UTILITY CO-OP CONNECTION
South Carolina co-op pursuing
three-pronged energy strategy
By Anne Mayberry
USDA Rural Development
Rural Utilities Programs
entral Electric Power Cooperative in South
Carolina is not an average utility, and neither
are its members average electricity
consumers. The co-op recently saluted its
members for their efforts to embrace
conservation, use renewable fuels and fund research into
clean-air technology. The co-op and its members have
committed up to $10 million per year to fund projects that
will help improve the environment and meet future energy
needs.
“Our members deserve credit for what they’ve done, ” says
Ron Calcaterra, the co-op’s president and CEO. Because of
their support, the co-op is “committed to investing in
renewable energy and energy efficiency.”
Studies prompt action
Recent actions by the co-op are the result of two new
studies commissioned by Central Electric to address its
growing energy needs. Calcaterra explains that the rapid
growth in the state — combined with the fact that most of its
energy is purchased — triggered the need to base the co-op’s
future direction on factual information rather than
speculation.
“There were lots of comments about how we should meet
our energy needs. We wanted to know what was possible, not
just technically achievable,” Calcaterra says. Rural electric
cooperatives are searching for safe, reliable and affordable
electric power, but worry that they won’t find it before
demand surpasses capacity. They’re not alone in having that
concern.
Measures to increase use of renewable fuels and decrease
carbon emissions will remain before Congress for the
foreseeable future. Investors are looking for a silver bullet to
generate returns on renewable fuels and carbon-capture
technologies. While the decision to move toward a
renewable-fuel portfolio can win accolades, it requires careful
evaluation.
“There has been a lot of speculation about the best way to
address climate change,” says Van O’Cain, spokesperson for
the Electric Cooperatives of South Carolina. “Unfortunately,
there isn’t always a lot of information that tells you the best
way to proceed.”
The challenge to meet future needs while providing
reliable, affordable and environmentally responsible power
led to the two independent, third-party studies. One study
reviewed energy-efficiency programs while the other
explored the value of renewable energy investments. Results
of the studies are guiding South Carolina rural electric
cooperatives as they determine which programs will deliver
the greatest return on investment in addressing climate
change issues.
Reliability
The energy studies focused on several sources of power.
Currently, wind is not a viable alternative for providing the
amount of power that electric cooperative utilities will need
to meet demands growing at twice the nationwide average,
Calcaterra says. “Setting up wind turbines off shore might
provide more electric power, but there’s a whole gamut of
problems with getting that power back on shore.”
Use of solar power would cost five-to-ten times the cost of
coal, and “the sun doesn’t always shine when you need it,”
Calcaterra notes. Baseload power must be available 24 hours
each day, seven days a week.
Gary Stooksbury, CEO of Aiken Electric Cooperative in South
Carolina, echoes Calcaterra’s comments. “I think we were somewhat
surprised that there was not more renewable power available in South
Carolina.” But, he adds, these studies will help people understand that it
will be difficult to rely on renewable energy for 15 percent of the nation’s
energy portfolio in the near future.
The biggest surprise contained in the study concerned biomass. “There
are as many as a half-dozen sites across the state with wood waste that
could be converted to electric power,” says Calcaterra. “Part of the cost of
biomass is a function of how far you have to transport the wood. But it is a
renewable resource.”
The energy-efficiency study put into perspective what would have the
greatest impact, with the additional advantage of being among the easiest
programs to implement. Stooksbury explains that the study showed that
conservation and wise use of energy offer “the most advantageous and
quickest payback.”
For this reason, the decision was made to immediately tackle one of the
studies’ recommendations. “We’re launching a massive plan to distribute 7
million compact fluorescent lights (CFLs) to our members, beginning this
spring,” says Calcaterra. “Because CFLs use one-third of the energy and
last up to 10 times longer than standard bulbs, their total energy savings
represents electric power used by about 35,000 homes.”
Affordability
Affordability is a key consideration for South Carolina cooperatives and
an additional reason to expand energy conservation and efficiency
programs. Conservation efforts that would cost $500 annually per
household are not realistic for many South Carolina rural electric
cooperative residents, Calcaterra explains. He notes that more than 20
percent of the co-op’s consumers live in manufactured homes.
Programs that increase heating and cooling efficiency result in savings
that the study characterizes as having not just “technical potential,” but
also significant “achievable potential.”
Environmentally responsible
Renewable energy, conservation and energy-efficiency programs
individually may not achieve significant energy savings. But together, they
can, Calcaterra says. “There is no silver bullet, but there may be silver
birdshot.”
That’s why net metering — which pays consumers who install their
own renewable-energy generation equipment (such as solar panels) in
their homes — is part of the South Carolina strategy. “We want those
entrepreneurs. We believe in our members. We want to set up a system
that gives incentives for helping find solutions,” Calcaterra says.
South Carolina cooperatives expect to be part of the solution. They
have invested $2.5 million to fund research at the University of South
Carolina to look for ways to burn coal cleaner.
Calcaterra explains: “We have become very efficient at burning coal.
The new plants are far more efficient and cleaner than those built 20 years
ago. And those plants were much better than those built 50 years ago. But
it has taken us anywhere from 20 to 50 years to accomplish that. We will
take care of the problem, but it cannot happen overnight.”
