Today, we look at a few final ideas to boost the performance of the existing transmission grid: storage-as-transmission and converting AC lines to HVDC. (If you don't want to read, you can listen!)
Great article! Couldn't be more timely. The idea of using existing HVAC for HVDC was really interesting. The sensible use of storage in combination with transmission reminds me of why I hope you'll take a look at the opportunities and obstacles of freight rail as a climate solution.
Due to California clean air mandates BNSF and Wabtec have developed a battery-powered locomotive. BNSF and other class 1 railroads are open to discussing fuel cell and batteries - but not in the common sense combination with catenary wires. The battery technology is an obvious solution to the (suspect) objections to rail electrification as being unfeasible due to places where catenary wire would be difficult or expensive to install. Thus Battery+Catenary is analogous to the storage plus transmission approach to resilience in the energy grid. The railroads' resistance to electrification is complex - so this is just a small bite of that apple. There are certainly other parallels related to utilization, ownership, access, and the public good.
Similar to transmission, freight transport is one of the most difficult climate/public interest problems to solve. I hope it captures your interest in future essays. The lessons we've been learning at Solutionary Rail may be of use if you chose to delve into this.
The Battery + Catenary makes a lot of sense. Railroads can recharge their batteries along catenary portions of the route negating the need for catenary lines along the entire route. Provides for greater planning flexibility and probably overall low cost. Couple with the use of flow batteries with ability to switch out cars with discharge reagent with charge reagent at switch yards.
are there any existing bills or policies that include updating the energy grid for renewable energy? anything average citizens can do to make this happen?
David Roberts makes a good case for SATA. It feels right that utility-scale batteries will be part of the future of our grid. Cody Hill of LS Power, however, sounds ambivalent, even downright opposed to SATA. And he's the one who deploys storage projects for LS Power. It's hard to feel optimistic for this idea taking hold in the near term. Or are things just developing slowly until regulators decide if these storage projects will be developed and managed by utilities or non-utility energy companies?
Skimming Bill Gates's new book. He seems to be off in a number of places. Bill McKibben in his recent review in the Times accuses him of not doing the research.
Gates says that burying power lines increases the cost by a factor of 5 to 10. That's not what I read in the last article here. It's because there's a problem keeping underground lines cool enough. But Roberts contends with the way it's being done now that's not an issue. Question: is Gates really this uninformed? Other places he says that there's a "green premium" of solar / wind over fossil fuel generated electricity of about 15%. Yet McKibben contends that building and operating solar / wind is now cheaper than just operating fossil fuel plants. Any comments?
I am not surprised that Gate's is behind on transmission. Despite or maybe because he is so deeply invested in Canadian National RR, he's not connecting the dots on climate, rail and renewable energy. One major failure of vision/leadership is Gates is championing of the "Cascadia Innovation Corridor." Despite the catchy brand, this proposal by the giant engineering firm WSP (formerly WSP-Parsons Brinckerhoff) for "Ultra" high speed rail is all hype and sucking the oxygen out of the room for the reality based/common sense investment in rail needed. Even the "ultra" of "ultraHSR" is a classification WSP invented. It relies on US people/electeds' general ignorance and vague aspirations about rail. WSP had a former Govt. Affairs Manager serving as Gov. Inslee's transportation advisor. That made it impossible for common sense ideas to get the Governor's attention. The Ultra-boondoggle started out promising 250mph (now down to 220mph) promising to serve 7 communities , but if ever built might only serve 3. This is on a route that has been studied for 30 years, currently served by the Amtrak Cascades stopping in 13 cities. The Amtrak Cascades Long Range Plan - that is being ignored by Washington DOT and Governor Inslee - is a plan that outlines the necessary projects to reach the optimal speed of 110mph. 110 is optima as a cost/benefit and energy use. The Ultra project Gates is pushing would most likely squander decades in eminent domain fights and drain coffers and political will. Its price tag could easily exceed $50 billion and may never get built. The Amtrak Cascades LRP is likely a $10billion with the addition of electrification and could be completed in 10 years. It would achieve improvements for freight and passenger.
I am pretty sick of billionaire and giant corporations determining the future of public works that are critical for our national and regional economic, social and environmental wellbeing.
It is a problem that Jay Inslee gets so easily swayed by corporate and billionaire donors. He's gotten a lot of bad advice from Gates, WSP and others. Another example is his early support for methanol export facilities in Tacoma and then Kalama, WA. Inslee seems like a nice guy who cares. Sadly, it also seems that he just isn't smart enough to think for himself or understand that he's surrounding himself with the wrong people.
Great article! Couldn't be more timely. The idea of using existing HVAC for HVDC was really interesting. The sensible use of storage in combination with transmission reminds me of why I hope you'll take a look at the opportunities and obstacles of freight rail as a climate solution.
Due to California clean air mandates BNSF and Wabtec have developed a battery-powered locomotive. BNSF and other class 1 railroads are open to discussing fuel cell and batteries - but not in the common sense combination with catenary wires. The battery technology is an obvious solution to the (suspect) objections to rail electrification as being unfeasible due to places where catenary wire would be difficult or expensive to install. Thus Battery+Catenary is analogous to the storage plus transmission approach to resilience in the energy grid. The railroads' resistance to electrification is complex - so this is just a small bite of that apple. There are certainly other parallels related to utilization, ownership, access, and the public good.
Similar to transmission, freight transport is one of the most difficult climate/public interest problems to solve. I hope it captures your interest in future essays. The lessons we've been learning at Solutionary Rail may be of use if you chose to delve into this.
Thanks again!
The Battery + Catenary makes a lot of sense. Railroads can recharge their batteries along catenary portions of the route negating the need for catenary lines along the entire route. Provides for greater planning flexibility and probably overall low cost. Couple with the use of flow batteries with ability to switch out cars with discharge reagent with charge reagent at switch yards.
are there any existing bills or policies that include updating the energy grid for renewable energy? anything average citizens can do to make this happen?
David Roberts makes a good case for SATA. It feels right that utility-scale batteries will be part of the future of our grid. Cody Hill of LS Power, however, sounds ambivalent, even downright opposed to SATA. And he's the one who deploys storage projects for LS Power. It's hard to feel optimistic for this idea taking hold in the near term. Or are things just developing slowly until regulators decide if these storage projects will be developed and managed by utilities or non-utility energy companies?
Skimming Bill Gates's new book. He seems to be off in a number of places. Bill McKibben in his recent review in the Times accuses him of not doing the research.
Gates says that burying power lines increases the cost by a factor of 5 to 10. That's not what I read in the last article here. It's because there's a problem keeping underground lines cool enough. But Roberts contends with the way it's being done now that's not an issue. Question: is Gates really this uninformed? Other places he says that there's a "green premium" of solar / wind over fossil fuel generated electricity of about 15%. Yet McKibben contends that building and operating solar / wind is now cheaper than just operating fossil fuel plants. Any comments?
I am not surprised that Gate's is behind on transmission. Despite or maybe because he is so deeply invested in Canadian National RR, he's not connecting the dots on climate, rail and renewable energy. One major failure of vision/leadership is Gates is championing of the "Cascadia Innovation Corridor." Despite the catchy brand, this proposal by the giant engineering firm WSP (formerly WSP-Parsons Brinckerhoff) for "Ultra" high speed rail is all hype and sucking the oxygen out of the room for the reality based/common sense investment in rail needed. Even the "ultra" of "ultraHSR" is a classification WSP invented. It relies on US people/electeds' general ignorance and vague aspirations about rail. WSP had a former Govt. Affairs Manager serving as Gov. Inslee's transportation advisor. That made it impossible for common sense ideas to get the Governor's attention. The Ultra-boondoggle started out promising 250mph (now down to 220mph) promising to serve 7 communities , but if ever built might only serve 3. This is on a route that has been studied for 30 years, currently served by the Amtrak Cascades stopping in 13 cities. The Amtrak Cascades Long Range Plan - that is being ignored by Washington DOT and Governor Inslee - is a plan that outlines the necessary projects to reach the optimal speed of 110mph. 110 is optima as a cost/benefit and energy use. The Ultra project Gates is pushing would most likely squander decades in eminent domain fights and drain coffers and political will. Its price tag could easily exceed $50 billion and may never get built. The Amtrak Cascades LRP is likely a $10billion with the addition of electrification and could be completed in 10 years. It would achieve improvements for freight and passenger.
I am pretty sick of billionaire and giant corporations determining the future of public works that are critical for our national and regional economic, social and environmental wellbeing.
It is a problem that Jay Inslee gets so easily swayed by corporate and billionaire donors. He's gotten a lot of bad advice from Gates, WSP and others. Another example is his early support for methanol export facilities in Tacoma and then Kalama, WA. Inslee seems like a nice guy who cares. Sadly, it also seems that he just isn't smart enough to think for himself or understand that he's surrounding himself with the wrong people.