Published: June 20, 2008 12:11 am         

East or West, many of the problems and questions regarding future energy needs remain the same

In the region, wind farm developers have run up against opposition to the large turbines critics say won’t produce enough energy to be an efficient alternative to existing coal and gas fired generation.

Coal and gas fired electric generators pollute the landscape; water and air and wind turbines will spoil the view shed.

But you have to get the electricity, regardless of how it is generated, to where it is needed.

Utilities, including Allegheny Power and American Electric Power, have run up against similar opposition to their proposed construction — at the urging of the PJM Interconnection which operates the power grid for much of the Northeast — of two high voltage power transmission lines through the region.

The lines would traverse over several hundred miles of privately owned property with little compensation to the property owners for loss of use and value of the affected acreage.

The utilities also plan to recoup the cost of construction of the lines by increasing electric rates to users, including those whose property the lines cross.

The power lines would carry the electricity generated by the power plants and wind farms in Pennsylvania, West Virginia and Maryland to the Eastern Seaboard where there is increasing demand for reliable electricity to feed residential, commercial and industrial needs.

So far, there seem to be no viable alternatives to the construction of the lines, though there have been some interesting suggestions as to how land owners may be compensated, including free electricity, new taxes and other options.

An Associated Press story out of California caught my eye the other day.

The story focuses on a proposal by San Diego Gas and Electric Co. to build one of the world’s largest solar power operations in the Southern California desert and surround it with plants that run on wind and underground heat.

I’ve been to that desert. It is barren and looking at the idea from a strictly economic development standpoint, it would provide lots of jobs from development to construction to operation and maintenance in an area where there are none now.

It is renewable energy and therefore reduces the nation’s dependence on oil (foreign or otherwise).

The problem is that the plan also calls for 150-mile high-voltage transmission line to be constructed to get the power from the desert to San Diego.

Sound familiar?

It’s worse really, the path of the line would take it through about 23 miles of the Anza-Borrego Desert State Park, known for its hiking trails, wildflowers, palm groves, cacti and mountain views.

Similar to the push in our area to have power plants built closer to the demand, environmentalists in the West are pushing for renewable power to be generated closer to heavily populated areas, rather than brought in from distant sites such as the desert.

One utility operator offered the analogy that the situation “is a classic chicken and the egg” syndrome. “No one can develop a project if they can’t send (the electricity) anywhere. You need transmission.”

And he’s right, there’s is no argument that transmission is needed; it’s the mode that’s in question in both the East and the West and if there is indeed only one mode of transmission, how do you compensate landowners for the inconvenience and loss of value and avoid the intrusion into a state or national park?

There also are similar arguments in California against renewables as critics say solar and wind cannot generate nearly enough power to satisfy needs.

I’m not sure I buy that argument either as another article in recent weeks has pointed out that given current research and development rates in renewables, as much as 25 percent of the nation’s electricity needs might soon come from renewable alternatives.

Solar, wind and geothermal are likely to play significantly more important roles in the future of energy generation.

I’d also like to see utilities take a more in-depth look at boosting the capabilities of existing transmission lines.

The companies have apparently ruled out putting additional lines underground because of cost, but that too needs a new look.

The opposition and questions will continue until all avenues for alternatives to the inconvenience and threats such lines pose to people and environments are exhausted.

Contact Mona Ridder at mridder@times-news.com.