be a key piece in getting transmission built. There has been some work on mapping to guide developers on where the mitigation efforts would be least expensive on federal land. This must be coordinated among the states so that the gradation maps make sense. Right now federal policies are in conflict. The federal government supports renewable energy but has other policies that bar us from access to the land that is needed for transmission.
* * * * *
Showing posts with label Transmission. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Transmission. Show all posts
Tuesday, October 27, 2009
Tuesday, September 8, 2009
Legislative Energy, Environment and Technology Interim Committee Updates
The Joint Energy, Environment and Technology Interim Committee met early this month for updates on transmission projects, a proposal for the establishment of Energy Independence Districts, how projects utilizing woody biomass are progressing (or aren’t), and how the Governor’s Office of Energy Resources is poised to utilize stimulus funding.
Transmission Project Siting
Ron Williams from LS Power updated the Committee on the progress of two transmission projects that will form a regional transmission hub through southern Idaho and that together represent more than 1,000 miles of transmission: The Southwest Intertie Project (SWIP) and the Overland Intertie Project (OIP). The SWIP will be the most advanced high voltage project in the west. Construction on this $1 billion capital investment project is slated to begin next year. It will provide a connection to areas southwest of Idaho where renewable energy generation is available. The OIP represents east/west transmission to and from points in eastern Wyoming.
LS Power is still engaged in siting both of these projects and is including public input in an alternate routing study currently underway. The preferred route is through the site established through right of way established through the Gateway West Transmission Plan.
Energy Independence Districts
Reporting on behalf of the Idaho Department of Commerce, Lane Packwood described a legislative initiative the department is developing for residences and small businesses to finance renewable energy projects. Their intention is to remove financial barriers to consumers – who want to retrofit their properties – by developing a framework for property secured municipal financing. Packwood noted that 12 other states have established laws allowing municipalities to establish local improvement districts. Such districts would be opt-in rather than geographically defined, and would allow for a tax assessment on the property to finance improvements at a much lower interest rate and longer term than traditional financing.
Senator Kate Kelly noted that her biggest concern is the constitutionality of the proposed legislation, although Packwood asserted that at least 4 other states had similar concerns regarding constitutionality and found ways to address them.
Senator Kelly remained skeptical. “What we have seen, time after time, is the legislature doing something creative with the constitution,” she said, “and seeing it challenged in court.”
Woody Biomass
If you have been tracking the developments of this committee for a while, you may be wondering about whether anything has developed with the utilization of woody biomass as a renewable resource. Examples of woody biomass projects in Council and Kellogg have been touted as successful: heating schools and other public buildings at a fraction of the cost and emissions of coal or fuel oil.
Experts note, when looking at all other sources of renewable energy combined, biomass is the only renewable energy source that can close the gap in the 25’x25’ initiative: a nonpartisan public policy initiative to get 25 percent of our energy from renewable resources like wind, solar and biofuels by the year 2025. Idaho is participating in the initiative as a part of the 2007 state Energy Plan.
Several members of the committee have expressed concern for the lack of development in this area. Who is coordinating efforts? Among the issues to be resolved is access to biomass material – which can be expensive to gather, bundle and haul. Jim Reilly of the Intermountain Forest Association noted that a lack of technology is not the impediment to this sector, and that there are small forests that could supply the market, plus substantial fiber available on federal lands. The problem is the gridlock that keeps those lands from contributing to this market. The best opportunities in the biomass industry come from improving the efficiencies in moving biomass from the forest to the power plant.
Representative Eric Anderson voiced extreme frustration with the red tape associated with accessing biomass material on federal lands.
“You should be paying people to take dead and dying material out of the forest, not charging them a permit fee,” he said to US Forest Service’s Andy Brunelle.
The committee elected to draft a letter to the Governor’s Office of Energy Resources, strongly encouraging it to take a lead on the woody biomass issue. They also voted to send a letter strongly encouraging the Idaho Department of Lands to grant stewardship grants for access to fuel sources for periods of ten years or more.
Stimulus Money to Fund Energy Audits for Schools
The committee heard from the Governor’s Office of Energy Resources about their plans to utilize $30 million in stimulus funding to conduct energy audits on each of the 700 schools in Idaho. The state has until 2015 to conduct the audits and make the repairs. The OER has recruited Maria Barratt from the Department of Financial Management to oversee the management of the stimulus funding. Thus far, the OER has contracted with licensed engineers from across the state to conduct the audits.
Is It a Resolution or isn’t it?
Senator Elliot Werk submitted draft copy for a concurrent resolution that would clarify responsibilities outlined in the 2007 Energy Plan and ask for a detailed report from the Office of Energy Resources every two years.
The 2007 Energy Plan was established before the OER, which has the responsibility for energy planning, policy and coordination in the state of Idaho and should, says Senator Werk, be held accountable for addressing the plan and how they’re spending stimulus funds.
Some discussion was held as to whether a concurrent resolution was the proper vehicle for this message, or if a letter outlining expectations would be more appropriate. Senator Patty Anne Lodge wondered if the committee should be asking the agencies to add to their already considerable workload.
Representative Wendy Jaquet pointed out that this committee has fallen short of its duties by not outlining specific accountabilities to the Public Utilities Commission as aligned with the Energy Plan.
Co-chair George Eskridge noted that Idaho could expect to receive federal mandates. “We’re in a far more serious position than we were two years ago,” he said. “All we’re asking for is a report.” The committee will invite the PUC to present at the next meeting on their alignment to the Energy Plan and on efforts to establish shareholder incentives to meet efficiency targets.
Who should pay for new growth?
House Bill 52 was introduced last year, which would allow the PUC to assign some of the costs of utility development to new growth. Upon its introduction, it was met with opposition from realtors and contractors who had no input in its development. Representative Bert Stevenson noted that they’re planning to reintroduce the bill, inviting opponents to submit their input. The Supreme Court has ruled that new growth can’t be responsible for paying all of the costs for new utilities. Legislation going forward needs to address how the partial costs of construction could be allocated to new growth.
Codification of the Office of Energy Resources
The Office of Energy Resources is currently a creature of the Governor’s executive order which has approximately the force of law but not quite, according to Senator Kelly. If the office is codified, it would be continued from one administration to another. Senator Kelly has met with Director Kjellander and David Hensley of the governor’s office and got a lot of input from them. Senator Kelly asked for input from the committee on her draft proposal to codify the Office of Energy Resources.
Renewable & Energy Conservation Tax Credit
John Watts made a presentation on a piece of legislation for one of his clients: Renewable & Energy Conservation Tax Credit. It has been through three drafts so far.
Thirty-nine other states have a renewable energy tax credit.
It’s a proposed 35% investment tax credit on facilities located in Idaho for con-generation facilities. Some with no taxable income could pass the credit along to someone else who can use the tax credit. This is not to exceed $20 million on overall project cost.
The program would reside within the Office of Energy Resources and be financed by taking 5% for administration. Investors could re- capture 7% per year.
Other Stimulus Projects
Ken Eckland for Office of Energy Resources outlined the projects that are being funded with stimulus funds:
- Energy tune-ups for energy efficiency: $17 million
- Pilot project on solar roofs for five schools. $2,750,000. A consultant will audit to make sure the most competitive projects are funded.
- Renewable Energy Enterprise Zones Project forming private-public partnerships for renewable energy projects: $1,500,000
- Micron Technology LED conversion to produce LED lighting at its existing Boise facility. The research and development is on track to convert the lines that have been shut down to produce light emitting diodes. DOE approached Micron for a proposal: $5 million.
- Competitive block grant for smaller cities and counties: $5.5 million. OER is encouraging cities and counties to team up for projects.
- Methane gas project: $1.15 million.
- Building code upgrades: $500,000.
- Biomass: $500,000.
- PV Solar: $300,000.
The next meeting of the Energy, Environment and Technology Interim Committee has been scheduled for October 21st and 22nd.
Transmission Project Siting
Ron Williams from LS Power updated the Committee on the progress of two transmission projects that will form a regional transmission hub through southern Idaho and that together represent more than 1,000 miles of transmission: The Southwest Intertie Project (SWIP) and the Overland Intertie Project (OIP). The SWIP will be the most advanced high voltage project in the west. Construction on this $1 billion capital investment project is slated to begin next year. It will provide a connection to areas southwest of Idaho where renewable energy generation is available. The OIP represents east/west transmission to and from points in eastern Wyoming.
LS Power is still engaged in siting both of these projects and is including public input in an alternate routing study currently underway. The preferred route is through the site established through right of way established through the Gateway West Transmission Plan.
Energy Independence Districts
Reporting on behalf of the Idaho Department of Commerce, Lane Packwood described a legislative initiative the department is developing for residences and small businesses to finance renewable energy projects. Their intention is to remove financial barriers to consumers – who want to retrofit their properties – by developing a framework for property secured municipal financing. Packwood noted that 12 other states have established laws allowing municipalities to establish local improvement districts. Such districts would be opt-in rather than geographically defined, and would allow for a tax assessment on the property to finance improvements at a much lower interest rate and longer term than traditional financing.
Senator Kate Kelly noted that her biggest concern is the constitutionality of the proposed legislation, although Packwood asserted that at least 4 other states had similar concerns regarding constitutionality and found ways to address them.
Senator Kelly remained skeptical. “What we have seen, time after time, is the legislature doing something creative with the constitution,” she said, “and seeing it challenged in court.”
Woody Biomass
If you have been tracking the developments of this committee for a while, you may be wondering about whether anything has developed with the utilization of woody biomass as a renewable resource. Examples of woody biomass projects in Council and Kellogg have been touted as successful: heating schools and other public buildings at a fraction of the cost and emissions of coal or fuel oil.
Experts note, when looking at all other sources of renewable energy combined, biomass is the only renewable energy source that can close the gap in the 25’x25’ initiative: a nonpartisan public policy initiative to get 25 percent of our energy from renewable resources like wind, solar and biofuels by the year 2025. Idaho is participating in the initiative as a part of the 2007 state Energy Plan.
Several members of the committee have expressed concern for the lack of development in this area. Who is coordinating efforts? Among the issues to be resolved is access to biomass material – which can be expensive to gather, bundle and haul. Jim Reilly of the Intermountain Forest Association noted that a lack of technology is not the impediment to this sector, and that there are small forests that could supply the market, plus substantial fiber available on federal lands. The problem is the gridlock that keeps those lands from contributing to this market. The best opportunities in the biomass industry come from improving the efficiencies in moving biomass from the forest to the power plant.
Representative Eric Anderson voiced extreme frustration with the red tape associated with accessing biomass material on federal lands.
“You should be paying people to take dead and dying material out of the forest, not charging them a permit fee,” he said to US Forest Service’s Andy Brunelle.
The committee elected to draft a letter to the Governor’s Office of Energy Resources, strongly encouraging it to take a lead on the woody biomass issue. They also voted to send a letter strongly encouraging the Idaho Department of Lands to grant stewardship grants for access to fuel sources for periods of ten years or more.
Stimulus Money to Fund Energy Audits for Schools
The committee heard from the Governor’s Office of Energy Resources about their plans to utilize $30 million in stimulus funding to conduct energy audits on each of the 700 schools in Idaho. The state has until 2015 to conduct the audits and make the repairs. The OER has recruited Maria Barratt from the Department of Financial Management to oversee the management of the stimulus funding. Thus far, the OER has contracted with licensed engineers from across the state to conduct the audits.
Is It a Resolution or isn’t it?
Senator Elliot Werk submitted draft copy for a concurrent resolution that would clarify responsibilities outlined in the 2007 Energy Plan and ask for a detailed report from the Office of Energy Resources every two years.
The 2007 Energy Plan was established before the OER, which has the responsibility for energy planning, policy and coordination in the state of Idaho and should, says Senator Werk, be held accountable for addressing the plan and how they’re spending stimulus funds.
Some discussion was held as to whether a concurrent resolution was the proper vehicle for this message, or if a letter outlining expectations would be more appropriate. Senator Patty Anne Lodge wondered if the committee should be asking the agencies to add to their already considerable workload.
Representative Wendy Jaquet pointed out that this committee has fallen short of its duties by not outlining specific accountabilities to the Public Utilities Commission as aligned with the Energy Plan.
Co-chair George Eskridge noted that Idaho could expect to receive federal mandates. “We’re in a far more serious position than we were two years ago,” he said. “All we’re asking for is a report.” The committee will invite the PUC to present at the next meeting on their alignment to the Energy Plan and on efforts to establish shareholder incentives to meet efficiency targets.
Who should pay for new growth?
House Bill 52 was introduced last year, which would allow the PUC to assign some of the costs of utility development to new growth. Upon its introduction, it was met with opposition from realtors and contractors who had no input in its development. Representative Bert Stevenson noted that they’re planning to reintroduce the bill, inviting opponents to submit their input. The Supreme Court has ruled that new growth can’t be responsible for paying all of the costs for new utilities. Legislation going forward needs to address how the partial costs of construction could be allocated to new growth.
Codification of the Office of Energy Resources
The Office of Energy Resources is currently a creature of the Governor’s executive order which has approximately the force of law but not quite, according to Senator Kelly. If the office is codified, it would be continued from one administration to another. Senator Kelly has met with Director Kjellander and David Hensley of the governor’s office and got a lot of input from them. Senator Kelly asked for input from the committee on her draft proposal to codify the Office of Energy Resources.
Renewable & Energy Conservation Tax Credit
John Watts made a presentation on a piece of legislation for one of his clients: Renewable & Energy Conservation Tax Credit. It has been through three drafts so far.
Thirty-nine other states have a renewable energy tax credit.
It’s a proposed 35% investment tax credit on facilities located in Idaho for con-generation facilities. Some with no taxable income could pass the credit along to someone else who can use the tax credit. This is not to exceed $20 million on overall project cost.
The program would reside within the Office of Energy Resources and be financed by taking 5% for administration. Investors could re- capture 7% per year.
Other Stimulus Projects
Ken Eckland for Office of Energy Resources outlined the projects that are being funded with stimulus funds:
- Energy tune-ups for energy efficiency: $17 million
- Pilot project on solar roofs for five schools. $2,750,000. A consultant will audit to make sure the most competitive projects are funded.
- Renewable Energy Enterprise Zones Project forming private-public partnerships for renewable energy projects: $1,500,000
- Micron Technology LED conversion to produce LED lighting at its existing Boise facility. The research and development is on track to convert the lines that have been shut down to produce light emitting diodes. DOE approached Micron for a proposal: $5 million.
- Competitive block grant for smaller cities and counties: $5.5 million. OER is encouraging cities and counties to team up for projects.
- Methane gas project: $1.15 million.
- Building code upgrades: $500,000.
- Biomass: $500,000.
- PV Solar: $300,000.
The next meeting of the Energy, Environment and Technology Interim Committee has been scheduled for October 21st and 22nd.
Tuesday, July 14, 2009
Western states to lose control over transmission siting?
The Pacific Northwest Economic Region (PNWER) is holding its 19th annual summit in Boise this week. The theme of the conference is Global Challenges, Northwest Imperatives for the Future. Following is an article published by NewWest.net about transmission siting in the West.
For further information about PNWER activities in Boise this week, go to: http://www.pnwer.org/2009summit/Home
Western States To Lose Control Over Transmission Siting?
'We don't know why or where it came from."
By Sharon Fisher, 7-13-09:
Newly added provisions to the Waxman-Markey cap-and-trade bill, next slated to be voted on by the U.S. Senate, give the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission final say over the siting of electric transmission lines in Western states—but not in any other part of the country, attendees of the Pacific Northwest Economic Region conference in Boise learned today.
There is a “real threat” of the federal government taking over, said Paul Kjellander, administrator of Idaho’s office of energy resources, noting that seven transmission lines are currently slated to crisscross Idaho.
One of the biggest issues is Gateway West, the siting of which is being fought by Parma and Kuna, which found out at recent public meetings that towers up to 180 feet tall along a corridor up to 250 wide were slated to cross the cities’ impact areas.
“Everyone agrees it’s essential,” Kjellander said. “What they can’t agree on is where it goes,” especially since some alternative routes could add up to $1 billion more to the project.
Siting of transmission lines are a major issue in the West; a lawsuit was filed earlier this month regarding the designation of a number of “energy corridors” here.
The Fourth Circuit court overturned a legal decision earlier this year regarding FERC power over site selection. “FERC had argued that the 2005 Energy Policy Act permitted it to order “national interest” transmission projects to go forward, and that Congress’ mandate included implicit authority to overrule state decisions to the contrary,” according to the Marten Law Group. “The Fourth Circuit disagreed, finding that if states turn down transmission projects on reasonable grounds, they cannot be overruled by FERC.” The case may end up going to the U.S. Supreme Court, the law group said.
It was after that, in May, when amendments were added to the The American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 (ACES), H.R. 2454, commonly known as the Waxman-Markey bill, allowing FERC to pre-empt state decisions on siting, said Janice Adair, Washington liaison to the Western Climate Initiative, which is developing its own cap-and-trade plan.
“We don’t know why or where it came from,” Adair said, noting that the amendment came in a package about 3 am. “We’re going backwards to try to figure out how that happened. The Western states are very much opposed to that position,” she added.
“Under the newest draft, a “high-priority national transmission project"developer must first apply to a state to route transmission facilities,” the Marten Law Group said. “But if the state fails to approve the construction and routing within one year of application, rejects the application, or imposes “unreasonable” conditions on the project, FERC can step in and authorize the transmission line routing. The explicit authority to override a state’s rejection of a project is a direct response to the 4th Circuit decision.”
“The federal government isn’t likely to be as respectful of private lands” as the states are, Kjellander said. On the other hand, “Transmission is that key resource we need to be developing as quickly as we can,” he added. “Let’s not forget what happens if we don’t move forward.”
For further information about PNWER activities in Boise this week, go to: http://www.pnwer.org/2009summit/Home
Western States To Lose Control Over Transmission Siting?
'We don't know why or where it came from."
By Sharon Fisher, 7-13-09:
Newly added provisions to the Waxman-Markey cap-and-trade bill, next slated to be voted on by the U.S. Senate, give the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission final say over the siting of electric transmission lines in Western states—but not in any other part of the country, attendees of the Pacific Northwest Economic Region conference in Boise learned today.
There is a “real threat” of the federal government taking over, said Paul Kjellander, administrator of Idaho’s office of energy resources, noting that seven transmission lines are currently slated to crisscross Idaho.
One of the biggest issues is Gateway West, the siting of which is being fought by Parma and Kuna, which found out at recent public meetings that towers up to 180 feet tall along a corridor up to 250 wide were slated to cross the cities’ impact areas.
“Everyone agrees it’s essential,” Kjellander said. “What they can’t agree on is where it goes,” especially since some alternative routes could add up to $1 billion more to the project.
Siting of transmission lines are a major issue in the West; a lawsuit was filed earlier this month regarding the designation of a number of “energy corridors” here.
The Fourth Circuit court overturned a legal decision earlier this year regarding FERC power over site selection. “FERC had argued that the 2005 Energy Policy Act permitted it to order “national interest” transmission projects to go forward, and that Congress’ mandate included implicit authority to overrule state decisions to the contrary,” according to the Marten Law Group. “The Fourth Circuit disagreed, finding that if states turn down transmission projects on reasonable grounds, they cannot be overruled by FERC.” The case may end up going to the U.S. Supreme Court, the law group said.
It was after that, in May, when amendments were added to the The American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 (ACES), H.R. 2454, commonly known as the Waxman-Markey bill, allowing FERC to pre-empt state decisions on siting, said Janice Adair, Washington liaison to the Western Climate Initiative, which is developing its own cap-and-trade plan.
“We don’t know why or where it came from,” Adair said, noting that the amendment came in a package about 3 am. “We’re going backwards to try to figure out how that happened. The Western states are very much opposed to that position,” she added.
“Under the newest draft, a “high-priority national transmission project"developer must first apply to a state to route transmission facilities,” the Marten Law Group said. “But if the state fails to approve the construction and routing within one year of application, rejects the application, or imposes “unreasonable” conditions on the project, FERC can step in and authorize the transmission line routing. The explicit authority to override a state’s rejection of a project is a direct response to the 4th Circuit decision.”
“The federal government isn’t likely to be as respectful of private lands” as the states are, Kjellander said. On the other hand, “Transmission is that key resource we need to be developing as quickly as we can,” he added. “Let’s not forget what happens if we don’t move forward.”
Friday, May 1, 2009
Transmission facilities get priority status
H7: PUC and transmission facilities: signed by the Governor on 2-19-09, effective 7-1-09
This legislation recognizes Idaho’s critical need for transmission infrastructure as it relates to economic growth and sustainability, energy security, and the broader public interest. The PUC and the Office of Energy Resource both confirm that a “priority status” designation does not impact the decision-making role of local units of government as it relates to their current responsibilities associated with transmission siting. Rather, the purpose of this legislation is for the public utilities commission to determine whether the construction of electric transmission facilities should be designated to receive priority processing by state agencies, facilitating expedited processing by those agencies. The process of seeking priority status would be initiated by a transmission developer.
State agencies, at the direction of the Governor, will develop the functional role related to designating priority status at the state level.
This legislation recognizes Idaho’s critical need for transmission infrastructure as it relates to economic growth and sustainability, energy security, and the broader public interest. The PUC and the Office of Energy Resource both confirm that a “priority status” designation does not impact the decision-making role of local units of government as it relates to their current responsibilities associated with transmission siting. Rather, the purpose of this legislation is for the public utilities commission to determine whether the construction of electric transmission facilities should be designated to receive priority processing by state agencies, facilitating expedited processing by those agencies. The process of seeking priority status would be initiated by a transmission developer.
State agencies, at the direction of the Governor, will develop the functional role related to designating priority status at the state level.
Tuesday, February 3, 2009
Transmission - Saturday Summary 1/31/09
This is from a weekly roundup of some of ICIE’s activities in and around the Idaho Legislature. Staffing limits mean we can’t cover every meeting. If there’s an item of interest to you at an upcoming meeting of one of the environment or agriculture committees, let us know and we’ll try to cover it. Agendas are available at http://www.state.id.us/. Click on “Legislative” and click on “Calendars and agendas.”
House Environment, Energy & Technology Committee, 1-26-09: At last week’s House Environment, Energy and Technology Committee, Office of Energy Resources Administrator Paul Kjellander presented a bill to create priority status for transmmission projects in Idaho. This week, he returned with more information about its impacts. Committee members were particularly interested in how the designation of priority status would impact local government agencies. Kjellander noted the benefits of granting transmission projects priority status include providing an open public forum and public records to facilitate better public understanding of such projects. “People may still not like (a particular) project,” Kjellander noted, “but at least they’ll have the opportunity to understand it and why the priority status was designated.” Kjellander noted that the bill would not challenge the decision-making autonomy of county government where transmission projects were concerned. The bill would only pertain to those agencies that the State and Public Utilities Commission deal with. Representatives from the PUC and the Association of Idaho Counties testified that they agreed with Kjellander’s assessment of the impact of this bill on local authority. The committee voted to send the bill to the floor with a do-pass recommendation.
*****
*****
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)