June 15, 2008

The green trade-off

Sheep, solar, and coal

Two environmental groups are currently opposing a proposed transmission project that would connect portions of Southern California with renewable energy–rich areas near the California-Mexico-Arizona borders. The project’s alleged impacts on bighorn sheep populations are among their objections. These groups have identified new fossil-fueled generation located near a load center as a preferred alternative to siting a transmission line for renewables near the bighorn sheep.

It may well be that society would be better served by not building the transmission line in deference to the bighorn sheep. However, the current approach toward environmental review of energy infrastructure projects countenances the energy policy paralysis this country has suffered since at least the first oil embargo in the 1970s. It does so by ducking the question, What’s preferable: more fossil-fueled generation or renewable power and associated transmission lines?

Tough choices must be made

Increasing renewable generation, reducing GHG emissions, and decreasing dependence on foreign oil are important national policies that must be advanced. The reality that new transmission facilities must be constructed to accomplish these goals requires a new paradigm for the environmental assessment of additions to the transmission infrastructure.

The environmental analysis for transmission projects must reflect the environmental, energy, and political realities of our era. If California and other states want renewable power, particularly in the quantities and on the timetables dictated by policymakers, residents of these states must accept that additional transmission facilities are required and that workable mitigation measures must be developed to address environmental concerns. The era of an “environmental veto” has passed. Construction of these needed facilities will inevitably impose some local or broader environmental cost, so decision-makers must be able to appropriately weigh those costs against the regional and national benefits of increased renewable power.

—Steven F. Greenwald (stevegreenwald@dwt.com) leads Davis Wright Tremaine’s Energy Practice Group. Jeffrey P. Gray (jeffgray@dwt.com) is a partner in the firm’s Energy Practice Group.