5.4. ERMUSR 02-10-2015 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

A to rush to judgment now and risk having to make These and other unanswered questions lead us to adjustments to the RES to conform to the state's CPP conclude that MRITS is useful but not conclusive. plan at a later date. We would be better advised to conduct a study that incorporates Minnesota's actual CPP compliance plan in The Minnesota Renewable Energy Integration and combination with the plans of other states in our region Transmission Study— to determine how the transmission system would be Some Questions Answered, Others Remain impacted by a 40 percent RES and what modifications The recently completed MRITS study concluded that would be necessary to accommodate it. Minnesota's renewable energy standard could be modified to require 40 percent renewable energy by And we have time to address these issues. Under the 2030, with the addition of 54 transmission mitigations to existing RES Xcel will be at 30 percent renewable by accommodate the increased wind and solar generation at 2020 and the other power suppliers in the state will a projected cost of$373 million. be at 20 percent by 2020, and on track to be at 25 percent by 2025. We can amend the RES as necessary While it might seem at first glance that this is all the to accommodate our CPP state plan once we have a information we need, the issues become cloudier when clear idea of what the plan contemplates.And under the we examine the assumptions underlying the study. draft version of the CPP, there is absolutely no reason to MRITS did not take into account changes to the utility accelerate development of renewables prior to 2020. system that could result from the EPA Clean Power Plan. The study assumed that Minnesota's renewable MMUA Position energy increased to 40 percent, while the rest of MISO The Clean Power Plan will not be finalized until mid- North/Central would be at 15 percent. Given that summer 2015. Then the states, including Minnesota, will renewable energy is one of the four building blocks in have a year or longer to devise their plans for complying the CPP, it seems likely that some of our surrounding with it.The MRITS study is useful information,but states will choose to develop renewable energy at a level a number of unanswered questions remain. There is significantly higher than 15 percent.And MRITS looked no need to act now on increasing the RES.The time only at transmission upgrade costs within Minnesota, to consider revising the RES will come when our state and did not consider cost impacts elsewhere in the CPP plan is in place and we have had the opportunity region. to model the full impact of our plan in combination with the plans of other states in the region.And at least The study assumes that many coal units in the region under the draft version of the CPP there is absolutely would act as"must-run"units, or that all coal units were no reason to accelerate renewable development prior economically committed and that nine additional coal to 2020.This is not the time to consider increasing units were available. These assumptions don't match Minnesota's renewable energy standard. the expected outcome under the CPP. Further, the study did not examine the economic or wear and tear impact of increased cycling of coal plants. 40w4k :u rt _ e The two,two-megawatt wind turbines owned by Willmar A project to burn corn cobs in Willmar's power plant has been Municipal Utilities were projected to supply approximately three permitted but awaits favorable market conditions to implement. percent of the utility's annual energy needs. 2015 State Position Statements/7