As energy demand grows, so does the demand to interconnect renewable energy resources to the grid. According to Queued Up: 2024 Edition, an annual study on the characteristics of power plants seeking interconnection in the US published by Lawrence Berkeley National Lab (LBNL), there is currently more than 1,480 GW of zero-carbon generating capacity seeking transmission access. Although generating capacity and demand grow, grid interconnection remains one of the top challenges for renewable energy.

However, with several major rulings and proposals, there have been important developments in the transmission and interconnection space—from increased interconnection request requirements and costs, to getting the most out of the existing grid with Alternative Transmission Technologies (ATTs). The below explores the current setting and how to navigate the challenges of interconnecting renewable resources to the transmission grid.

FERC Order No. 2023

In response to the interconnection backlog, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) issued Order 2023 which aims to streamline the interconnection process. This reform required a cluster study approach across all the Independent System Operators (ISO) and Transmission Owners (TO), which attempts to study a group of projects within the same electrical region or zone at once. To standardize the process, the order also increased readiness requirements through a first ready, first served approach.

This regulation poses both challenges and opportunities for organized and non-organized energy markets. The cluster study approach minimizes study time and reduces cost, since traditionally the utilities would study projects serially. However, it also introduces delay in the study process and dependency on other projects studied in the cluster.

In large clusters with more than 20-30 projects it is very difficult to isolate multiple “what if” scenarios and understand the cost implications if other projects decide to drop out of the queue or don’t advance forward. The uncertainty in terms of cost and schedule is far more uncertain in a cluster process.

The organized markets (i.e. the ISOs) have already implemented much of what Order 2023 requires. This includes the cluster studies and requirements like withdrawal penalties, site control, and higher interconnection deposits. Since these requirements have already been implemented by multiple ISOs such as CAISO, SPP, PJM, and MISO, the impacts here are minimal.

Where FERC Order 2023 has greater implications is the non-organized markets. This is also where most of the queue was serial and the cost of entry was fairly inexpensive. Although the changes in these markets will eventually be helpful, there have been some challenges and delays to active projects as the utilities try to transition to the FERC Order 2023 guidelines.

The Order still leaves a gap on how to tie the interconnection process to long-term planning needs, thus exposing the generators to cost and schedule risks and uncertainties. It also leads to inefficiencies in how the system is planned, which is not only inefficient but also more expensive — not only for the developers but also for the rate paying customers.

FERC Order 1920

In 2024, FERC issued Order 1920 which aims to proactively plan for the future transmission system, including the interconnection of new generating resources. These reforms require proactive multi-driver and multi-benefit long term planning that considers any system upgrades identified through the interconnection process. This order also takes into account the integration of Alternative Transmission Technologies and Grid-Enhancing Technologies (GETs) to offer potential solutions for a more predictable and efficient energy grid. The criteria laid out in order 1920 aims to extend and apply to not only long-term planning but also the joint targeted interconnection queue, long range transmission planning and intra-regional planning efforts led by various ISOs.

The aging grid and new technologies

The U.S. power grid was designed for a different era and now faces the challenge of integrating renewable energy sources. FERC Orders 2023 and 1920 require transmission providers to evaluate Alternative Transmission Technologies such as dynamic line ratings, advanced power flow devices, and advanced conductors. These technologies, while not mandated, offer a bridge to faster and cheaper renewable energy integration.

Grid-enhancing technologies (GETs)

GETs can typically be deployed in months, if not weeks, and are considerably cheaper than their long-term counterparts. To-date, these GETs have been used in operational scenarios, specifically topology optimization, so it’s in the independent power producers (IPPs) interest to study the benefits of these technologies on their project. Most of the IPPs have performed studies to evaluate cost benefit and then proposed to TOs to implement.

So far, IPPs have evaluated and studied dynamic line rating and topology optimization. These have been deployed by many utilities in their current operating scenarios, while managing outages. The next step is to have enough studies to show the benefits and establish a proactive process for proper evaluation and implementation on the TO side. After several years of effort working with MISO, there is a process to get them evaluated in that grid operator. Some of our recent efforts have also come to fruition in ERCOT, but in SPP we still haven’t been able to make a breakthrough.

Just a few years ago, there was little-to-no discussion happening on how to adopt these grid enhancing technologies. Today, there are several FERC Orders such as 881, 2023 and 1920 that demonstrate the need for adopting GETs not only in the operational environment but also as we plan the grid in transmission planning. FERC Order 1920 requires that GETs be evaluated as the ISOs andTOs plan the system.

Challenges and opportunities for IPPs in GETs adoption

The biggest challenge for IPPs is the lack of clarity and transparency in the evaluation of proposing GET solutions. This is true in both the interconnection process as well as during the operational process. There is no one-stop-shop to where the criteria, contacts and processes are listed, so the evaluation is not transparent for the interconnection customer.

However, the biggest opportunity is that these solutions are win-wins for interconnection customers (IC), ISO’s and TOs. In a study done by ENGIE and New Grid (a TO software provider), by reconfiguring just three constraints resulted in approximately $151M USD market congestion costs saving annually. This was done with minimal investment and was deployed within one month. These congestion costs savings not only help the ICs, but the savings transfer to the rate payers.

Solving this congestion problem will eventually help end customers, who are the main stakeholders for any ISO/TO. We are in a time where ISO/TO do not have to do this on their own, but they can count on ICs as their partners — where we can collaboratively provide detailed technical studies, feedback, and reviews to develop this process. The modern grid needs modern solutions, and GETs are a part of that solution.

Need for future reforms

FERC Order 1920 and 2023 are good initial steps, but there is still more work to be done. Several additional reforms are needed to speed up the interconnection backlog include:

1. Requiring study automation, including quality check reviews to ensure the information passed on to stakeholders is reliable. This should include setting up an independent interconnection study monitor.

2. Fast track projects that do not need or already have network upgrades.

3. Require that all the cost-effective solutions (such as GETs) are studied and evaluated when a transmission constraint is identified during the interconnection process.

4. Ensure transparency of the reporting of transmission construction phases to stakeholders.

The above and more reforms have been proposed by industry groups to FERC, and hopefully we see more improvements coming down the pipeline.