Wind on the Wires1 - Smart Grid (R) Evolution: Electric Power Struggles - page 150

generatedinIowa.Thisfacilitated regionalresourcedevelopmentofstrongwindresources,
but transmission soon became a barrier.
As early as the mid-2000's, Midwest states began to realize that wind development
was being impacted by lack of transmission. Like Texas, sites with good wind resources
are often located far from centers of electricity demand. However, while in Texas the
Legislature, the system operator (ERCOT), and the PUCT were able to coordinate
transmission planning, financing, and construction in that state, the same activity in the
Upper Midwest required a novel and unprecedented level of interstate coordination.
Historically, transmission planning, approval, and siting is under state jurisdiction and
building transmission lines is a notoriously difficult activity (Vajjhala and Fischbeck 2007 ;
Klass and Wilson 2013 ) . Linking distant wind resources to demand requires that states
decide how much transmission is needed, where it will be sited, and, importantly, how
costs will be allocated between users. These estimates are based on a set of power system
projections which embed estimates of future demand, resource development, and financing
mechanisms. In traditionally regulated states, utilities would do the analysis and then
present the results to the state PUC for approval and authorization of rate recovery from
customers. In this process, state projections and processes for transmission planning could
be different or even contradictory to one another. The first interstate transmission planning
in the MISO region, the MISO Transmission Expansion Planning (MTEP) process helped
to coordinate transmission planning for economic and reliability purposes (MISO 2014 ) .
This initial effort to integrate wind resources began with a small subset of Upper
Midwest states. Politicians realized that although transmission planning was vital to fulfill
many of their energy policies, they were not directly engaged in transmission development.
In September 2008, the governors of Iowa, Minnesota, North Dakota, South Dakota, and
Wisconsin signed the Upper Midwest Transmission Development Initiative (UMTDI),
forming a coordinating group that was supported by staff from MISO and included the
Organization of MISO states, which represents state PUC interests at MISO. The goals
of the UMTDI were twofold: (1) to create a multistate plan to guide development of
new transmission lines to support renewable energy development; (2) to develop a cost
allocation methodology to share the costs of new transmission across the states. For
states like North and South Dakota, with large wind resources and relatively low demand,
additional transmission lines to export wind power were critical for wind development.
For Wisconsin, which had an RPS but had few wind resources of its own, interstate
transmission lines would help to fulfill a political goal rather than offer instate economic
development.
With the overall goals of connecting wind resources to the grid while reducing grid
congestion and enhancing reliability, the UMTDI established a ten-person executive team