AUDIO:

The following is a rough machine transcript. Click the words to skip to that point in the audio.

TOM WHEELER:

Welcome to the Econews Report. I'm your host this week, Tom Wheeler, Executive Director of EPIC, the Environmental Protection Information Center. And joining me as co host is Matt Simmons, Climate Attorney at EPIC. So if we're having Matt on, we're going to be talking about some energy nerd stuff. And we have three energy nerd friends from the Schatz Energy Research Lab here to help talk about transmission planning. We have Jim Zoellick, Tanner Etherton, and Awbrey Yost. Welcome, group, to the Econews Report.

Well, I hope that energy nerds is not... I don't mean that in a derogatory way. You know, I think that we nerds are trying to recapture that term, right? So...

TANNER ETHERTON:

It is a compliment, and I'm an energy nerd in training.

WHEELER:

So we are here to talk about transmission planning for offshore wind energy. So I guess just let's get started at the very basics of why do we need to plan for offshore wind energy transmission? What are our transmission lines into and out of the area like and what is the capacity that we need to get to?

JIM ZOELLICK:

Right, so I'll take that one, at least the first shot at it. So currently, the Humboldt area, we're somewhat isolated from the big cities and metropolitan areas here, and we're a fairly rural area, so our electricity demand here is pretty modest compared to the state as a whole and compared to the metropolitan areas. There are a couple of 115 kilovolt lines that come from the east, and those are sized such that they can handle less than about 100 megawatts between them. And just relative to our local load, our average load is in the 100 megawatt range. Our peak could be up to as much as maybe 200 megawatts. So, but the offshore wind projects that have been proposed in the least area off of Humboldt Bay are expected to be in the two to four gigawatt range. So that's two to four gigawatts, two to 4,000 megawatts. So basically, about 20 to 40 times greater than the current transmission capacity that connects Humboldt to the bridge.

So really, in order to install these large-scale offshore wind projects, this transmission upgrade is necessary, basically in order to be able to get the power to where it can be consumed. And in the broader part of the state, especially the metropolitan areas, that's not to say that the power will only go to those places. The power will be able to serve the Humboldt area as well. There will be a connection to the Humboldt grid, and it will also allow other benefits to the local area. And we can talk about those as we go a little further.

And so I'll just say that the transmission that we're talking about was proposed and approved in the California Independent System Operator, or sometimes referred to as CAISO, in their 2023-2024 transmission plan. They do an annual transmission plan, and this was part of the 2023-2024 plan, and it was approved as a policy-driven project to help meet the state's goals for offshore wind and meeting the renewable energy goals for the state of California.

MATT SIMMONS:

Yeah, thanks, Jim. You gave us a lot to work with there. Sort of breaking it down into smaller pieces, I guess, I have a general sense of what a transmission line looks like and, and what it does, right. It's moving electricity, but just for everyone to understand it a bit better. What, what does this actually entail? Right. When, when you approve a transmission project, what are you saying can be built in our communities? And is there other facilities? I'm thinking specifically of substations that are also necessary in order to facilitate this.

ZOELLICK:

Awbrey, were you gonna take that one?

AWBREY YOST:

All right, I can give a real high level explanation and then Jim, if you want to jump in on some of the more technical pieces, that sounds good. So like Jim mentioned, the California Independent System Operator, CAISO, approved a particular or two projects that went out for bid that included like kind of big picture, two transmission lines that are 500 kilovolts each and a brand new 500 kilovolt substation that would be located here in Humboldt County. We don't know the exact location of the two transmission lines or the substation, but we have some information from the developer on what some of the preferred locations might be by that developer.

So kind of big picture, I think those two transmission lines, one that both head east and one connects to the Fern Road substation that's further east of Redding that's currently being constructed. The other transmission line would go from Humboldt, that new substation down to Collinsville where there's a proposed substation, which is kind of near the Bay Delta area. And so that's kind of the big pieces. Also a local connection that was approved by CAISO that PG&E will be responsible for developing and that would include a 115 kilovolt transmission line that connects the new substation to an existing substation at Mitchell Heights that we have here in Humboldt County.

SIMMONS:

And you said that you had some information from the developer about potential locations. Are you able to share sort of a general geography of what we're talking about here?

YOST:

Yeah, that's all public information they submitted as part of their bid to CAISO. So it was published, if anyone's curious and wants to read it, in the project selection reports that CAISO published. And so in their bid, the developer, who's CalGrid LLC, but is a wholly owned subsidiary of Viridon, so we often call them Viridon, they noted that the new substation is likely to be located in the freshwater area, just outside of the city of Eureka. And then the two new transmission lines likely to head east through Neyland and then follow one of the existing 115 kilovolt transmission lines that Jim mentioned earlier, that largely follows Highway 36 as it heads east. So again, these aren't set in stone. The locations could change based on the project design by the developer where they actually get easements and parcels and during environmental review and permitting, but that's the information that is publicly available that we have so far about the location.

ZOELLICK:

I was just going to say maybe just a couple of quick things just to connect what we're describing to just physically what it might look like, how big some of the things are and so forth. So these 500 kilovolt transmission lines, so right now the largest scale transmission lines that we have in the area are 115 kilovolt, and there's actually not that much. The lines that come from the east are 115 kilovolt. They land at the Mitchell Heights substation there off of Myrtle Avenue or whatever, and then there's a line that goes from that Mitchell Heights substation to the Humboldt Bay Generating Station power plant at King Salmon, and that's really the extent of it. And then as Awbrey said, the lines that go east, they go from that Mitchell Heights station, they go up over Neyland and then they go, let's see, I guess it goes to, we're down to Bridgeville and then east along the Highway 36 corridor.

So people, I'm sure people, you just drive around Humboldt Bay area right around the bay and there's those transmission towers, those metal lattice towers. So those are holding the 115 kV lines, and in some cases they're holding 60 kV. So the towers would be substantially larger than those 115 kilovolt towers and would need a broader sort of right-of-way cleared. And as Awbrey said, the plan is to use the existing corridors but expand them for this added infrastructure. So that's kind of the towers and it's just towers with conductors, with wires on them, three conductors on each of those large towers. And then the substation, which is, there are substations all around the area. There's one in downtown Arcata. That's one of the biggest ones, as I mentioned, at Mitchell Heights.

So just electrical equipment, a bunch of wires coming in, there's transformers and other equipment, but it just looks like an industrial electrical installation. But the size of the substation for this 500 kilovolt infrastructure would be substantially larger than any of the existing substations. So for instance, the one in downtown Arcata is less than a city block. This 500 kilovolt substation we're talking about has been environmental, did some environmental looks at possible locations and just kind of a high-level planning study that for the California Energy Commission that's publicly available. And they suggested that it would probably be 4,200 acres, if I'm right. Am I remembering that correct? Yeah, yeah. Okay. So yeah, about 40 to 100 acres of land to support this. So it's a pretty big footprint.

SIMMONS:

Yeah, that's all super helpful for helping us picture it. And I, I imagine that some of the people listening to this are probably thinking, wait, this is the first I've heard about this. And earlier you said that the plan was approved, but I think it's important to be clear that all that's been approved so far is the engineering plant, like the capacity that you're going to allow onto the grid. Is that a good way of thinking about it? None of the siting or environmental permitting or consultation has happened yet. This is all sort of in a pre-design engineering phase. Is that correct?

ZOELLICK:

That's a super important point, Matt, and yes it is, and I'll let Awbrey respond.

SIMMONS:

And then my question to follow up was how would that process actually work? How would you go about permitting a process, a giant new transmission line like this?

YOST:

Yeah, it's a big project and there's a lot of agencies involved. Yeah, and so like you said, the project itself, it hasn't obtained any permits or any approvals from other agencies that the project needs. That approval by CAISO was choosing the developer, including specifying that, yeah, the technical specifications, and there was some measures around like cost and other things. But in terms of actually getting the permits or the permission, that you need from agencies, there are, we're working on a report actually that we're hoping to publish next month that will lay out the permitting process that's likely for these projects. And it involves certainly many, many state and federal agencies, but the permit or the proceeding that I think is probably most central to these projects is what's called a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity, or I feel like in the world of energy regulation, people love acronyms, so CPCN, which the California Public Utilities Commission would be considering. The developer hasn't filed their application yet for that permit, which would kind of kick off the environmental review process.

So these projects will have to be evaluated under both federal and state environmental review requirements, so under the California Environmental Quality Act, CEQA, and the National Environmental Policy Act, NEPA, as well. So in terms of state regulation, that Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity is the big permit that needs to be granted.

SIMMONS:

And do you have an estimate on how long that might take, sort of based on other transmission projects that have been improved?

YOST:

It's likely to take several years from the time that the application is first filed, but there's also a lot of other pieces aside from just that permit. There's many other permits that have to be obtained. And then also because if you think about transmission lines, there are these long linear projects kind of like highways or canals where you also have to get rights of way or easements from both public landowners and private property owners. And then on top of that, you need to construct this massive project. So it's really a much longer timeline, probably at least like five to eight years after that application is filed before the project would actually be fully constructed and operational.

SIMMONS:

And then it's my understanding that the CAISO selection also had an in-service date where they told Viradhan, like, please have it done by this day. Can you let us know what that day is?

YOST:

Yeah, that's in 2034. So that's the date where Viridon is currently required to have the transmission lines operable by. But there is a potential that that could change in the future, but that's the current date that the project would have to be in service.

ZOELLICK:

All right, and I think I, I'm sorry, I'm just going to interject there quickly. I think I saw something just in the last week or so, but I mean, with all that's been happening on the federal landscape, specific, there's a lot there, but specific to offshore wind, which has definitely added some barriers and challenges, that it may be that that time frame, that timescale has expanded.

YOST:

Yeah, I think there is the potential for that. I think it depends largely. That's a decision that CAISO would need to make in terms of that in-service date because it has a contract with the developer. So they might need to go through a process to like amend that contract and consider if there'd be any other impacts from pushing out that in-service date. So there is a possibility that could happen, but my understanding is that has not happened yet.

WHEELER:

You are listening to the Econews Report. We're talking about transmission lines for offshore wind energy. Well, Tanner, I believe that you are the author or one of the authors of a new report that looked at the cost for developing transmission infrastructure related to offshore wind. How much, roughly, are we estimating that a transmission infrastructure improvement here for the North Coast would cost to facilitate offshore wind?

ETHERTON:

Yeah. So as both Jim and Awbrey mentioned, you know, there's a lot of information and the project sponsors bid, including how much they expect to spend on this project. And it's about $1.7 billion in just initial capital costs. So that's for developing, design, constructing this project. However, they also need to operate it and maintain it. They need to finance it. They got to pay back all that debt. And in the longterm, you're really looking at like a $10 billion project. It is over 50 years. So the lifetime of the project, at least how they've written it out is 2034 through 2084, at which point they would have paid back all that capital costs operating and maintained it for 50 years. That's about $5 billion in 2025 dollars. And we pay for that as rate payers and not just us here at Humboldt, but everyone in the CAISO balancing authority area. So that's most of California and it's, it's surprisingly not that expensive when you distribute it across hundreds of thousands of megawatts.

SIMMONS:

Well, and so I think your report had a per person, per year, what is the added cost to your electric bill to fund this transmission project?

ETHERTON:

Yeah, yeah, I can give that. So the average household in California, we consume a little less up here, but it's about six megawatts. And there's a forecast of this, we forecast it up to 24, you can kind of have this constant, but it comes out to on average, for those 50 years, just $1.68 per household per year. So you know, it's much less than a cup of coffee these days. It is more expensive in the beginning. And then it steadily declines. But yeah, on average, $1.68. And really at peak, you're looking at just under, I believe, $5 for the average household in a given year. And just to be clear, though, this is specifically for those two high voltage transmission projects. Those are the two projects that had a competitive solicitation, the Beardon was approved for. There is the PG&E little segment, that 115 kilovolt line. That wasn't included in the initial report. We are considering revising and maybe doing amendments to address that smaller piece.

It's not clear yet whether or not that would apply to the whole state, or it would just be paid by PG&E ratepayers in the PG&E service territory. It's still minimal. It's still really, really small. And what we're seeing in that preliminary analysis, and I think it's an important piece because there's so many benefits to these projects.

SIMMONS:

Yeah, so that's actually a great transition to my next question, which was to talk about some of the benefits. I think starting off, we said at the beginning that the purpose here is to move renewable offshore wind energy from the ocean, from off the coast of Humboldt to the rest of California so that we can hopefully displace fossil fuel powered energy that is currently on the grid and help fight climate change. Are there any Humboldt specific local benefits that would come along with the project? And I guess we could start off with electric benefits and then maybe, Tanner, you could talk about economic and workforce benefits.

ZOELLICK:

Yeah, so I can jump in and start with the electric benefits and then pass it over to Tanner. So one benefit is that we will have access to the offshore wind power just like the rest of the state. So that's a benefit. So currently there's the 215 kilovolt lines that come from the east that are really our main connection to the bulk grid. There is a 60 kV line that goes south and ties into down in Ukiah. Those lines are not large enough right now to supply our entire load in Humboldt. So that's why the Humboldt Bay Generating Station is located here. It's essential to meeting our local demand. And the reason there's 215 kV lines is they want to make sure that if they lose one of them, we don't lose an entire connection. So adding these new 500 kilovolt lines coming from the east will add basically some redundancy in the electrical connection to the broader grid to Humboldt.

So it adds redundancy, which is a benefit. If something happens to one of the existing 115 kV lines, for instance, then there's another for power to flow to our area. It also adds potentially more capacity. And I guess there's one – I'm trying not to go too far. You call this – this is the energy nerd discussion here, so I'll nerd out a little bit for a moment on kind of a technical detail. The connection between the new 500 kilovolt infrastructure, the transmission lines, and then landing on the substation that's proposed for Humboldt, the connection between that and the existing transmission system, which is at 115 kV, and then step down to 60 kV, which goes out to the substations that then serve all of our communities. So the connection between the 500 kilovolt and the existing 115 kilovolt will be through what's called a phase-shifting transformer. And typically, transformers just either boost or lower the voltage. And that'll be necessary to go from the 500 down to 115 to lower the voltage.

But this phase-shifting one is kind of like a – it's almost like a – you can think of it as like a regulating valve. And it will control how much power is able to flow from that 500 kilovolt system down to the 115 system. And it's necessary to make sure that the 115 kilovolt system doesn't get overloaded by the amount of power that could be pushed down to it. So that device will be sized to serve the local area. And that could provide an increase in the amount of power that can serve here – could be served here. And it could be – that could be increased in the future. So it adds redundancy. It adds the ability for more power to be delivered here.

And it may allow – this would take further study, but it may allow the eventual retirement of the local – of the Humboldt Bay Generating Station, which would allow for the retirement of a natural gas generator, which if the state is really to meet 100 percent clean renewable electric grid, we would have to be able to retire that plant. So the offshore wind power would help, but also this connection through the 500 kilovolt system. Again, that would take some additional study to really determine whether that would be adequate and would provide the reliability that's necessary.

Trying to think if there's – I guess the one last thing kind of technically related here is that – so I mentioned that the redundancy is a benefit to the Humboldt area just because it's another path for power flow. And if something happens to those existing 115 kV lines, we have other pathways. So that's likely to improve our reliability. However, to outline areas in the Humboldt region – and I'm thinking places like Hoopa Valley, for instance, or Garboville. Hoopa is one of the last substations on PG&E's circuit. It's also one of the worst-performing circuits in all of PG&E's service territory. It shows up – PG&E does an annual reliability report, and in that report there's a table that is the top 1 percent – so the top 1 percent of the worst-performing circuits. It's not a list you want to be on. Hoopa is on that list pretty regularly, as is the Garberville substation.

So those outlying areas that have really poor reliability, these new 500 kV lines and substation won't really do a lot to improve reliability to those outlying areas. It would improve the reliability to those outlying areas if the reason those outlying areas lost power was because the 115 kV lines were shut down, like when we had the public safety power shut off back in – what was it – 2019 or something like that. Maybe that's too long ago, but anyway, a fairly recent past. And so it would help with that, but most of the problems for those outlying areas like Hoopa and Garboville are between the Mitchell Heights substation and those locations. It's trees falling, it's fire danger, it's slides, it's all kinds of stuff that happens. And the new 500 kV lines and new 500 kV substation aren't going to improve those – overcome those issues that are between the greater Humboldt Bay area and those outlying areas.

So there would need to be additional focus on those outlying areas, and that could include things like microgrids, for instance, in those outlying areas, or improvements to the circuits that serve them. And that's kind of separate. It's not part of the project that's been approved as far as going forward with the developer process, but perhaps there's a way for the community to negotiate additional benefits in that regard.

WHEELER:

All right, Tanner, let's talk about the economic benefits of transmission infrastructure improvements. What can Humboldt County stand to gain economically from this work?

ETHERTON:

Yeah, I think, you know, it's almost obvious, right? But jobs. We are not desperate for them, but additional jobs in the area. And to also remember, well, jobs, property tax, economic output for the state, value added to Humboldt. But you also got to remember, it's not just these projects. We don't like to talk about these projects in isolation. There's the port projects, and there's the offshore wind farm, and all three of them need to happen. So in a way, it's the jobs through transmission, ports, all the economic benefits there, and the wind farms themselves that we stand to gain from.

We are working on a report right now to do an economic impact analysis of the transmission specifically. So we will have more solid numbers on those jobs to share with you, as well as both in Humboldt and for California. I mean, notably, most of this large portion of this transmission is in Humboldt. So that's where a lot of this investment will go, and that's where a lot of these workers will be. But one thing I can share from that analysis is it seems to have a positive economic output for the state and for Humboldt, versus if we just held on to that $1.68 a year. So for what that's worth, definitely economic benefit. But that's not to negate all the implications of these projects, and to be very aware that, yes, there are economic benefits, but cultural, environmental considerations. There are economic consequences in some regards, too, across the three different buckets. So all things to be aware of.

WHEELER:

Well, so Tanner, I like your point. All three are connected. All three are related to each other. Maybe we can do some quick back the envelope math on total amount of investment in the North state from offshore wind should everything move forward. So we have $10 billion over the life of this project in construction and maintenance and operation for transmission. Anyone have a good, good number on port 2.5 billion? Yeah. Yeah, that sounds about right. And then what is, what is our most recent estimate on the construction and operation for offshore wind? Does anyone have that number?

ETHERTON:

I mean it's in the billions. It's in the billions, right? Yeah, I've seen the levelized cost of energy recently and it's pretty dang high. So yeah, it's in the billions.

WHEELER:

Yeah. All right. So, so this is our multi-billion dollar potential economic future, but it's potential still, I think at this point. Well, friends, unfortunately, I think we are out of time. We had Awbrey Yost, Tanner Etherton, and Jim Zolik here. Thank you so much for my friends from the Schatz Lab.

ZOELLICK:

Thanks for having us. Thanks.

WHEELER:

All right, join us again next week on this time and channel for more environmental news from the North coast of California.