Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
Display:
Here is a low resolution grid map:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:UnitedStatesPowerGrid.jpg#file

There is an intersection of 230 kv and a 345 kv in the center of South Dakota next to a big dam on the Missouri River. And all the coal burners in the region also need to be near a river for cooling water. And it is those coal burners that hog the output of the transmission lines, plus the dams on the Missouri.

What there really is a need for is a choice. Should those wires be used for existing, largely pollution based electricity, or renewables. And will the Missouri River be allowed to be the source of the water for pumped hydro storage, as well as deferred hydro.

And so looks like coal wins for now... It owns the lines..

Nb41

by nb41 on Fri Aug 20th, 2010 at 09:39:53 PM EST
[ Parent ]
And so looks like coal wins for now... It owns the lines..

That was a good move for coal. But in California the PUC forced the utilities to sell the transmission infrastructure, if I recall correctly. Of course that was a dark side move to enable profiteering, a la Enron. Seems like such moves work so much better when done for dark side motives.

"It is not necessary to have hope in order to persevere."
by ARGeezer (ARGeezer a in a circle eurotrib daught com) on Fri Aug 20th, 2010 at 11:32:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:

Occasional Series