Timelines and costs for critical offshore wind power transmission capacity could be slashed in the north-east US by following existing rights-of-way and rebuilding ageing infrastructure, Brattle Group principal Hannes Pfeifenberger told Recharge in an exclusive interview.
The consultancy today released a report on US offshore wind transmission that highlighted the potential of region-wide planning for cutting costs and lowering social and environmental impacts of incorporating power from gigascale projects.
“Starting proactive planning for these long-term offshore wind generation needs now likely will save US consumers at least $20bn and reduce environmental and community impacts by 50%,” according to the Brattle report, commissioned by a group of industry and environmental organisations.
States in the US north-east have some 20GW of offshore wind pipeline, while the Biden administration is aiming for a “national goal” of 30GW of capacity by 2030 and 110GW by 2050.
But permitting and building greenfield transmission lines could take at least a decade. And Brattle Group warns that based upon studies done by National Grid in the UK, even a five-year delay in the planning process could result in slashing the benefits in half.
“There is no time to lose if we want to achieve any of these benefits,” said Pfeifenberger.
“[The industry needs to] start now to develop least-regrets transmission plans that can support states’ near-term offshore wind goals while simultaneously creating attractive transmission solutions to meet our long-term clean energy needs.”
The ageing grid in the US north-east grid provides “unique opportunities” to greatly diminish costs and timelines by offshore wind-ready capacity on existing rights-of-way, said Pfeifenberger.
“You can avoid a lot of the onshore permitting challenge by planning better and using existing transmission corridors [and] highway corridors in order to minimise the amount of greenfield transmission that you need to build,” he said.
Interstate planning and greater coordination with federal agencies including the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission will likewise be essential and require visionary leadership, particularly in the small New England states.
“You need to create a multi-state entity that has decision-making authority. And that requires the states to delegate at least some of that decision making authority to that entity,” he said.
New Jersey offers a compelling example of effective offshore wind grid planning in its pioneering $1bn transmission tender that concluded late last year.
It is the first state to take advantage of regional transmission operator PJM’s so-called State Agreement Approach that allowed it to include public policy along with need, cost, and reliability into grid planning.
The state opted for an onshore collector at the Larrabee substation to bring 6.4GW of project capacity to shore at the same location.
The solution leveraged existing rights-of-way while reducing the impact to New Jersey’s shoreline by deploying a single point of interconnection (POI).
“New Jersey already knew that they wanted to procure more wind, so they can pick an interconnection point with spare capacity to accommodate the necessary future extension,” Pfeifenberger said.
New Jersey surprised industry watchers by foregoing an offshore “backbone” grid, a concept that has captivated the industry with its potential to generate efficiencies while reducing onshore permitting timelines and stakeholder opposition.
New Jersey found, however, that investment tax credits (ITC) offered in the landmark Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) favoured including radial lines to shore in the overall generator package.
“The IRS [Internal Revenue Service] has not issued clarification on it,” said Pfeifenberger.
The IRS needs to “remove the uncertainty, the risk that an ITC may not be available for third party transmission.”
He added that permitting for offshore transmission “is still somewhat unclear and disconnected from the wind generation permitting process and could easily add a year to the permitting”.
Regardless, “we don't need to build an offshore backbone from Maine to Virginia – not now, maybe never,” he said. Instead, current transmission planning must include “modular facilities that are compatible with where we might end up in the long term”.
The report includes multiple other recommendations, including standardising technology around high voltage direct current (HVDC) technology that will enable fewer, larger lines at higher capacity to carry the power to market.
Brattle Group’s report included contributions from risk assessment firm DNV and was commissioned by American Clean Power Association, the American Council on Renewable Energy, the Clean Air Task Force, GridLab, and the Natural Resources Defence Council.
