The battle over whether to string power lines over a pristine part of Colorado has gone on long enough.
Xcel Energy has threatened to drop its plans for a controversial transmission line in southern Colorado because of regulatory conditions that might be imposed on the project. The power giant has taken issue with an administrative law judge’s recommendation that Xcel face financial sanctions if it doesn’t keep the $180 million line supplied with large amounts of power.
The Colorado Public Utilities Commission has final say over the matter and we think commissioners ought to stand up for ratepayers, who shouldn’t be on the hook for a project that isn’t needed at this time.
If Xcel decides to walk away from the project, the debate over improving energy reliability for southern Colorado can start over from scratch.
Xcel and Tri-State want to build 140 miles of transmission lines from Pueblo through Walsenberg and over La Veta pass all the way to Alamosa. Part of the lines would cross the 171,000-acre Trinchera Ranch, a beautiful and unspoiled part of Colorado.
While we’ve been somewhat sympathetic to the ranch owner’s concerns, we’ve also supported an increase in renewable energy in Colorado.
However, this is no longer about solar energy. Originally, the line was intended to help carry power from solar-energy generating stations in the San Luis Valley to Colorado’s Front Range and other population centers. But, as an administrative law judge’s ruling explains, the line no longer has to carry renewable energy. Xcel has said in its filings that it can meet the state standard of producing 30 percent of its electricity through renewable energy without the controversial project.
In November, administrative-law Judge Mana Jennings-Fader approved a certification of public convenience and necessity for the line — with the condition that Xcel carry 700 megawatts of electricity on it within 10 years. If it didn’t, Xcel ratepayers would get back half the construction costs — about $75 million.
Xcel said the provision would require it to refund 50 percent of the development costs it collects from ratepayers if the transmission line fails to carry that much power. The company said the requirement “is clearly not in the public interest” and called it “arbitrary and unreasonable” in one of its filings.
Xcel since has threatened to walk away from the project, saying it can’t control future power generation in the area and that the decision should have been straight up or down, without conditions.
But we think if the PUC removes the condition, ratepayers are no longer protected.
Those who oppose the line say if Xcel can just walk away from it, it must not be needed.
One of the original reasons for building the line, besides reliability issues in southern Colorado, was to boost solar energy. Xcel last year said it would allow the company to export 1,129 megawatts of solar-generated electricity from the valley. Now, the company is committing to only a paltry 60 megawatts.
If it’s no longer about solar, it’s time to start over.
