Why SLVREC's Members Need a New Transmission Line

A Letter to our Members

Many of you have heard our power provider is seeking approval for a new transmission line to serve the Valley. Some have painted this effort as an attempt of greedy corporations who want to steal the abundant resources from the poor people of the Valley. I don’t see it that way. I hope you don’t either.

There are three important reasons why we need a new transmission line to serve the San Luis Valley:
1. We need more power.
2. We need a new power delivery path to create a redundant system.
3. Solar development will require transmission out of the Valley.
Let me address each of those points separately.

We Need More Power
First, we’re not crying wolf. We need more power to meet demand and we need it sooner rather than later. Existing lines are at capacity.

The last new power line into the Valley was built in the late 80s. It was hoped that line would meet the Valley’s power needs for several decades. It did.

However, since it was built, the number of accounts our cooperative serves has almost doubled, going from 7,340 to just under 12,500 meters. In 1984, our members used 138 million kilowatt hours (kWh) of power; in 2008, they used 209 million kWh; in 2010 they used 217 million kWh. Since the mid 80s, we’ve added 500 miles of power line and the fixed assets needed to serve our members has gone from $30 million to $83 million.

Those increases are due to population growth and increased power consumption per household. Think back to 1985. Did you have a cell phone? Satellite TV? How about a personal computer?

We are more connected, wired and tied to electricity than we ever have been before. As we look to a future with electric cars and even more electronic devices, that trend will continue.

Some have asked, “What about conservation? Won’t that solve power supply concerns?” SLVREC actively promotes energy conservation. We offer rebates on energy efficient appliances, off-peak electric heating rates, refrigerator replacement incentives and more. We even have a program for free CFL light bulbs.

But, we don’t tell members how much electricity they can use. Conservation is a personal decision. It’s up to individuals to make the choice to use less electricity. Even with more efficient lighting and appliances, we expect the trend in use to continue upward.

Some have suggested we want to sell more power to make more money. As a cooperative, our success is not tied to how much power we sell. We don’t operate for a profit. We set rates to cover costs and we return excess revenue to members in the form of capital credits.

Our co-op is run by our members—people right here in the Valley. There is no distant board of shareholders. Decisions are made by the people who benefit from the cooperative’s services.

Similarly, Tri-State Generation & Transmission Association, our power provider, and the entity who has been working to get this line approved, is also a cooperative. There is no greedy corporation behind the scenes. (back to top)

Need for a Redundant System
Second, a transmission line is needed to create a more secure power delivery system. Right now, all power comes into the Valley from one direction. Adding a new line with a different route creates a loop feed. With a loop feed, if we were to experience a power failure on one delivery path, another path could take over.

Having all the lines into the Valley follow the same route creates a vulnerability. It limits the ability of the utilities to reroute power quickly if there’s a problem.

In fact, the groundwork for this project was laid in June 2000 when we experienced an outage that took out most of SLVREC’s substations. The outage was caused by a fault on Tri-State’s 230 kV transmission line. The other lines serving the Valley were not able to pick up the load. As a result, power fluctuations damaged expensive equipment for us and our members.

In 2000, we began discussions with Tri-State about a new transmission line. We were especially concerned in summer, when farmers are irrigating, that the Valley would face rolling brownouts.

Over the past decade, SLVREC rebuilt miles of line within the Valley to allow better load shifting in the event of a catastrophe. We worked with Tri-State to install devices to help minimize the impacts of sudden and severe power fluctuations to avoid damage to equipment. But, we’re nearing the end of these improvements.

Even before June 2000, Tri-State’s engineers recognized our concerns with capacity and redundancy. They were already evaluating different options to prevent voltage collapse. Over the past 12 years, they have analyzed a wide range of ideas including power generation within the Valley; new transmission lines to the Valley from the north, west, east and south; development of solar facilities in New Mexico with tie lines to the Valley and more. Their conclusion: the best option with the longest term benefits for the Valley is a new transmission line from the east. Additionally, this solution provides the option for possible development of the Valley’s solar resources.(back to top)

Development of Solar Resources
Yes, a new transmission line would allow for the development of the Valley’s solar resources. Logically, some have asked, “Why not just develop our own solar resources, solve our supply concerns and not worry about exporting power?”

As much as we would like to see local solar development as part of the solution for the Valley’s energy supply issues—and we do—it won’t work alone. Solar, by definition, is power derived from the sun. The Valley’s power needs typically peak between 7 and 9 p.m. at night, a time when solar plants are slowing down on production, not ramping up.
Until technology catches up and we have ways to store electricity, baseload generation will be needed to supplement solar and wind power. This holds true for large solar developments as well as smaller scale distributed generation facilities.

Additionally, Coloradans want clean energy. Citizens in this state voted to require Colorado utilities to meet specific renewable energy portfolio standards (RPS) by 2020. No one is sneaking in to do anything the citizens of Colorado didn’t want.

To meet RPS, utilities are looking first to the most productive areas within the state for renewable generation. For solar power generation, the best spot is the San Luis Valley because of our cool temperatures and abundant sunshine. Unlike groundwater, sunshine is a renewable resource. Developing solar power in the Valley doesn’t decrease the amount of sunshine for anyone.

Finally, many are suggesting a transmission line to the Valley will mean huge metal towers strung across the landscape. However, planning hasn’t gotten that far. The route hasn’t even been selected, much less a design standard for the line determined. Transmission lines are not always metal towers. We just don’t know yet.

No one is claiming power lines are attractive. However, neither are the coal mines in northwest Colorado or the natural gas wells in southwestern Colorado that serve everyone in the state.

NIMBY is a well-known phenomenon. As humans, we don’t like change. But sometimes, for the good of all of us, we have to accept change. If we are going to make the transition to a renewable energy economy, we must develop the resources we have.
It’s not going to be easy. It’s going to take a lot of work to develop solutions that lay lightly on the land. I think we can do that. I encourage you to engage in the process and to help us make decisions based upon facts—decisions that help the Valley and our state.

There will be more public meetings on this project. We will announce the dates in newspapers and in the newsletter. If there’s enough interest, we’ll hold a Q&A session on the project at our office. If you have questions, give me a call. I’ll be glad to talk or to meet with you to discuss your concerns.

John R. Villyard
SLVREC CEO and
SLVREC’s Board of
Directors
Mike Rierson, President
Scott Wolfe, Vice-President
Cole Wakasugi, Secretary
Carol Lee Dugan
Ernie Ford
Rick Inman
Eleanor Valdez

(back to top)