Long-Term Impacts of Constrained Transmission Deployment on the Cost-Reliability Tradeoff

Traditional Resource Adequacy (RA) frameworks in the U.S. undervalue the contributions of inter-regional transmission to resource adequacy during stress periods, focusing on the availability of nameplate capacity instead. However, availability of nameplate capacity does not always translate into electricity delivery, especially during tail events. Moreover, the rapid deployment of energy-limited resources and increasing electricity demand challenge existing resource adequacy frameworks and couple regional electricity demand and availability of supply via transmission. We propose a two-stage framework that goes beyond the existing capacity-centered approaches to reveal the RA contributions of transmission. In the first stage we introduce a multi-objective optimization framework to quantify the merits of transmission expansion via Pareto Frontiers under alternative futures of no transmission investment, primary energy resources availability and demand growth. The second stage focuses on tail events and leverages the results of the first stage to characterize the risk profile of regional consumers across the U.S. under the alternative energy futures. We find that no new transmission can lead to a more expensive and less reliable national grid across scenarios, however, the impact on regional RA can vary. The probabilistic analysis reveals that transmission investments can alleviate the tail risk of consumers, however, the availability of fuel resources does not always alleviate regional tail risks. Our findings inform policymakers and utilities on the prioritization of transmission investments to mitigate the risk of widespread outages, also for tail events, and ensure reliable and affordable electricity delivery to all.