In my post, "Going Solar Is Harder than It Looks, the San Luis Valley Finds," I linked to the NY Times article that talked about the differences between one of the utility's viewpoints (centralized concentrated solar power plant with high-voltage transmission) and the residents of the San Luis Valley (distributed generation). In the NY Times article the utility used a wealthy rancher as a scapegoat. Well, the rancher has responded with a letter to the editor in the same newspaper.
One of the solutions that the rancher came up with was, "to use existing transmission corridors and federally mandated corridors." I wonder if this is a viable option instead of creating a new path for transmission lines. Can anybody shed some light on this?
What the NYT and most reporters neglect to tell readers is the there are already 3 power lines coming into the San Luis Valley, a 230 kV, 115 kV and 69 kV line with the combined capacity to export, according to Xcel's own testimony under oath, 455 MW. Remote industrial solar generation is not a cost effective or efficient approach to solar development, but it does allow utility companies to control energy markets and reap huge (and unjustified) profits from unnecessary new transmission lines. To review the Trichera Ranch alternatives go to: http://www.smartvalleyenergy.com/index.php/get-informed/our-alternatives, and for more insight from the Valley: http://slvrenewablecommunities.blogspot.com
ReplyDelete