Quantifying siting difficulty : A case study of US transmission line siting

The worldwide demand for new energy infrastructures has been paralleled in recent years by the increasing difficulty of siting major facilities. Siting difficulty is the subject of widespread discussion, but because of the complexity of the problem, potential solutions are not obvious or well understood. This paper presents a two-step policy-level framework that first develops an empirical measure of siting difficulty and then quantitatively assesses its major causes. The approach is based on the creation and aggregation of four siting indicators that are independent of the common causes and localized effects of siting problems. The proposed framework is demonstrated for the case of U.S. transmission line siting. Results of the analyses reveal significant variations in state siting difficulty and industry experts’ perceptions of its dominant causes, with implications for the long-term success of Regional Transmission Organizations (RTOs) and knowledge transfer among siting professionals in the deregulated industry.

[1]  Eric Hirst,et al.  Transmission Planning for a Restructuring U . S . Electricity Industry , 2001 .

[2]  J. R. Pierobon New transmission lines: The challenge , 1995 .

[3]  Howard Kunreuther,et al.  The Role of Compensation in Siting Hazardous Facilities , 1996 .

[4]  Herbert Inhaber Slaying the NIMBY dragon , 1997 .

[5]  Howard Kunreuther,et al.  Siting noxious facilities: A test of the Facility Siting Credo , 1993 .

[6]  Jonathan D. Schneider Natural Gas & Electric Power Industries Analysis , 2002 .

[7]  Paul L. Joskow,et al.  Transmission policy in the United States , 2005 .

[8]  Per-Erik Bjoerklund,et al.  High voltage direct current transmission , 1994 .

[9]  Ralph L. Keeney,et al.  Siting energy facilities , 1980 .

[10]  J. Casazza,et al.  The Development of Electric Power Transmission: The Role Played by Technology, Institutions, and People , 1992 .

[11]  Ron Gold,et al.  Energy policy act of 2005 leaves US with open issues , 2005 .

[12]  Brendan Kirby,et al.  Expanding Transmission Capacity: A Proposed Planning Process , 2002 .

[13]  Euston Quah,et al.  The Siting Problem of Nimby Facilities: Cost – Benefit Analysis and Auction Mechanisms , 1998 .

[14]  Richard G. Kuhn,et al.  Canadian Innovations in Siting Hazardous Waste Management Facilities , 1998, Environmental management.

[15]  R. L. Keeney,et al.  Decisions with Multiple Objectives: Preferences and Value Trade-Offs , 1977, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics.

[16]  Jos Arrillaga,et al.  High Voltage Direct Current Transmission , 2014 .

[17]  Steven E. Barkan,et al.  Powerline: The First Battle of America’s Energy War , 1982, Contemporary Sociology: A Journal of Reviews.

[18]  Edward N. Krapels,et al.  Stimulating New Transmission Investments , 2002 .

[19]  Dennis W Ducsik Public Involvement in Energy Facility Planning , 1986 .

[20]  Indira Nair,et al.  Small Group Studies of Regulatory Decision‐Making for Power‐Frequency Electric and Magnetic Fields , 1990 .

[21]  Ralph L. Keeney,et al.  Decisions with multiple objectives: preferences and value tradeoffs , 1976 .

[22]  William W. Hogan Transmission Market Design , 2003 .