I've revised some of the wording - you can post the following. More eyes
searching the www would be helpful in building 'the big picture' on
what's really going on....
=======
I'm doing a little research to see if I can scrounge up some details on
where TANC plans (from which state) to get the power they want to
transport, because it's clearly not coming from CA.
One basic question in regards to TANC TTP is their premise that this is
a renewable power transmission project to Raven, an area where there are
no current projects underway (if they build it, they will come....".
Since is is very unlikely that TANC's members would invest millions in
a purely speculative venture, TANC must have a back-up plan in the event
that inadequate renewable energy generation facilities are built in
Lassen County. Where do they expect to obtain sufficient power to
transport to their customers to justify the investment in the new lines,
should there be a delay in 'renewable energy generation development' in
Lassen County? Why is this alternative power source not identified as a
part of the proposal?
Identifying possible out-of state sources within power company working
documents would certainly indicate there is some sort of a plan that
hasn't been brought forward (yet) into the realm of public discussion.
I haven't had time to really go through this first document, but it
looks like an analysis of possible routes to get power into CA, and
Round Mountain is heavily discussed. TANC was a participant according to
the presentation.
Please note I haven't read each document closely. I may have completely
missed some important point, plus I'm not sure I comprehend all the
terminology.
The cost data is at: pages 14+ and maps are later:
http://www.pge.com/includes/docs/pdfs/mybusiness/customerservice/nonpgeutility/electrictransmission/weccplanning/steering_team_presentation_technical_analysis042007.pdf
And another copy with a cover letter, similar maps but no cost data, and
no mention of TANC is at:
http://www.energy.ca.gov/2007_energypolicy/documents/2007-05-14_workshop/public_comments/PG+Es_2007-05-14.PDF
Be sure to download a copy of the first one as well as bookmark it, as
some of this documentation seems to be evaporating off the www.
I haven't found any real clues why the Round Mountain substation
alternative was ultimately selected by TANC, but it does raise some
questions as to why one of the more expensive alternatives is what TANC
has chosen to pursue. There may be some subcommittee meeting minutes
posted somewhere but i haven't found them as yet. This is a PGE
document, but TANC is mentioned as being on the committee doing the cost
studies in the first document. The differences in presentations may be
due to different audiences/meetings.
The routes considered does raise the issue of whether PG&E plans to
pursue one or more of the possible routes at a later date.
Note: It's possible that TANC may have withdrawn from this particular
steering committee - maybe it was to pursue their own proposal. I think
TANC was also a committee member with on the British Columbia-Northern
California line plan with PG&E, and I think I saw a note somewhere that
TANC withdrew from that committee so I may have them confused.
Anyway, the report helps clarify where TANC might expect to ultimately
get power. It also illustrated that the route from Raven south to Table
Mountain near Oroville is both cost effective and equally worthy (and it
avoids most of us up and down the North Valley, and certainly would save
Round Mountain (and Oak Run and Cottonwood)
Originally I thought that Table Mountain Substation was near Table
Mountain in Fresno County - but it's actually a substation near Oroville
and not as far south as I had thought.
Now, I've also been looking at other out-of-state power resources:
http://www.oatioasis.com/SPPC/SPPCdocs/Interconnection_Requests_6-18-09.htm
Nevada: Sierra Pacific Power Company Interconnection Requests
This is from a page on Nevada power transmission. It indicates there are
a number of open applications for Interties into Lassen County, CA
from Nevada. Please Note that the Round Mountain substation mentioned is
apparently a Nevada site southeast of Reno, not the one in CA.
http://www.nvenergy.com/renewablesenvironment/renewables/images/renewables_map.pdf
http://www.nevadarenewables.org/?section=featured&id=79\
Frontier line is interstate and fairly hard to find current info, so I
don't know if this project is already approved or ???:
http://psc.state.wy.us/htdocs/subregional/Frontierline040105.pdf
TANC is mentioned as being a committee member for the Frontier Line:
http://www.nrel.gov/analysis/seminar/docs/2007/ea_seminar_jan_4_wtep.ppt
slide 7. The powerpoint also has maps, but they don't show a NorCAl
connection.
http://www.westgov.org/wga/meetings/nwcc07/Smith.pdf
This presentation shows one map with a connection to the Captain Jack
substation, which may explain why TANC is so set on Round Mountain -
there may be a possibility of siting another line north to tap into
future Captain Jack's 'new' power connections.
It's like a giant chess game where we don't know the rules. Well, I
guess we can learn as we go....