Backing down wind generation for Mesaba
July 11th, 2006
OH, this is just too funny. For the Mesaba Sensitivity Stability Analysis, to make this bunch of tinkertoys and wires work, they had to change the model and cut out 675MW of wind from the 1,500MW in the model:
Reduced generation in SW MN to approximately 825MW and reduced load in the XEL area (zone 601) by a corresponding amount.
Click here for G519, the revised report, go to Section 6, paragraphs 6.1.2.1 and 6.1.2.2.
Yup, you heard it here… they’re cutting modeled wind generation in Southwest Minnesota from 1500MW to 825MW! And on top of that, for it all to work, they’re “keeping the output of Big Stone II in North Dakota.” Oh really… ummmmm… Let me see if I understand this — to put 600MW of Mesaba coal gasification on line they need to cut 625MW of wind in SW Minnesota.
This just gets better and better…
Take 625MW wind off to put 600MW coal gasification on. Oh, and pay the curtailment payments for the wind, eh? Great, good idea, yeah, this is one hell of a deal we’ve got going here…
January 7th, 2007 at 10:08 pm
[…] January 7th, 2007 Oh, yes, those are clouds you see on Excelsior’s Mesaba Project horizon… In my brief, I’d referred to Excelsior’s transmission problems as “perversely hilarious.” Well, it just got better… On Friday, Xcel sent its Initial Brief around (yup, don’t have them posted yet, I cannot copy with technology, someday… someday…). In that brief, Xcel referenced a new MISO study on the transmission fiasco for the Mesaba Project. Somehow, it just happens that Xcel got this the day before the briefs were due. Funny how that works, but I guess that’s why they call them “power companies,” eh? So here’s the study: MISO System Impact Study for Long-Term Firm Transmission Service And here’s the quote that explains it all: 3.   Conclusion  Based on the above results, it is concluded that the request for 603MW for firm transmission service cannot be granted at this time. Constraints are listed in Tables 2-1 through 2-14. All constraints must be mitigated before service can be granted.  The System Impact Study will not continue to determine the remaining constraints and mitigation required to correct the constraints found. Translation for non-engineers: Excelsior — you don’t get transmission for the Mesaba Project — but maybe all the problems can be fixed so you could have transmission — but there are SEVEN pages of problems. Two options for 2011 and 2014, and oh, my, you’ve got a shitload of problems — GIVE IT UP! But that’s not anything new given the reports from MAPP, like the one of August 16, 2006 that said Mesaba failed for both the East and West site! Dig the big red “failed” on slides 8 and 9. Excelsior Sherner presentation to NM-SPG Aug 16 2006 The Excelsior party line is, “There, there, little girl, you just don’t understand.” Sure, right, OK, fine, just like the way they’d have to cut 675MW of Buff Ridge Wind, Minnesota Power generation cut and capacity of the Arrowhead line, and that they have to “keep” the Big Stone II generation in North Dakota! See: Backing down wind generation for Mesaba  Yup, I’m misunderstanding all right, just like when the Chisago line capacity was doubled to 868MVA under the terms of the deal between NSP and St. Croix Falls/Taylors Falls; just like the way only 213-302MW would come off of Buff Ridge into the 2085MVA SW MN 345kV line; and just like the SW MN CapX2020 line and the “Hampton Corners” Prairie Island-Roch-LaX lines are connected… uh-huh, I’m misunderstanding. Well, it’s in Xcel’s brief so it’s gotta be true, right?!?!?!?! This just keeps getting more and more hilarious… Posted by Carol A. Overland Filed in Power Plants – includes Mesaba coal gasification […]