Grid Resilience

The Need for a Coordinated Approach to Energy Infrastructure

As the current Administrator of the Site Evaluation Committee (SEC) in New Hampshire, I find myself at a critical juncture in our state’s energy landscape. My role involves the review of safety and security protocols for new energy generation, transmission, and storage projects during the permitting process for new facilities, upgrades, and even transfers of ownership. Through this work, I’ve gained deep insights into the challenges and vulnerabilities that come with our increasingly fragmented energy market.

In the past, vertically integrated utilities were responsible for the entire energy process—from generating power to delivering it to customers. This model, while sometimes criticized for inefficiency, had the benefit of centralized coordination and planning. Utilities had full control over the energy supply chain, which allowed for more predictable outcomes and streamlined responses to emergencies.

Today, however, we operate in a deregulated market that has fundamentally altered the structure of our energy system. A mix of regulated utilities, merchant generators, and small-scale distributed generation now forms a complex, daisy-chained network that lacks the coordination and central planning of the old model. While this approach has generally led to cheaper rates for consumers by fostering competition, it also presents significant challenges that we must address to ensure the resilience and security of our energy infrastructure.

One of the most pressing concerns is the resilience of our energy grid to extreme weather events. New Hampshire, like much of the country, has experienced an increase in the frequency and severity of storms, which can wreak havoc on our energy infrastructure. The fragmented nature of our current system makes it difficult to coordinate responses effectively, leading to longer outages and higher restoration costs.

To address this, we must implement a more integrated approach to grid resilience. This involves encouraging greater collaboration between utilities, independent power producers, and regulators to develop comprehensive storm-hardening strategies. These strategies should include upgrading transmission lines, improving vegetation management practices, and investing in more resilient infrastructure, such as underground cables and smart grid technologies that can quickly isolate and address faults.

Cybersecurity is another area where our current system’s lack of coordination poses significant risks. As the energy sector becomes increasingly digitized, the threat of cyberattacks looms large. In a deregulated market, where multiple entities control different parts of the energy supply chain, it is challenging to maintain a unified defense against cyber threats. The lack of centralized oversight can result in vulnerabilities that are exploited by malicious actors, potentially leading to widespread disruptions.

To mitigate these risks, cybersecurity must be treated as a shared responsibility across all stakeholders in the energy sector. This means implementing industry-wide standards for cybersecurity, conducting regular audits, and fostering information-sharing initiatives that allow for a rapid response to emerging threats. Additionally, we may consider the creation of a centralized cybersecurity task force that can coordinate efforts across different entities, ensuring that all parts of the energy supply chain are protected.

Physical security is equally important in safeguarding our energy infrastructure. The dispersed nature of today’s energy system means that critical assets are often located in remote, unprotected areas, making them vulnerable to physical attacks. Whether the threat comes from terrorism, vandalism, or natural disasters, the consequences of a successful attack on our energy infrastructure can be devastating.

To mitigate this risk, we should require all energy projects undergoing the permitting process include a comprehensive physical security plan. This plan should outline measures such as perimeter fencing, surveillance systems, and access controls to protect critical infrastructure. Moreover, investing in training programs for local law enforcement and first responders would be a wise move - equipping them with the knowledge and tools needed to respond to incidents involving energy facilities.

The issue of baseload generation capacity also requires attention. As we transition to cleaner energy sources, we must ensure that we have sufficient baseload power to meet demand at all times. The deregulated market’s focus on cost-cutting and efficiency can sometimes lead to underinvestment in reliable, always-on power sources. Without adequate baseload capacity, we risk facing power shortages, particularly during periods of high demand or low renewable generation. Increased demand from widespread EVs adoption will only exacerbate this problem.

To address this, we must maintain a balanced energy portfolio. This includes maintaining a mix of renewable energy sources, such as wind and solar, alongside traditional baseload generation from natural gas and nuclear power. By doing so, we can ensure that our energy supply remains stable and reliable, even as we work towards a more sustainable future.

Finally, as we integrate new technologies into our energy system, we must prioritize public health and safety. Emerging technologies like battery storage and hydrogen production offer great potential but also come with new risks. Ensuring that these technologies are implemented safely requires rigorous testing, clear regulatory guidelines, and ongoing oversight.

So, while the deregulated energy market has brought benefits in terms of lower costs and increased innovation, it has also introduced new challenges that we must address to protect the resilience, security, and safety of our energy infrastructure. By fostering greater coordination and central planning among the various entities involved in our energy system, we can build a more robust and secure energy future.

###