Thread by @PMoutis

My take on @ivanlpenn's & @ckrausss's @nytimes: nytimes.com/2021/07/11/bus…
TL;DR: #transmission (trX) vs. rooftop #PV (rPV) dilemma = unfounded, poorly scoped article, misrepresented study, romanticized rPV, pessimistic trX, obsolete #energy policy references & more! -1/n

First of all, rPV & trX are largely UNRELATED. rPV increase energy #efficiency & (might) offer #energy #resilience . trX reduces energy costs, increases #reliability & expands access to electricity market for all. -2/n

An important aspect is that rPV comes mostly at personal high upfront costs, while trX investments are "socialized". I.e. rPV is not for everyone, while trX is driven by broader energy concerns of wide social impact. Here is the article's first miss!.. 👇 -3/n

The @California_ISO & @ERCOT_ISO black-outs & energy costs disparity among US states (see eia.gov/electricity/mo…) CLEARLY indicate broad energy concerns. Cheap & reliable energy can flow throughout the US only w/ new trX. See @NREL's SEAMS study

https://twitter.com/eeregov/status/1412437456247480322

-4/n

The equivalent rPV efficiency+resilience to handle the aforementioned black-outs & energy costs disparity throughout the US (& the world) would require mobilization that not even the urgency of #covid vaccination managed to achieve❗️ -5/n

It was super hard to get >50% of any large population vaccinated at the risk of their imminent death due to some wackos' conspiracy theories. Imagine a call to rPV action which is non-imminently-mortal & w/ fossil fuel lobby shooting down everything.

https://twitter.com/JesseJenkins/status/1410407513514774533

-6/n

rPV incentives are also phased out (no matter the "battles going on in state capitals")! Net-metering is the only means of revenue, making access to rPV harder for middle-lower incomes & their energy more expensive, too (death spiral). -7/n

However, as @DrChrisClack's & @VibrantCE's studies have shown rPV & trX will go🤝to complement each other in an overall cheaper & cleaner energy future for all. In other words, there is no such thing as conflict or antagonism between trX & rPV! -8/n

'building trX' per se is NOT hard as a subtitle reads❗️ All summer 2020 @CMUEngineering & @teppercmu grads+students & I agreed w/ researchers @kyrib, @ElectrifyBloom & @LizaBevin & energy reporter @russellgold that poor #policy is the main issue!

https://twitter.com/PMoutis/status/1308050063579643904

-9/n

Misguided policy & tip-toeing federal laws (@FERC order 1000 failed expectations) have allowed lobbyists & 'concerned citizens' (=astroturfing) to freeze or bankrupt-to-cancellation multiple trX projects. -10/n

Even if 1 or 2 or 3 of the frozen/canceled projects were harmful to the environment or surroundings, the broad effectiveness of the opposing actions shows that policy has completely failed the trX industry! POLICY IS WHY BUILDING POWER LINES IS HARD! -11/n

As for the @NREL report mentioned in the article it "found" that more rPV reduces trX needs... It is a 3yo report/review, doesn't study trX build-outs per se but energy costs, induces trX is not congested when some places have a lot rPV. Nothing like the article statement! -12/n

The article fails the subject & its criticality. Pitting rPV vs. trX seems made-up, if not dubious. rPV *AND* trX are necessary for our energy future & work well together. trX needs us to mobilize ASAP according to @Princeton 2050 net-zero, @NREL SEAMS & many other studies. -n/n