Brief summary: It’s not clear that large-scale interstate expansion transmission lines like the proposed CHC line are the optimal solution for preventing outages, handling peak demand, or protecting against damage from extreme weather conditions or cyber attacks.
No. The transmission developers have yet to provide any analysis of a reliability need for CHC. Nor have they researched the potential of a Low Voltage Transmission Alternative to meet future electricity needs as required by Wisconsin law. Importantly, most outages experienced by electricity consumers occur in the distribution portion of the system, not the transmission portion. Distribution lines are the lines that connect directly to our homes. Severe weather, downed trees, squirrel activity are all factors that can cause blackouts. In recent years, there has been a decrease in spending by utility companies on maintenance of distribution lines. Rather, these companies have opted to focus on building high capacity transmission lines, a much more profitable venture. The high-voltage Cardinal-Hickory Creek line will not enhance reliability. (Bakke, G. (2016) The Grid: The fraying wires between Americans and our energy future. Bloomsbury, USA)
As for the transmission portion of the grid, according to a 2014 article in The Economist, the interconnected US grid is not equipped to handle cyber-attacks or extreme weather conditions over large areas. This realization has led many organizations across the country to install their own microgrids:
“Microgrids, with their own electricity-generating capacity, are a better bet. Most of these local grids are operated by private organizations such as military bases, industrial plants and universities, which need more dependable power than the national grid can offer. The biggest U.S. microgrid powers 150 buildings at the University of Texas at Austin with almost complete reliability.” http://www.startribune.com/when-it-comes-to-u-s-power-grid-reliability-small-electricity-grids-have-the-bigger-advantage/279835222/
To meet peak electricity demand, the most cost-effective approach is through energy efficiency, demand response, and solar energy development. Demand response refers to the reduction or shift in electricity usage during peak periods on the part of consumers in response to some form of financial incentive (see Lazard’s Levelized Cost of Energy Analysis). (ELPC, p. 22)
It’s also important to keep in mind that because the Cardinal-Hickory Creek line would carry a mix of electricity generated by continuously operating coal plants and by wind farms, in its efforts to meet peak demand, it would be generating more pollution in a more costly fashion than would the use of energy efficiency measures, demand response, and peaking plants. (ELPC, p. 23)
In addition to energy efficiency and demand response initiatives, Wisconsin can meet its energy needs and peak demand with locally generated wind and solar energy development combined with energy storage. Current and planned wind and solar projects in Wisconsin include:
1) Glacier Hills Wind Park in Columbia County.
2) Quilt Block Wind Farm in Lafayette County
3) Dairyland Power Cooperative plans for 15.5 megawatts of solar projects in western Wisconsin.
4) Excel Energy Corp’s Northern States Power utility in Eau Claire plans for three new solar projects.
5) Excel’s plans to build two community “solar garden” projects.