A hybrid electric grid is answer for today's energy woes
Most national attention has focused on the need for additional generation. However, the power produced by these generators cannot be delivered to the trillions of devices that use this energy without a robust network of transmission lines that links generators to local distribution networks throughout the country.
The current patchwork legacy system of jurisdictional responsibilities and competing state interests bottlenecks the needs of the 21st century electric economy. Transmission siting approvals are shared among many redundant decisionmakers based on laws enacted when interstate transmission was in its infancy. The result is that sub-regional decisions are made that fail to take full consideration of the advantages, economies of scale and the best new technologies that benefit the interconnection as a whole.
A high-voltage direct current (or DC) transmission system, for example, can overlay the alternating current or AC grid, providing significantly more capacity to move power large distances to users. High-voltage DC, however, can only be optimized by studying the electric network as a whole.
The average age of our transmission lines is between 40 and 50 years. Obtaining required approvals of new projects can take decades, and lines proposed to meet minimum reliability requirements are often rejected for political reasons or abandoned by their proponents as costs and delays accumulate. As the grid is stretched closer to its physical limits, lower-cost generators operating below their full capability cannot help regions in distress because of the delivery limitations of the AC system.
As recently observed, the Northeast operated near critical limits during an extended heat wave, while generation in neighboring areas couldn't be delivered to alleviate the concern. NERC, the national agency responsible for reliability of the high voltage electric system, stated in its 2024 Reliability Report that 35 GWs of additional transfer capability was needed throughout the national grid.
Electricity does not flow over transmission lines like water or natural gas through pipes. Changes in supply or demand and other system conditions instantaneously impact power flows across the entire Eastern (600GWs), Western (160GWs) and Texas (95 GWs) AC interconnections based on physical laws unique to electricity.
This speed-of-light delivery must be kept in balance between power sources and uses at all times, while maintaining a constant frequency of 60 hertz and ensuring that the amount of energy transmitted does not exceed the capacity of any individual transmission line in the interconnection. Every second, complex computer programs surveil every source, line and use to identify limitations that result from system changes so that operators can respond effectively.
Because every change affects the entire AC network, complex, protracted studies must be made for all system additions, slowing down the ability to keep up with requests to connect to the system.
The Chinese and Europeans have long recognized these same problems.
In 2005, the Chinese began to overlay their 1300 GW AC grid with an high-voltage DC system, creating a hybrid grid that currently consists of 55 HVDC lines with a combined 170 GWs of transfer capacity. Another 27 GWs is under construction. Many of China's high-voltage DC lines are more than 1,500 miles long, and a new 12 GW line is over 2,100 miles long, which is like connecting California to the MidAtlantic.
The Europeans formed a consortium, ' Friends Of The Supergrid,' in 2006 to consider a high-voltage DC supergrid over their 540 GW AC grid. Europe also established ENTSOe, a group of all transmission owners, to study their collective transmission needs and coordinate a unified plan with the European Union.
But the U.S. has not taken full advantage of high-voltage DC capability and other important new technologies. In 2016, Alexander Macdonald published a study based on 10 years of NOAA supercomputer analysis of system conditions and weather patterns, which concluded that every dollar of high-voltage DC investment would produce $3 of benefits while also substantially reducing carbon emissions.
Opportunities also exist to replace existing conductors with composite core conductors, which would substantially increase the carrying capacity of existing lines. And a new technology known as grid-forming inverters can detect system anomalies in milliseconds, providing immediate benefits to real time grid reliability. This capability is especially important as more 'rotating iron' is reaching the end of its useful life.
If these matters are not addressed, America will not have the energy to meet the needs of a growing economy. We need a program to upgrade the national electric grid, which should include three critical elements.
First, like the establishment of the transcontinental railroad and interstate highway system, America needs to build a national, preferably buried, network of high-voltage DC lines that overlays the existing AC network. In addition to the physical security and environmental advantages, buried high-voltage DC lines can be placed in the same Right of Way as existing AC transmission lines.
Second, the transfer capacity of the existing AC network should be improved by hot line conversion, without taking any line outages, to composite core conductors on crucial circuits.
Third, the advantages of grid-forming inverters to real-time grid reliability are intuitively obvious; installation of these devices should be a priority.
With rapidly rising demand, the future is coming at us quickly, and we are not ready for it. These three priorities, effectively implemented, would assist in ensuring that there is sufficient reliable energy to meet the growth needs of the American economy.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Atlantic
29 minutes ago
- Atlantic
The Death of Democracy Promotion
On April 29, 1999, precision-guided NATO bombs tore through the brick facades of two defense-ministry buildings in Belgrade, the capital of the rump state of Yugoslavia. The targets were chosen more for symbolic reasons than operational ones: The American-led coalition wanted to send the country's authoritarian government, at that time engaged in a brutal campaign of ethnic cleansing in Kosovo, a clear message that human rights weren't just words. They were backed by weapons. For decades, the ruins of the buildings, on either side of a major artery through central Belgrade, were left largely untouched. Tangled concrete and twisted rebar stuck out of pancaked floors. Serbian architects fought to preserve the destroyed buildings; the government has treated them as a war memorial. At the time of the 1999 NATO bombings, Aleksandar Vučić, Serbia's minister of information, was tasked with denouncing the West and backing his country's despot, Slobodan Milošević. Today, Vučić has risen in the ranks to become Serbia's president—an apologist for Russia who attacks the press, has been accused of nurturing close ties to organized crime, and is rapidly dragging his country toward authoritarianism. Vučić is not Milošević—he has not led his country into genocidal wars or faced judgment for war crimes at The Hague—but until recently, he might have expected that his authoritarian style would make relations with Washington rocky. That time is past. Instead of harshly condemning Serbia's abuses, America's president, Donald Trump, will build a Trump Tower Belgrade on top of the defense buildings' ruins. 'Belgrade welcomes a Global Icon,' the slick website for Trump Belgrade proclaims. 'TRUMP. Unrivaled Luxury.' The contract for the project has been signed with Affinity Partners, Jared Kushner's investment firm, which is largely funded with billions of dollars in cash from Saudi Arabia. This story is the material expression of the second Trump administration's turn against a long-standing tradition of Western democracy promotion—and of an embrace of conflicts of interest from which the world's despots can only take inspiration. The authoritarians who govern small countries such as Serbia no longer need to fear the condemnation, much less the bombs, of the American president when they crack down on their opponents, enrich themselves, or tighten their grip on power. On the contrary—the American flirtation with similar practices emboldens them. With Trump's unapologetic foreign policy in his second term, American democracy promotion is effectively dead. Prior to the Soviet Union's collapse, Western diplomats cared far more about whether a dictator was an ally or adversary to the Soviets than about the quality of a country's elections or its respect for human rights. If diplomats from Washington or London pushed too hard for democracy, there was a credible risk that a Western ally could defect and become a friend to Moscow. Once the Soviet Union ceased to exist, the world's despots no longer had so much cover; Western diplomats could now push harder. New norms developed, which led to a rapid surge in the number of competitive, multiparty elections. Human rights were no longer just an aspirational buzzword. Some countries lost foreign aid or were shunned by the international community if their government committed atrocities. This pressure to adopt democracy and protect human rights was never applied equally. Powerful countries, such as a rising China, became largely immune to Western cajoling. And strategically important countries, such as Saudi Arabia, in many cases got a free pass, facing little more than rhetorical condemnation while presidents and prime ministers continued to shake hands and ink major arms deals. Meanwhile, in smaller countries, such as Togo, Madagascar, or the former Yugoslavia, the post–Cold War push for democracy and human rights often came not just with lip service, but also with teeth. After all, the White House could afford to lose the goodwill of Madagascar in a dispute over values; its geopolitical priorities would suffer little downside. Moreover, weak countries such as Madagascar depended on foreign aid, such that Western governments wielded far more leverage in them than they did in larger, more self-sufficient countries. For a while, then, small-time despots faced a credible threat: Go too far, rights defenders could hope to warn strongmen, and a Western ambassador could soon be knocking on the palace door. None of this is to say that Western powers were always on the side of the angels. During the Cold War, Western governments made lofty speeches about democracy and human rights while funding coups and arming politically convenient rebels. The CIA played a role in overthrowing popularly legitimate governments, such as those of Mohammad Mossadegh in Iran, Patrice Lumumba in the Congo, and Salvador Allende in Chile. Even after the Cold War, Western governments have cozied up to plenty of friendly dictatorships, in countries such as Saudi Arabia and Equatorial Guinea. And yet, particularly in the last 30 years, Western pressure and foreign aid have been significant forces for global democratization. Dictators and despots knew that the world was paying attention, which gave them pause before they turned their guns on their own people. Foreign aid became tied to the verdicts of election monitors, which drastically expanded operations after the end of the Cold War. With funding from the United States and other Western governments, opposition parties, journalists, and civil-society organizations received training on how to bolster democracy. And when political transitions toward democracy took place, as in Tunisia after the Arab Spring, billions of dollars in support flowed in. Partly because of these shifting international norms, the expansion of political freedom was so abrupt after the end of the Cold War that many believed democracy, having won the ideological battle against rival models of governance such as fascism and communism, had become an inexorable force. But the democracy boom under Bill Clinton gave way to failed wars under George W. Bush and inaction under Barack Obama. Bush, who justified wars in Afghanistan and Iraq partly under the guise of a democracy-and-freedom agenda, inadvertently discredited the notion of values-based 'nation building.' A widespread perception among American adversaries took root that democracy promotion was just a code word for 'regime change carried out by American troops.' This gave dictators political cover to boot out international NGOs hoping to bolster democracy and human rights, branding them as mere precursors for a heavy-handed invasion. Obama, picking up the pieces of that failed foreign policy, downplayed the grand vision of a more democratic world as a guiding principle of American diplomacy, even as countries across the globe began to pivot toward authoritarian rule. Now the world is steadily becoming less democratic. According to data from Freedom House, the world has become more authoritarian every year since 2006. Trump's second term may provide the most potent autocratic accelerant yet. In his first term, Trump routinely praised dictators, including in a memorable moment when he boasted about exchanging 'beautiful letters' with North Korea's tyrant. President Joe Biden, with his much-touted Summit for Democracy, tried to recenter democracy as a core principle of the State Department, but that effort was overtaken by successive geopolitical emergencies in Ukraine and Gaza. Now, with his return to power, Trump has gone further than before to fully uproot democracy promotion from American foreign policy. The list of dismantled initiatives is long. In the first months of the second Trump administration, Elon Musk's Department of Government Efficiency not only slashed America's foreign-aid machinery, effectively destroying USAID, but also targeted the National Endowment for Democracy: a bipartisan grant-making organization established under Ronald Reagan to strengthen democratic values abroad. The Trump administration has effectively kneecapped Voice of America and Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, outlets that have aimed to provide news and information to those living under oppressive regimes. Once viewed as bulwarks against authoritarian censorship, these platforms are now overseen by Trump acolyte Kari Lake. Secretary of State Marco Rubio recently announced an overhaul of the State Department that effectively eliminates programs that work toward peace building and democracy. As an extra gift to the world's despots, on July 16, Rubio signaled that America will no longer stand in the way of election rigging: Washington will condemn autocrats who use sham election-style events to stay in power only if a major American foreign-policy interest is at stake, the secretary made clear, and from now on, American comments on foreign elections will be 'brief, focused on congratulating the winning candidate and, when appropriate, noting shared foreign policy interests.' The world's worst dictators can rest assured that the next American diplomat to come knocking on their palace doors is more likely to be looking for property rights than human rights. Countries such as Saudi Arabia, which always have had a free pass, might not notice the difference. But brutal regimes in less-noticed parts of the world have now gotten the memo that the Trump White House is indifferent to democracy and human rights, and they are acting accordingly. Cambodia has cracked down on journalists while courting American military officials. Tanzania's leader recently arrested his main rival and charged him with treason. Indonesia's president has begun changing laws, militarizing the country, and undermining the principle of civilian rule. Nigeria's president made a power grab that critics say was blatantly illegal. And El Salvador's president, Nayib Bukele, who had faced international criticisms for egregious human-rights abuses, isn't just absolved from American pressure—he's become a much-celebrated friend of the White House, lauded because of his gulags. Already, in regions such as Southeast Asia, brave pro-democracy reformers find themselves newly vulnerable and isolated. In Myanmar, pro-democracy forces fighting the country's military dictatorship long benefitted from American aid. The DOGE cuts put an end to that—and gave the repressive junta an enormous boost. In Thailand, a human-rights organization that once sheltered dissidents fleeing Cambodia and Laos has been forced to close its safehouses, allowing those regimes to more easily hunt down and even kill their opponents. These funding streams had accounted for a tiny proportion of the U.S. government's budget, but their elimination sends a strong signal to the world's autocrats: that virtually no one will now interfere with their designs. Admittedly, the United States is less powerful than it once was, and other countries have always had their own domestic agendas, regardless of what Washington has said or done. But that a growing number of the world's despots no longer have to weigh economic costs or diplomatic consequences for crushing their opponents has already made a difference. Thomas Carothers and Oliver Stuenkel of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace highlighted the fact that shortly after Musk referred to USAID as a 'criminal organization,' autocrats in Hungary, Serbia, and Slovakia began targeting pro-democracy NGOs that had received money from the agency. President Reagan once celebrated the United States as a 'shining city on a hill,' a 'beacon, still a magnet for all who must have freedom, for all the pilgrims from all the lost places who are hurtling through the darkness, toward home.' That is apparently no longer the aspiration of the American government, which now sends its foreign pilgrims to a dehumanizing prison in El Salvador, arrests judges, and suggests that following the country's Constitution may be optional. For democracy to flourish, citizens must yearn for it—and demand it of their governments. At the moment, few can be looking with admiration to the United States as a model. Already in 2024, according to a 34-country survey conducted by Pew Research, the most common perception of American democracy was that the United States 'used to be a good example, but has not been in recent years.' The first months of the second Trump administration can hardly have improved that impression. Nonetheless, democracy—which provides citizens with a meaningful say over how their lives are governed—still has mass appeal across the globe. Brave, principled activists continue to stand up to despots, even though they do so at much greater peril today than even just a few months ago. In Serbia, for example, pro-democracy, anti-corruption protests have persisted for months. Students and workers are demanding immediate reforms and calling on Vučić to resign. In years past, precisely this kind of movement would have provoked White House press releases, diplomatic visits, and barbed statements from the Oval Office. In April, at long last, came a high-profile visit to Serbia from someone closely linked to the Trump administration. But instead of offering support for the pro-democracy demonstrators, this American emissary condemned the protests and implied that they were the sinister work of American left-wingers and USAID. That visitor was none other than Donald Trump Jr., who had arrived in Belgrade to fawn over Vučić in an exclusive interview for his Triggered with Don Jr. podcast, in the months before the newest Trump Tower opens for presales.
Hamilton Spectator
40 minutes ago
- Hamilton Spectator
Savaria Announces Date for Second Quarter 2025 Financial Results
LAVAL, Québec, July 28, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) — Savaria Corporation ('Savaria') (TSX: SIS) one of the global leaders in the accessibility industry, announces it will release its financial results for the second quarter of 2025 after market close on August 6, 2025. Savaria's management will hold an investor conference call and webcast at 8:30 a.m. Eastern Time (ET) on Thursday, August 7, 2025. Investors and members of the media are invited to participate on a listen-only basis. Conference call access: To access the conference call, you must register online and choose the method to join the call, either by dialing the number provided to you or by entering your phone number to receive a call from the system. Webcast URL (EN): About Savaria Corporation Savaria Corporation ( ) is a global leader in the accessibility industry. It provides accessibility solutions for the physically challenged to increase their comfort, their mobility and their independence. Its product line is one of the most comprehensive on the market. Savaria designs, manufactures, distributes and installs accessibility equipment, such as stairlifts for straight and curved stairs, vertical and inclined wheelchair lifts and elevators for home and commercial use. It also manufactures and markets a comprehensive selection of pressure management products for the medical market, medical beds for the long-term care market, as well as an extensive line of medical equipment and solutions for the safe handling of patients, including ceiling lifts and slings. The Corporation operates a sales network of dealers worldwide and direct sales offices in North America, Europe (UK, The Netherlands, Switzerland, Italy, Germany, Poland and Czech Republic), Australia and China. Savaria employs approximately 2,500 people globally and its plants are located across Canada, the United States, Mexico, Europe and China. Facebook : Instagram : LinkedIn:
New York Post
an hour ago
- New York Post
Trump says his priority to ensure Gazans are ‘getting fed,' shrugs off push to recognize Palestinian state
WASHINGTON — President Trump said Monday that he isn't 'going to take a position' on recognizing Palestinian statehood — and that his focus is on ensuring starving Palestinians are fed. 'I'm not going to take a position. I don't mind him [British Prime Minister Keir Starmer] taking a position,' the president said when asked about Starmer's assertion that recognition of a Palestinian state is a step toward peace. 'I'm looking for people getting fed right now,' Trump said next to Starmer ahead of their meeting at Trump Turnberry in Scotland. Donald Trump meets British Prime Minister Keir Starmer and his wife Victoria Starmer, on the day of a bilateral meeting at Trump Turnberry resort in Turnberry, Scotland, Britain, July 28, 2025. REUTERS Palestinians wait for donated food at a community kitchen, in Gaza City, northern Gaza Strip, Saturday, July 26, 2025. AP 'That's the number one position, you have a lot of starving people,' he added. 'The United States recently, just a couple of weeks ago, we gave $60 million. It's a lot of money. No other nation gave money.' Starmer recently announced plans to airdrop aid to Gaza and had joined dozens of Western nations in raising concerns about the dire conditions on the ground in the war-torn enclave. During his meeting with European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen on Sunday, Trump complained that the US wasn't getting a 'thank you' for the humanitarian aid it marshaled for Gaza and claimed he took political heat for giving the aid. Over the weekend, the Israeli military began allowing airdrops of aid to fall into Gaza. Israel's military also announced plans to establish critical humanitarian corridors for United Nations convoys to enter and disperse aid to starving Palestinians in Gaza. The Israeli Defense Force characterized its shift as being 'aimed at improving the humanitarian response' in Gaza and to 'refute the false claims of deliberate starvation in the Gaza Strip.' Over 250 trucks filled with aid from the UN and other groups entered Gaza on Saturday, which is lower than the roughly 600 trucks per day that entered during the previous ceasefire that fell apart in March.
