Obama Administration's Electric Transmission Announcement can be Good News for Renewables...

[ProSense]

Carl Zichella’s Blog

Obama Administration's Electric Transmission Announcement can be Good News for Renewables, if Done Right

The Obama administration’s Rapid Response Team for Transmission (RRTT), today announced a plan to accelerate the permitting and construction of seven transmission lines that are forecast to create thousands of operational and construction jobs. These projects are intended to serve as pilot demonstrations of streamlined federal permitting and will provide renewable electricity in Arizona, Colorado, Idaho, New Mexico, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, Wyoming, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Minnesota and Wisconsin, and create a much needed modern and efficient infrastructure grid.

All these lines are in some stage of National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) review and all in at least some manner will benefit the integration of renewable energy sources. Some are more controversial than others in terms of environmental impacts and the power they will move. They are to be pilot projects in streamlined federal project review and approval.b] Some of the best renewable energy sources on the planet are separated from the consumers that need it by hundreds to a thousand or more miles. Projects can be brought on line in several years while transmission can take five, seven or ten years to approve and develop. Significant amounts of the time is spent in the approval process, much of which is necessary, but some of which can be avoided if federal agencies and state and local jurisdictions better coordinate their activities.

<...>

As this morning’s announcement stated: “Building electric transmission lines involves coordination among multiple federal, state, and tribal agencies subject to permitting, review, and consultation. Improving the overall quality and timeliness of these procedures enables the federal government to help expedite new transmission lines. Adding necessary transmission infrastructure will integrate renewable electricity sources into the grid, accommodate the growing number of electric vehicles on America’s roads, help avoid blackouts, restore power more quickly when outages occur, and reduce the need for new power plants.

<...>

The Obama administration believes – and so does NRDC – that we can accelerate transmission approvals without cutting corners on environmental or cultural reviews. These pilot projects demonstrate that enhanced coordination can play a critical role in accomplishing the goals laid out in the Western Grid 2050 report (see my blog here) to get us on a trajectory to cut emissions in the West by 80% in 2050. As always the devil is in the details, and this process will not be a spectator sport. To be successful several elements not entirely spelled out in the administrations announcement will need to be included, to wit:

more

[Tarheel_Dem]

1. K & R

:dem:

[enough]

2. A much less cheerful view from those who have been working on this issue.

From the blog of one of the most knowledgeable attorneys on the proposed transmission lines:

http://legalectric.org/weblog/7142/

[ProSense]

3. It's

"A much less cheerful view from those who have been working on this issue."

...possible to find opposition to every proposal. I mean, there was strong opposition during the last Congress to the House climate change bill and Kerry-Boxer, both would have represented significant progress.

I'm always leery whenever a proposal such as this is met with "it's worse than nothing" or "scary."

[enough]

4. Glad you're so sangine. I tend to think the people who have been working closely with an issue

in detail for years may actually have something useful to say.

[ProSense]

5. Finding

"Glad you're so sangine. I tend to think the people who have been working closely with an issue"

...every reason to oppose proposals that represent progress with the goal of killing them serves no purpose. For example, there is not a ridiculous effort to portray the infrastructure bank as a bad thing.

For example, here is a Daily Kos diary that piggy backs on a NYT editorial calling for the jobs bill by introducing a piece casting suspicion on the infrastructure bank. What's this suspicion based on: who has advocated for creation of such an entity.

<...>

And yet, there you are, complaining about inept policy blundering again, moaning about an obvious, overwhelming lack of positive economic results from our Consensus program for ordinary American voters. Listen, the Democratic President of the United States stood in front of Congress and literally demanded that this body pass his Administration-endorsed National Infrastructure Bank! He called for the passage of Kerry-Hutchison, loud and clear! He said “jobs” many times!

Wait…am I hearing that the National Infrastructure Bank proposal is just not good enough for you moldy, old Glass-Steagall types? Seriously?

But it’s Fareed Zakaria’s favorite policy!

But the New America Foundation loves it!

But the Progressive Policy Institute included it in their “New Book of Memos to the New President,” just as soon as Obama took office!

But Norman Anderson, the president and CEO of CG/LA Infrastructure, LLC, a “Washington, DC based Consulting Firm dedicated to the creation of Public Value via Consulting, Publications and Rankings and The Leadership Forum ( Infrastructure Conference)” made the case for Kerry-Hutchison again for PPI in March! Even such a policy and political genius as Tom Friedman was in attendance at this desperately needed Infrastructure Conference!

<...>

It's idiotic bullshit.

You know who else advocated for the Infrastructure bank Bob Herbert. Here's are more details.

The idea is very popular, that doesn't make it bad.