KIUC’s unbelievable load forecast (Part I): on unthinkable acts

going backward

Still haven't seen KIUC’s Energy Management Plan (EMP), just adopted despite opposition by Ben Sullivan in his first KIUC Director’s meeting. (Yeah! Ahh!).

Sadly, the BAU boyz (business-as-usual) 'freight train' had a full head of steam before Sullivan came aboard.

Worse, KIUC's plans could lock us into energy choices that move us in the wrong direction.

Sure, the Strategic Plan talks about transitioning to 'green' energy, yet KIUC’s first major expenditure will be for another fossil fuel plant. Yikes!

This prospect should be unthinkable, yet the BAU framework produced this decision...and we’ll need a sustainability framework to produce dramatically different decisions.

The EMP decision coincided with Board approval of the Long Range Engineering Plan, which follows from the Integrated Resource Plan (IRP) that they approved last December. (BTW, neither this IRP link nor any of these documents appears on KIUC's website...WTF!)

At core, the BAU view is that things will return to "normal" and past trends will continue. We know this is false, yet the KIUC Board endorsed this view as if its "certainty" was superior to the "uncertainty" of 'green' energy options.

The sustainability view, on the other hand, is that our energy picture is changing rapidly and will inevitably drive new trends.

This line from the consultant's IRP presentation says it all:

"High risk projects cannot prudently be considered for a vital near-term addition."

...which raises the question of how needs and risks are assessed.

The BAU preference is certainty, while our un-sustainability virtually guarantees uncertainty.

More worse, the Board was cowed into this rush to add new generating capacity on the basis of a deeply flawed consultant's Load Forecast.

Makes me think the Board could have used an independent assessment of the numbers provided by the consultant...mebbe by an economist (heh).

...(for my assessment of the Load Forecast, see Part II)

Published by Ken on May 26th, 2009 tagged Best Practices, Energy


One Response to “KIUC’s unbelievable load forecast (Part I): on unthinkable acts”

  1. Ted Montgomery Says:

    Ken and Ben - I pray that you both will be able to endure what are becoming larger and larger challenges to one's patience and understanding. From here in Vermont, I support you both! We have similar challenges with a governor that I feel is grossly out of step with energy policy and has little visionary interests. I long to be back in Kaua'i with the Hale Hibiscus project under construction somewhere. Keep the Faith!

Leave a Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.