From: Steve Grady <ssgrady4@gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, June 6, 2019 12:06 AM
To: RPS, DOER (ENE)
Subject: RPS comment
Categories: Saved as HTML
June
5, 2019
John
Wassam,
I went to your hearing tonight, Wed
June 5, to talk about the notice that National Grid sent to central
Massachusetts towns. I had no idea that bio-mass was such an issue.
I felt sorry that the 4 (or maybe 5) of you had to endure so much
testimony. But I did notice that a common thread was the benefit to the
environment that trees provide. I agree with the protesters on this point
only. My issue is the size of the landmass required to support commercial
solar. I have done rough calculations (back of the napkin style). If
Massachusetts has 31,000 MW of installed electrical generating capacity and
your goal is to replace 35% of that with "renewables", namely solar
(at 7.5 acres per MW) then you need to cover 127 square miles of Massachusetts
with solar panels.
That is a lot of trees to kill to
save the environment!
Now consider that solar has a
capacity factor of less than 19%. Your 127 square miles is not 35%, but 6
1/2% of the total generation capacity.
Even worse, "renewables" are
not dispatchable. They are erratic, variable and non-flexible. Some
estimates to remedy these shortcoming exceed a hundred BILLION $$.
Renewables should not be forced onto
the grid until they are combined with storage. The RPS needs to be
amended to require that every generating unit must be dispatchable.
You are proposing raising the 14.07:
Renewable Energy Portfolio Standard - Class I annual increase from 1% to
2%. In light of the Nation Grid action, there should be no increase in
this mandate until after the "Cluster Study" is complete.
The "Cluster Study" will
undoubtedly reveal a need to standardize inverters and certify metering. If
you continue installing solar, knowing that it currently behaves badly on the
grid, without addressing these issues the DOER should be held accountable for
the damages. The solar installers and their customers need to have
equipment that is compatible with the grid.
Maybe your intention is to destroy
the current centralized grid and replace it with your distributed grid. Think
back to the horse & automobile. The horse was not taxed to death for
polluting the streets with manure, but rather the automobile was improved to
the point that it out performed the horse. If your "renewables"
require the governmental force of incentives then they are not ready for
deployment.
More research and development is
needed before clear cutting square miles of central Massachusetts. The
RPS should include prohibitions. No farm lands, no forest, no preserved
land, no chapter 61 conversions. Why not run the entire UMass Amherst
campus without fossil fuel, entirely on "renewables" before
sending your gas powered chain saws and diesel bulldozers to central
Massachusetts. I understand you just gave them a million dollars and that
they have 31 million of other money. Use your money wisely. Prove
that renewables can actually power facilities independent of the grid before
sacrificing the environment.
Thank you for you time