Winds of change
Tri-State is trying to reinvent itself, but time is ticking
Tri-State Generation and Transmission ended operations at the Escalante Station power plant, near Grant, N.M., in 2020. The G&T is playing catch-up to meet demand for renewables from its remaining members, but is it too little, too late?/ Courtesy photo
On a recent Friday on the Capitol’s steps, Colorado Gov. Jared Polis praised a new energy efficiency and beneficial electrification program offered by Tri-State Generation and Transmission. The credit is deserved. Tri-State, Colorado’s second largest electrical generator, is not the same utility it was 20 years ago, when it was planning a giant, new coal plant. It’s pivoting fast to renewables.
But can Tri-State reinvent itself even more? The loss of member co-ops suggests existential problems. Just two mornings before the announcement, United Power had become independent. The lights didn’t blink. The Brighton-based cooperative has 111,000 members, primarily in the north metro area. It was by far Tri-State’s largest member.
Other co-ops are also leaving. Granby-based Mountain Parks will be gone next January. La Plata Electric Association gave its two-year notice in March. Tri-State will soon have 30% less demand for its electricity.
Departing members have cited the desire for lower-cost electricity and flexibility to generate electricity locally.
The exodus began in 2016. Many expected Kit Carson Electric Cooperative to stumble. Instead, it has soared. Last summer, it completed enough solar capacity around Taos to meet 100% of its members’ daytime needs. It also completed the $37 million payment required to leave remaining Tri-State members whole.
I began following Tri-State in 2005. To finance a giant new coal plant in Kansas, it asked its 44 members to extend their contracts to 2050. Kit Carson refused. So did Delta-Montrose Electric.
In 2006, Kansas Gov. Kathleen Sebelius denied a permit for the coal plant. It was believed to be the first denial of a coal plant on the grounds of global warming. At the time, Tri-State was furious. Eventually, it did get a permit. By then, costs of renewables had plummeted, and coal costs had increased. Maybe Tri-State should erect a statue to Sebelius. Think of the problems for Tri-State were it saddled with the cost of that outdated technology.
Now, Tri-State is rapidly building its renewable portfolio as it prepares to close three coal-burning units in Craig between 2025-30. By decade’s end, it expects to be at 70% renewables across its four-state service territory.
Can Tri-State innovate its way into continued relevance? It was created in 1952 to generate and transmit electricity to rural areas. Federal aid made extension of power lines possible to dispersed farms that investor-owned utilities saw as unprofitable.
Today, Tri-State has to get out from under its stranded coal assets. It lobbied hard to get a carve-out in the Inflation Reduction Act in 2022 for it and other G&Ts, or generation and transmission organizations. It has applied for the maximum available, $970 million.
Might Tri-State G&T end up being Tri-State Transmission? Unlike its coal plants, Tri-State’s 5,800 miles of high-voltage transmission lines have considerable value.
To remain relevant, Tri-State needs to reinvent itself, a more difficult task than reconfiguring urban utilities. The economic geography of rural areas is more difficult. I do hope they figure it out.
Allen Best can be found at BigPivots.com, an e-journal that tries to make sense of the energy transition in Colorado and sometimes beyond.