NC’s power grid is safe for now, but it may be vulnerable to future climate disasters

North Carolinians have turned a worried eye to Texas as millions of people in that state went several days without electricity amid freezing temperatures because much of the power grid failed.

A similar disaster is unlikely in North Carolina. Our state’s grid, mostly controlled by Duke Energy, is better winterized, has larger reserves of power and, unlike the freestanding Texas system, is connected to neighboring states that could offer help during a surge in demand.

“Our job is to be prepared for whatever the weather brings to us,” said Sam Holeman, Duke’s vice president of transmission system planning and operations. “We’ve taken many steps.”

But no matter how well existing systems are protected, North Carolina can hardly rest easy about the reliability of power – and the environmental impact of generating it – as the effects of climate change grow. More frequent occurrences of extreme cold and heat will stress capacity, more frequent storms will increase the risk of fallen power lines and flooded power plants, and more greenhouse gas emissions will add to the problem.

How well North Carolina adapts is largely up to Duke Energy, the utility that serves most of the state. It needs to do more to create a system that will remain reliable and affordable and emit less carbon as climate change presents new challenges.

The best way to build resilience and reduce emissions is to decentralize the generation of power and diversify power sources. That means a wider use of solar and wind power and the creation of more so-called microgrids that can operate even when a wider network goes down. Renewable sources, coupled with rapidly improving battery storage capacity, could bring power generation closer to power users and limit the domino effect that occurs when power is lost in a heavily centralized system.

Duke’s 2020 Integrated Resource Plan for the next 15 years offers scenarios for producing power that include various mixes of fossil fuels and renewable sources. The state’s Public Staff, representing consumers’ interests, will file comments on the proposals Friday with the state Utilities Commission, but the comments – in accordance with statute – will focus more on affordability than resiliency.

Duke is increasing its own solar power use and pledging to reduce emissions, but given the change in weather patterns and the urgency of the climate crisis the utility needs to move faster.

In a recent report the Sierra Club gave Duke Energy low marks for its efforts to add renewables and cut fossil fuels. “While Duke is planning to build some solar capacity, the size of its commitment is paltry, especially for a company with its resources,” the report said.

To spur Duke to make changes, the General Assembly should adjust rules and create incentives that would further encourage grid resilience and reduction in greenhouse gas emissions.

Stephen S. Kalland, executive director of N.C. State University’s NC Clean Energy Technology Center, said, “Duke is going in the right direction. They are just doing it much more slowly than in other parts of the country where the incentives align to do it more quickly.”

The state’s laws regulating utilities tend to be too narrowly focused and should do more to encourage the adaptation of new technologies, even if they involve higher early costs.

“The primary drive is reliability and low coast,” Kalland said. “Anything that doesn’t fit those two markers is undervalued or not valued at all.”

Kalland noted that the Virginia-based utility Dominion Energy is moving to tap offshore wind power because the Virginia state legislature passed a law that provided incentives and mandates.

North Carolina’s power system is not as vulnerable as the one in Texas. Duke Energy and its state regulators deserve credit for that. But the utility – and its state regulators – need to change with the climate.

This story was originally published February 24, 2021 at 12:00 AM with the headline "NC’s power grid is safe for now, but it may be vulnerable to future climate disasters."