DOCSLIB.ORG

RECORD of DECISION Gemini Solar Project

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
RECORD of DECISION Gemini Solar Project RECORD OF DECISION Gemini Solar Project Case File Number: N-84631 DOI-BLM-NV-S010-2018-0051-EIS May 2020 Prepared by United States Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management Las Vegas Field Office 4701 N. Torrey Pines Drive Las Vegas, NV 89130 GEMIN1 SOLAR PROJECT RECORD OF DECISION Executive Summary This document constitutes the Record of Decision (ROD) of the United States Department of the Interior (DOI), regarding the Solar Partners XI, LLC's (Applicant) application fora right-of-way (ROW) grant for the Gemini Solar Project (Project) and the associated amendment to the Las Vegas Resource Management Plan of 1998, as amended (1998 Las Vegas RMP). This decision is supportedby the analysis included in the Proposed Resource Management Plan Amendment (RM.PA) andFinal Environmental lmpact Statement (FBlS) for Ulis project that was published on December 27, 2019. This ROD makes two decisions: • First, it approves the issuance of a Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA) Title V ROW grant to the Applicant to construct, operate, maintain, and decommission a solar facility analyzed in the Proposed RMPA/Final EIS as the Hybrid Alternative. • Second, it amends the Visual Resource Management (VRM) Class 111 objective in the 1998 Las Vegas RMP to a VRM Class TV objective, to allow for management activities that require major modifications of existing landscape character. This decision reflects careful consideration of the Proposed Action, the various alternatives, and the issues identified in the Propo$ed RMPA/Final EIS. This decision best fulfillsthe BLM' s and DOJ's stallllory mission and responsibilities. Introduction The Applicant amended an existing ROW grant application with the BLM to construct, operate, maintain, and decommission the Project on July 21, 2017. As part of the ROW grant application process, the Appli,cant submitted a Plan of Development (POD) forthe Project to the BLM with the application followed by revised versions of the POD released in March 2019 and December 2019, to supplement informa6on provided in the original submittal. The Project would include a solar generation power plant and aucillary facilities on approximately 7,L00 acres (2,873 hectares) ofBLM land in Clark County, Nevada, that would produce approximately 690�megawatts alternating current, as described in the POD (Solar Partners, Xl, LLC 2019). Because the proposed Project would not be in conformancewith the 1998 Las Vegas RMP, the BLM aJso considered amending the 1998 Las Vegas RMP. In accordance with FLPMA, public lands are to be managed formultiple uses in a manner that accounts fora combination of balanced and diverse resource uses that consider the long-term needs of future generations for renewable and non-renewable resources. The BLM is authorized to grant ROWs on public lands forsystems of generation, transmission, and distribution of electrical energy (§ 501 [a][ 4)). Taking into account the BLM's multiple-use and sustained yield mandates, the BLM's purpose and need for this action was to respond to the ROW application submitted by the Applicant under Title V of FLPMA (43 United States Code [USC] § 1761) (serial number N-84631) to consh'uct, operate, maintain, and decommission the Project in compliance with FLPMA, BLM ROW regulations, the BLM NEPA Hai1dbook, DOT NEPA regulations, and other applicable federal and state laws and policies. Under FLPMA, the Department was required to decide whether to deny the proposed ROW, grant the ROW, or grant the ROW with modifications and apptove the RMPA. The Department would decide whether to include terms, conditions, and stipulations it determined to be in the public interest and may include modifying the proposed use or changing the location of the proposed facilities (43 CFR 2805.1 0(a)(l)). Because the proposed Prqject site overlaps with a segment of the Old Spanish National Historic Trail (OSNHT), the BLM evaluated the effects oftbe Project on that portion of the OSNHT corridor, as is required undet' the National Trail Systems Act of 1968 (NTSA). Section l 0 of the NTSA authorizes the Secretary to grant ROWs .. upon, over, under, across, or along any component of the national trails GEMJNI SOLAR PROJECT RECORD OF DECISION system," 16 USC§ 1248(a), and to incorporate appropriate terms and conditions to mitigate impacts to those components. The BLM evaluated impacts to the OSNHT and, with the Applicant, developed mitigation measures that appropriately address those irnpacts. The Proposed RMPA/Final EIS for this project was published on December 27, 2019. Overview of Alternatives The P'roposed RMPA/Final EIS evaluated four alternativesrelating to the proposed Project. They are summarized below, and a complete description of the Proposed Action and all the altematives analyzed can be found in Chapter 2 of the Proposed RMPA/Final BIS, including maps and the aJternatlves considered but eliminated fromdetailed analysis. I. Proposed Project - The Proposed Action includes authorization to construct, operate, maintain, and decommission a 690-MW photovoltaic solar electric generating facility and ancillary facilities.The proposed on-site solar facjjjties include 34.5 kilovolt overhead and underground collector lines, a 2-acre (0.8-hectare) operation and maintenance (O&M) facility, three substations, internal access roads, access roads along generation tie-lines (gen-tie), a perimeter road, perimeter fencing, water storage tanks for fire protection, drainage control features, a potential on-site water well or a new water pipeline, and improvements to the existing NV Energy facilities to support interconnection. The Project would result in the permanent disturbance of approximately 7,097 acres (2,873 hectares) within tl1e 44,000-acre ROW application area. Development areas were established during Project planning. The Proposed Action includes development areas A, B, C, D, and E. Areas that remain undisturbed and not within the fenced facilitywould be relinquished by the Applicant back to BLM. The facility would be constructed using what is referred to as "traditional development methods" where all vegetation is cleared from the solar facility, disked and rolled into the subsm-face soil, and the soils compacted. 2. All Mowing Alternative- The All Mowing Alternativeis similar to the Proposed Action but would involve mowing of all development areas of the solar facilityand maintaining vegetation on site forthe life of the Projecl The All Mowing Alternative includes development of areas A (with a portion removed to avoid a sensitive cultural resource), B, Bl, B2, C (with a small portion of area C removed for avoidance ofthreecorner milkvetch), a portion of area D, area E, and area G (wi.th the southern portion removed), fora total solar field area of?, I J 5 acres (2,879 hectares). Vegetation would be mowed in the solar development areas instead of completely removed through disking and compacting the soils on the site. When constructionis complete. the security fencing around the mowed areas would be modifiedallowing approximately 8 inches (20 centimeters) of space at the bottom of the fence to allow desert tortoise the opporh1nity to reoccupy the solar development areas. Solar development areas constructed using mowing would also experience reduced erosion and runoff and reduced spread of invasive or noxious weed species, as compared to areas where vegetation is completely removed through disk and roll. The entire site would be mowed under the All Mowing Alternative. 3. Hybrid Altemative -The Hybrid Alternativewould involve mowing of roughly 65 percent of the development area, and traditional development methods would be used for the remaining 35 percent. The Hybrid Alternativeincludes development of areas A (with a portion removed to avoid a sensitive cultural resource), B, B 1, C ( with a small portion of area C removed for avoidance of threecomer milkvetch), D, and E, fora total solar field ru·ea of 7,038 acres (2,848 hectares). Development areas B2, F, and G would not be developed. Approximately 4,489 acres (1,817 hectares) would be developed by mowing, and approximately 2,549acrcs (1,032 hectares) would be developed by traditional methods. 2 GEMINl SOLAR PROJECT RECORD OF DECISION 4. No Action Alternative - Under the No Action Alternative, the Oepa1tment would not authorize a ROW grant forthe Project nor amend the 1998 Las Vegas RMP. No solar field, substation(s), collector routes, gen-tie lines, O&M facilities, or other Project components would be constructed. The BLM would continue to manage the land consistent with the 1998 Las Vegas RMP. Any future solar applications fordevelopment of the site would be subject to the site-specific conditions identified in BLM's Solar PEIS and the applicable laws and land use plans in place at the time of application. The Proposed RMPA/Final EIS also described how approval of the Proposed Project or a modified Project alternativewould require an amendment to the 1998 Las Vegas RMP. A description of the Proposed Action and all the alternatives analyzed can be found in Chapter 2 of the Proposed RMPA/Final EJS, including maps aod the alternatives considered but eliminated from detailed analysis. Alternatives Considered but Eliminated from Detailed Analysis: According to the Council on Environmental Quality's (CEQ) NEPA Regulations (40 CFR 1502.14), the alternativessection in an EIS shall rigorously explore and objectively evaluate all reasonable alternatives; however, foralternat ives which were eliminated from detailed study, tl1e EIS shall brieflydiscuss the reasons for their having been eliminated. Several alternativesites, technologies, and methods were considered but eliminated, as described in Table l. Additional informationon the alternatives consideredbut eliminated are provided in the Alternatives Report (Panorama Environmental, lnc. 2019b ). Table 1 Summary of Alternatives Considered but Elimina1ed from Detailed Analysis I Alternative I Description I Site Alternatives Much of the available private land in the region is parceled and served by nearby utility systems to accommodate bjghcr-intensity industrial uses, which renders the land too Private Land expensive for solar PV development.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Strategic Transmission Discussion
    Section 1:4: ExecutiveStrategic SummaryTransmission Discussion Strategic Discussion Section 4 SECTION 4: NEAC STRATEGIC TRANSMISSION DISCUSSION 4.1 SECTION PURPOSE The purpose of this section is to describe and discuss the methodology, rationale, and technical assessments utilized to determine the transmission export projects presented in this report. In order to provide an overall view of the process, this section summarizes the chronological process that was completed to reach the conclusion of the three proposed export transmission routes. 4.2 BACKGROUND 4.2.1 Transmission Historical Development The existing transmission grid in the state of Nevada has generally been planned, designed, constructed, and operated to transport energy from generators located in neighboring states and generators located in rural locations to serve electric loads principally in urban centers within the state. Historically generators were sized to serve the electric loads for single concentrated urban areas and/or industrial electric customers. It was recognized over time that economies could be obtained by constructing large generation facilities. This required constructing transmission lines for interconnecting the generators with multiple concentrated electric loads (“load centers”). Further development of the transmission grid resulted from interconnecting multiple generation facilities to enhance reliability in the event of outages on the generators. The state of Nevada does not have indigenous coal, oil, or natural gas to fuel conventional generators. As a result, Nevada must rely on the import of fuels and electrical energy to supply the electric load centers throughout the State. To support this, the existing transmission grid has been constructed to a large extent to import electric energy resources.
    [Show full text]
  • Are DOE Loan Guarantees an Energy Policy Mistake?
    Greentech Media http://www.greentechmedia.com/articles/print/Are-DOE-Loan-Guarantee... RESEARCH & ANALYSIS | POLICY ERIC WESOFF: JUNE 2, 2011 Are DOE Loan Guarantees an Energy Policy Mistake? It’s the Liberals versus the Libertarians: Is the DOE Loan Guarantee Program a righteous creator of jobs and new industry or a wrongful use of taxpayer money? The United States DOE Loan Guarantee Program has disbursed $30.7 billion and claims to have created or saved 62,350 jobs. The loan program has three categories: Section 1703 of Title XVII of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 authorizes the DOE to support innovative clean energy technologies that are typically unable to obtain conventional private financing due to high technology risks. Section 1705 is a temporary program designed to address the current economic conditions of the nation. It authorizes loan guarantees for certain renewable energy systems, electric power transmission systems and leading edge biofuels projects that commence construction no later than September 30, 2011. The Advanced Technology Vehicles Manufacturing (ATVM) Loan Program consists of direct loans to support the development of advanced technology vehicles and associated components in the U.S. The more publicized loan guarantee recipients include Solyndra , BrightSource Energy , Ford, Fisker , and Tesla. (See the more complete list of loan recipients at the end of this article.) The Loan Program Office (LPO) has issued conditional commitments to 13 power generation projects with cumulative project costs of over $27 billion. This represents a greater investment in clean energy generation projects than the entire private sector made in 2009 ($10.6 billion), and almost as much as was invested in such projects in 2008 -- the peak financing year to date ($22.6 billion), according to the DOE.
    [Show full text]
  • A Technical Comparison of Coal Pipeline Options
    A TECHNICAL COMPARISON OF COAL PIPELINE OPTIONS By N.T. Cowper1, J. Sobota2 and A.D. Thomas1 1 Slurry Systems Pty Limited, Sydney, Australia. [email protected] 2 Wroclaw University of Environmental and Life Sciences, Wroclaw, Poland Hydrotransport 18 Conference, Rio de Janeiro September 2010 Long distance transportation of coal was commercially proven in the highly successful 440 km Black Mesa Coal Pipeline commissioned in 1970. The economic pumping of coal in water over long distances requires the coal to be reduced to a fine size consist. At the power station the de-watered coal is further reduced to pulverised fuel (pf) size. Another option is to reduce the coal to pf size before transport and pump as a coal-water mixture. For long distance transport of minus 50 mm export size coal, the only viable option is to use a unique Special Vehicle Slurry (SVS) system. The paper compares the technical issues involved in all coal pipeline options. 1. INTRODUCTION The transportation of coal over long distances was commercially proven in the highly successful 440 km Black Mesa Coal Pipeline commissioned Aug. 14, 1970. The Black Mesa pipeline fed the captive Mohave Power Station for over 35 years. Although the use of coal for energy may slowly decrease in the long term, coking coal will still require transportation. The economic pumping of coal in water over long distances requires the particle size of the coal to be reduced to a fine size consist with the Black Mesa pipeline having a top size of 1.4 mm and 18 to 20% minus 45 microns to ensure optimum slurry properties.
    [Show full text]
  • Solar Thermal Energy an Industry Report
    Solar Thermal Energy an Industry Report . Solar Thermal Technology on an Industrial Scale The Sun is Our Source Our sun produces 400,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 watts of energy every second and the belief is that it will last for another 5 billion years. The United States An eSolar project in California. reached peak oil production in 1970, and there is no telling when global oil production will peak, but it is accepted that when it is gone the party is over. The sun, however, is the most reliable and abundant source of energy. This site will keep an updated log of new improvements to solar thermal and lists of projects currently planned or under construction. Please email us your comments at: [email protected] Abengoa’s PS10 project in Seville, Spain. Companies featured in this report: The Acciona Nevada Solar One plant. Solar Thermal Energy an Industry Report . Solar Thermal vs. Photovoltaic It is important to understand that solar thermal technology is not the same as solar panel, or photovoltaic, technology. Solar thermal electric energy generation concentrates the light from the sun to create heat, and that heat is used to run a heat engine, which turns a generator to make electricity. The working fluid that is heated by the concentrated sunlight can be a liquid or a gas. Different working fluids include water, oil, salts, air, nitrogen, helium, etc. Different engine types include steam engines, gas turbines, Stirling engines, etc. All of these engines can be quite efficient, often between 30% and 40%, and are capable of producing 10’s to 100’s of megawatts of power.
    [Show full text]
  • Amended and Restated Victorville-Lugo Interconnection Agreement
    DWP No. 10343 AMENDED AND RESTATED VICTORVILLE-LUGO INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENT BETWEEN DEPARTMENT OF WATER AND POWER OF THE CITY OF LOS ANGELES AND SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY -l- Table of Contents SECTION TITLE PAGE 1. Parties 4 2. Recitals ,4 3. Agreement, .5 4. Effective Date Filing and Term 5 5. Definitions .6 6. Ownership of the Victorville-Lugo Transmission Lines .9 I 7. Victorville-Lugo Transmission Line .9 i 8. LADWP Facilities ,9 9. SCE Facilities 9 10. Operation and Maintenance of Transmission System 10 11. Transmission System, 11 12. Balancing Authority 12 13. Metering and Line Losses ,12 14. Scheduling of Power Deliveries 12 15. Adverse Determination or Expansion of Obligations 12 16. Successors and Assigns 13 17. Dispute Resolution ...14 18. Liability 14 29. Willful Action 15 20. No Dedication of Facilities 16 21. No Obligation to Offer Same Service to others 16 22. No Precedent. 16 -2- 23. Notices 16 24. Severability 17 25. Right of the Parties upon Termination 17 26. Force Majeure 17 27. Waivers and Remedies 18 28. Authorizations and Approvals 18 29. Relationship of Parties 18 30. No Third Party Rights or Obligation 18 31. Warranty of Authority 18 s \ 32. Assignment of Agreement 19 33. Conflicting Provisions 19 34. Governing Law 19 35. Signature Clause .20 Exhibit A Transmission Lines & Transmission System. ,21 Exhibit B Diagram. .26 “3- AMENDED AND RESTATED VICTORVILLE-LUGO INTERCONNECTION AGREEMENT 1. Parties: The parties to this Victorville-Lugo Interconnection Agreement are the DEPARTMENT OF WATER AND POWER OF THE CITY OF LOS ANGELES (“LADWP”), a department organized and existing under the Charter of the City of Los Angeles, a municipal corporation of the State of California, and SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY (“SCE”), a California corporation, hereinafter referred to individually as "Party" and collectively as "Parties".
    [Show full text]
  • Solar Power Satellites
    Solar Power Satellites August 1981 NTIS order #PB82-108846 Library of Congress Catalog Card Number 81-600129 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402 Foreword The energy difficulties the Nation has faced over the past decade have given rise to an increased awareness of the potential long-term, inexhaustible, or renewable energy technologies. This assessment responds to a request by the House Committee on Science and Technology for an evaluation of the energy potential of one of the most ambitious and long-term of these technologies, the solar power satellite (SPS). In assessing SPS, OTA has taken into account the preliminary nature of SPS technology by comparing four alternative SPS systems across a broad range of issues: their technical characteristics, long-term energy supply potential, interna- tional and military implications, environmental impacts, and institutional effects. The SPS options are also compared to potentially competitive future energy technologies in order to identify how choices among them might be made. In addi- tion, OTA developed a set of Federal research and funding options to address the central questions and uncertainties identified in the report. We were greatly aided by the advice of the SPS advisory panel, as well as by the participants in three specialized workshops: one on alternative SPS systems, one on public opinion, and another on competing energy supply technologies. The contri- butions of a number of contractors, who provided important analyses, and of numerous individuals who gave generously of their time and knowledge, are gratefully appreciated. Director . Ill Solar Power Satellites Advisory Panel John P.
    [Show full text]
  • CSP Technologies
    CSP Technologies Solar Solar Power Generation Radiation fuel Concentrating the solar radiation in Concentrating Absorbing Storage Generation high magnification and using this thermal energy for power generation Absorbing/ fuel Reaction Features of Each Types of Solar Power PTC Type CRS Type Dish type 1Axis Sun tracking controller 2 Axis Sun tracking controller 2 Axis Sun tracking controller Concentrating rate : 30 ~ 100, ~400 oC Concentrating rate: 500 ~ 1,000, Concentrating rate: 1,000 ~ 10,000 ~1,500 oC Parabolic Trough Concentrator Parabolic Dish Concentrator Central Receiver System CSP Technologies PTC CRS Dish commercialized in large scale various types (from 1 to 20MW ) Stirling type in ~25kW size (more than 50MW ) developing the technology, partially completing the development technology development is already commercialized efficiency ~30% reached proper level, diffusion level efficiency ~16% efficiency ~12% CSP Test Facilities Worldwide Parabolic Trough Concentrator In 1994, the first research on high temperature solar technology started PTC technology for steam generation and solar detoxification Parabolic reflector and solar tracking system were developed <The First PTC System Installed in KIER(left) and Second PTC developed by KIER(right)> Dish Concentrator 1st Prototype: 15 circular mirror facets/ 2.2m focal length/ 11.7㎡ reflection area 2nd Prototype: 8.2m diameter/ 4.8m focal length/ 36㎡ reflection area <The First(left) and Second(right) KIER’s Prototype Dish Concentrator> Dish Concentrator Two demonstration projects for 10kW dish-stirling solar power system Increased reflection area(9m dia. 42㎡) and newly designed mirror facets Running with Solo V161 Stirling engine, 19.2% efficiency (solar to electricity) <KIER’s 10kW Dish-Stirling System in Jinhae City> Dish Concentrator 25 20 15 (%) 10 발전 효율 5 Peak.
    [Show full text]
  • Planning Transmission for Uncertainty
    WESTERN ELECTRICITY COORDINATING COUNCIL Planning Transmission for Uncertainty: Applications and Lessons for the Western Interconnection FINAL REPORT JANUARY 2016 Jonathan L. Ho, Benjamin F. Hobbs, Pearl Donohoo‐Vallett, Qingyu Xu, Saamrat Kasina, Sang Woo Park, and Yueying Ouyang Department of Geography & Environmental Engineering Environment, Energy, Sustainability & Health Institute The Johns Hopkins University Baltimore, MD Report Prepared for The Western Electricity Coordinating Council Acknowledgement This material is based upon work supported by the Western Electricity Coordinating Council and by the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Electricity Delivery and Energy Reliability through a contract man‐ aged by the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory. The project team would like to thank Vijay Satyal, Gary Simonson, Michael Bailey, and Keenan Moyer of WECC and Joseph Eto of LBNL for their support and advice during this project. We also gratefully acknowledge the contributions of the members of the Technical Advisory Committee whose advice was invaluable in development of the study cases. We also thank Yujia Zhu and Prof. Daniel Tylavsky of the Department of Electrical Engineering at Arizona State University for access to their software for power network reduction and the advice they provided on its use. Jim McCalley contributed to an earlier ver‐ sion of the literature survey in Section 2. However, the authors are solely responsible for any opinions or errors in this document. All authors performed this work when associated with Johns Hopkins University. Jonathan Ho is now with the National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Pearl Donohoo‐Vallett is with Brattle Consultants, and Yueying Ouyang is with Energy & Environmental Economics (E3) Consultants.
    [Show full text]
  • Genesis Solar Energy Project PA/FEIS 4.1-1 August 2010 4
    CHAPTER 4 Environmental Consequences 4.1 Introduction This chapter assesses environmental impacts that would occur due to the implementation of proposed action or the alternatives described in Chapter 2. The baseline affected environment, or existing condition, is described in Chapter 3. 4.1.1 Analytical Assumptions The following impacts analysis was conducted with the following assumptions: 1. The laws, regulations, and policies applicable to BLM authorizing ROW grants for renewable energy development facilities would be applied consistently for all action alternatives. 2. The proposed facility would be constructed, operated, maintained and decommissioned as described in each action alternative. 3. Short-term impacts are those expected to occur during the construction phase and the first five years of the operation and maintenance phase. Long-term impacts are those that would occur after the first five years of operation. 4.1.2 Types of Effects The potential impacts from those actions that would have direct, indirect, and cumulative effects were considered for each resource. Effects and impacts as used in this document are synonymous and could be beneficial or detrimental. Direct effects are caused by the action and occur at the same time and place as the action; indirect effects are caused by the action and occur later in time or further in distance, but are still reasonably foreseeable. 40 CFR 1508.8. Cumulative impacts are those effects resulting from the incremental impacts of an action when combined with other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions (regardless of which agency or person undertakes such actions). 40 CFR 1508.7. Cumulative impacts could result from individually insignificant but collectively significant actions taking place over a period of time.
    [Show full text]
  • December 2012 Number 1
    Calochortiana December 2012 Number 1 December 2012 Number 1 CONTENTS Proceedings of the Fifth South- western Rare and Endangered Plant Conference Calochortiana, a new publication of the Utah Native Plant Society . 3 The Fifth Southwestern Rare and En- dangered Plant Conference, Salt Lake City, Utah, March 2009 . 3 Abstracts of presentations and posters not submitted for the proceedings . 4 Southwestern cienegas: Rare habitats for endangered wetland plants. Robert Sivinski . 17 A new look at ranking plant rarity for conservation purposes, with an em- phasis on the flora of the American Southwest. John R. Spence . 25 The contribution of Cedar Breaks Na- tional Monument to the conservation of vascular plant diversity in Utah. Walter Fertig and Douglas N. Rey- nolds . 35 Studying the seed bank dynamics of rare plants. Susan Meyer . 46 East meets west: Rare desert Alliums in Arizona. John L. Anderson . 56 Calochortus nuttallii (Sego lily), Spatial patterns of endemic plant spe- state flower of Utah. By Kaye cies of the Colorado Plateau. Crystal Thorne. Krause . 63 Continued on page 2 Copyright 2012 Utah Native Plant Society. All Rights Reserved. Utah Native Plant Society Utah Native Plant Society, PO Box 520041, Salt Lake Copyright 2012 Utah Native Plant Society. All Rights City, Utah, 84152-0041. www.unps.org Reserved. Calochortiana is a publication of the Utah Native Plant Society, a 501(c)(3) not-for-profit organi- Editor: Walter Fertig ([email protected]), zation dedicated to conserving and promoting steward- Editorial Committee: Walter Fertig, Mindy Wheeler, ship of our native plants. Leila Shultz, and Susan Meyer CONTENTS, continued Biogeography of rare plants of the Ash Meadows National Wildlife Refuge, Nevada.
    [Show full text]
  • Advanced Transmission Technologies
    Advanced Transmission Technologies December 2020 United States Department of Energy Washington, DC 20585 Executive Summary The high-voltage transmission electric grid is a complex, interconnected, and interdependent system that is responsible for providing safe, reliable, and cost-effective electricity to customers. In the United States, the transmission system is comprised of three distinct power grids, or “interconnections”: the Eastern Interconnection, the Western Interconnection, and a smaller grid containing most of Texas. The three systems have weak ties between them to act as power transfers, but they largely rely on independent systems to remain stable and reliable. Along with aged assets, primarily from the 1960s and 1970s, the electric power system is evolving, from consisting of predominantly reliable, dependable, and variable-output generation sources (e.g., coal, natural gas, and hydroelectric) to increasing percentages of climate- and weather- dependent intermittent power generation sources (e.g., wind and solar). All of these generation sources rely heavily on high-voltage transmission lines, substations, and the distribution grid to bring electric power to the customers. The original vertically-integrated system design was simple, following the path of generation to transmission to distribution to customer. The centralized control paradigm in which generation is dispatched to serve variable customer demands is being challenged with greater deployment of distributed energy resources (at both the transmission and distribution level), which may not follow the traditional path mentioned above. This means an electricity customer today could be a generation source tomorrow if wind or solar assets were on their privately-owned property. The fact that customers can now be power sources means that they do not have to wholly rely on their utility to serve their needs and they could sell power back to the utility.
    [Show full text]
  • Comparative Analysis of Wind, Solar and Landfill Gases As Alternative Sources of Energy for Electricity Generation
    University of New Orleans ScholarWorks@UNO University of New Orleans Theses and Dissertations Dissertations and Theses 12-17-2010 Comparative Analysis of Wind, Solar and Landfill Gases as Alternative Sources of Energy for Electricity Generation Suruchi Verma University of New Orleans Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.uno.edu/td Recommended Citation Verma, Suruchi, "Comparative Analysis of Wind, Solar and Landfill Gases as Alternative Sources of Energy for Electricity Generation" (2010). University of New Orleans Theses and Dissertations. 1262. https://scholarworks.uno.edu/td/1262 This Thesis is protected by copyright and/or related rights. It has been brought to you by ScholarWorks@UNO with permission from the rights-holder(s). You are free to use this Thesis in any way that is permitted by the copyright and related rights legislation that applies to your use. For other uses you need to obtain permission from the rights- holder(s) directly, unless additional rights are indicated by a Creative Commons license in the record and/or on the work itself. This Thesis has been accepted for inclusion in University of New Orleans Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks@UNO. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Comparative Analysis of Wind, Solar and Landfill Gases as Alternative Sources of Energy for Electricity Generation A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the University of New Orleans in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Engineering Electrical By Suruchi Verma B.Tech., Punjab Technical University, India, 2007 December, 2010 Acknowledgement It gives me pleasure to thank the many people who made this thesis possible.
    [Show full text]