Search
December 25, 2025

Posted on

NECA Panel Discusses DERs, Impact of Order 2222

Last September, FERC ordered RTOs and ISOs to open their markets to distributed energy resource aggregations. The commission said that the grid operators’ existing rules create participation barriers for aggregations in their capacity, energy and ancillary service markets.

While proponents have lauded Order 2222 for its intention, there are concerns regarding the lack of visibility and affordability of some DERs. There is also the question of whether the order intrudes on state jurisdiction, according to FERC Commissioner James Danly, who dissented on the ruling. (See FERC Opens RTO Markets to DER Aggregation.)

Attendees of a Northeast Energy and Commerce Association webinar Wednesday discussed these concerns and the impact of the order, as well as other potential roadblocks to DERs’ extensive deployment.

Order 2222 defines DERs as resources located on the distribution system or subsystem, or behind a customer meter. They include energy storage, thermal storage, intermittent generation, distributed generation, energy efficiency, and electric vehicles and their charging equipment. It requires RTOs and ISOs to allow DER aggregators to register as market participants under models that accommodate their physical and operational characteristics. Grid operators must set minimum size requirements for DER aggregations of no more than 100 kW.

Sarah Bresolin, director of government and regulatory affairs with ENGIE North America, said DERs are “a learning curve for everybody, and we’re all working fairly well to overcome the obstacles that we need to deploy these resources.”

Sheila Keane, assistant director of electric power at the Massachusetts Department of Public Utilities, said it is important to update the ISO-NE interconnection tariff and process.

“We’ve got a lot of these resources on our system, and the impacts are starting to roll up to the ISO level, so there’s been a lot more coordination and communication, and just figuring out those touchpoints,” Keane said. “We’re working through how to accommodate energy storage into our interconnection process in a meaningful way.”

Keane added that with new resources, even if they are small, comes the need for “significant upgrades to the distribution system.”

“[Upgrades] are expensive, and we don’t want that to be a barrier to continued deployment, so we’re looking at ways where we might enable some proactive investments in the distribution system rather than waiting for projects to trigger the need and sharing those costs among broader groups of customers.”

Vandan Divatia, vice president of transmission, policy and compliance at Eversource Energy, said the amount of DERs at some substations is greater than the transformer capacity.

“The number of resources behind the transformer is greater than the load that it was serving to a point where it can’t even send power back into the grid without upgrading the system,” Divatia said.

He added that it is “actually a fun challenge” where investment in the distribution system is necessary because it creates an “impact on our decarbonization goals, and it is going to create an impact on how the future grid evolves.”

“We just have to be as thorough as possible to make sure we don’t impact reliability through the whole transition, and we give enough of a heads up and expectation to these developers on what it’s going to take to interconnect,” Divatia said.

James Pigeon, manager of distributed resources integration for NYISO, said a principal benefit of DERs is “definitely” the addition of new types of resources adding to resilience while there is a challenge with size.

“In our model, we said anything down to 1 kW is acceptable as a participant in an aggregation, and there is a 100-kW aggregation minimum [with Order 2222],” Pigeon said. “Early on, one of our concerns was, what happens if we have thousands of these 100-kW aggregations that potentially slow down our dispatching system? That’s something we’ve been keeping an eye on as we expect the number of different resources that will be participating and having to solve for on a real-time basis grow.”

Impact of Order 2222

Mike Berlinski, director of emerging technologies for Customized Energy Solutions and webinar moderator, said that Order 2222 is “not overly prescriptive.”

“It doesn’t get into interconnection … and it doesn’t require that these ISO markets are going to provide enough money to make the project work, so you still have that challenge,” Berlinski said.

Bresolin was hoping that the order would address interconnection and models that would make participation in the capacity markets “a little bit easier for very small resources.”

Keane added that she is interested in voluntary coordination between state regulators and the RTOs, which she said is “appropriate and understandable.”

“We’re very much interested in establishing some sort of coordination,” Keane said. “I think that the trick that we have to think through in New England is we’re six different states [with] six different appetites or opinions on the order.”

Divatia said coordination is “going to be so important to make sure everyone gets involved” in implementing Order 2222, with the first compliance filing due in July.

Pigeon concluded that he is “just very excited to see where this plays out.”

“We’re seeing some of the biggest changes in 130 years in the electrical system, and I foresee it changing even more rapidly as we continue to progress,” Pigeon said. “I can only imagine what the next idea is going to be that looks crazy but turns out to be a reality.”

Posted on

California PUC Slams SCE Over Power Shutoffs

The California Public Utilities Commission and state emergency officials told Southern California Edison this week that it had mishandled its public safety power shutoffs (PSPS) in 2020 and needs to work quickly to improve its communications with customers and government agencies.

“I called this meeting and required the presence of Southern California Edison’s leadership because of my deep concern over Edison’s overall execution of its public safety power shutoff events this past year,” CPUC President Marybel Batjer said in the online meeting Tuesday. “Reliable electricity service is essential to the safety and well-being of all Californians. It is important service in normal times, and it is even more critical now with the majority of Californians learning and working from home due to the COVID-19 pandemic.”

The meeting continued the CPUC’s efforts to enforce PSPS rules for the state’s large investor-owned utilities. Pacific Gas and Electric came under fire last year for its extensive use of PSPS in 2019. (See PG&E Working to Improve Safety Blackouts.)

Batjer was joined on the virtual dais by her three fellow commissioners and Thom Porter, director of the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (Cal Fire), and Mark Ghilarducci, director of the Governor’s Office of Emergency Services (Cal OES). SCE CEO Kevin Payne and five of the company’s vice presidents responsible for PSPS events responded to their grilling.

Batjer noted that SCE called 16 power shutoffs from May to December, including one on Thanksgiving and another on Christmas Eve. The utility continued to use PSPS into mid-January, with rain scarce in Southern California and Santa Ana winds creating hazardous fire conditions.

The day before the Thanksgiving shutoff, the utility told customers they could lose power around 3 p.m., but the utility began to cut power at 9 a.m., before families could prepare their holiday meals. The timing was terrible, and notices to customers were confusing and contradictory, as with many of SCE’s PSPS events, Batjer said.

During power shutoffs, staff members at the CPUC, OES and Cal Fire had “observed numerous instances in which Edison’s PSPS execution appeared tactless and in many regards seemed deficient,” she said. It is not evident the company knows how to communicate with customers or state and local governments when executing shutoffs, she continued.

She added that the company’s reporting to the CPUC after the events was often late and incomplete.

“These missteps cannot be repeated,” Batjer said.

The utility has fallen far behind its targets for identifying customers who rely on medical devices and ensuring they have backup power, she said.

In a letter calling the meeting, Batjer ordered the utility to file a corrective action plan by Feb. 12.

Porter said SCE needs to harden its grid so it does not need to shut off power as frequently.

“PSPS was always meant to be a last resort,” the Cal Fire chief said. “Last resort means we’ve done everything possible to not flip that switch.”

Ghilarducci told the SCE executives that he was concerned the utility was using PSPS as a tool of “first resort.” The state allows utilities to shut off power to prevent fires in a worst-case scenario with winds of 80-90 mph, not 16-20 mph, as SCE has done, he said.

The purpose is “not to be able to provide a liability coverage across the board for any event,” he said.

The OES director said the company had failed to notify the state before some PSPS events and lacked standardized criteria for its decision making. The utility seemed to use different criteria for every event, he said. “There are baseline consistencies that can be driven into the protocols.”

SCE Responds

Payne acknowledged SCE needs to better communicate with its customers.

“If there are areas where we have failed in that regard, we will continue our improvement until we succeed,” he said.

Rapidly changing winds and weather had “created some confusion with notifications,” he said, but the utility is trying to improve its weather forecasting to reduce the number of customers potentially affected by PSPS and to avoid last-minute shutoffs.

The utility is accelerating its grid hardening program after installing nearly 1,000 miles of covered conductor last year, he said.

Jill Anderson, senior vice president for customer service, said SCE was seeking to reduce the number of notifications customers receive leading up to a PSPS event. Typically, they receive about six notices, which can sometimes give conflicting information, she said.

For instance, hundreds of thousands of customers might be notified that they could fall within the scope of a PSPS event only to learn later that they will not lose power. The company has sectionalized its grid so it can target shutoffs more narrowly and reduce the number of residents ultimately affected, executives said.

Phil Herrington, senior vice president for transmission and distribution, said that prior to a Dec. 4 shutoff, SCE notified 230,000 customers that they could lose power but ended up blacking out about 78,000 customers.

Responding to concerns about backup batteries, Anderson said the utility had had trouble identifying and contacting medical baseline customers but was trying to increase its outreach. The utility has provided 830 backup batteries so far and intends to distribute 3,000 to 4,000 additional batteries this year to vulnerable customers in high-risk fire areas, she said.

Ghilarducci said he was “frustrated and perplexed” by the company’s poor performance, with so few people getting batteries in its massive service territory. The state has long made it clear that helping at-risk customers is a top priority, he said.

“This should have been done two years ago quite frankly,” he said. “Where we’re at today in this discussion is not good.”

Payne assured Batjer that all the concerns raised would be addressed in SCE’s February action plan.

Posted on

Report: ‘Rein in’ Massachusetts Utilities’ Influence on Climate Policy

Opponents of legislation to address climate change in Massachusetts are no longer denying the problem but are blocking measures through “discourses of delay,” according to a new study by researchers at Brown University, which recommends the state “rein in” utilities’ lobbying.

The study by the Institute at Brown for Environment and Society, looked at 245 pieces of climate and clean energy legislation in Massachusetts from 2013 to 2018, only 43 of which made it out of committee and only nine of which passed. Based on the lobbying records for the bills, the researchers identified four “interest group coalitions” that regularly oppose climate policy: utilities; fossil and chemical companies; real estate companies; and fossil fuel power generation companies.

Massachusetts was among the first in the U.S. to act on climate change with the 2008 Global Warming Solutions Act, which called for an 80% cut in carbon emissions by 2050. But other states have enacted more ambitious targets since then, the report’s authors say. On Thursday, lawmakers again approved a bill vetoed Jan. 14 by Gov. Charlie Baker (R) that would require an 85% emissions cut from 1990 levels by 2050. (See Mass. Lawmakers Pass Next-Gen Climate Bill, Again.)

“Public opinion is not the barrier to climate policies in Massachusetts,” the authors said. “Rather, leadership’s tight control over the House, the process of handling bills, the openness to lobbying in which corporations far outspend environmental and social advocates, and the lack of transparency together create a hostile environment for ambitious climate legislation. When the Massachusetts legislature has advanced climate and energy policy, it has been in spite of, not because of, these factors.”

Those who testified publicly against climate policies said they supported climate action while opposing the specific policy proposal, according to the report, which named four tactics:

      • “Policy perfectionism,” in which opponents call for well-crafted solutions that are supported by all affected parties;
      • Appeals to social justice that focus on the burdensome costs of climate action on low-income and minority residents;
      • “Fossil-fuel solutionism,” suggesting the fossil fuel industry should be recognized for already leading the way on reducing emissions via energy efficiency and lower-carbon fuels;
      • “Premature success-ism,” where existing climate targets are held up as ambitious enough to resolve climate change issues.

The study said the pervasive usage of those four tactics among opponents of new climate legislation was “striking” and “subtle,” and proponents of climate policy must understand them.

Lobbying Spending

Utilities, the report said, were the highest spenders on lobbying activities, with Eversource and National Grid together spending about $3.5 million on lobbying during the study years. They were frequently allied with the Associated Industries of Massachusetts, which spent more than $2 million over the period. By comparison, two of the most active climate and energy lobbyists for the same period, the Environmental League of Massachusetts and Clean Water Action, together spent about $500,000.

The two utilities were most often in favor of legislation that promoted large-scale hydropower and wind energy, but they took an aggressive stance against solar, which they said in public testimony is too expensive.

Hydro and wind projects “would result in substantial contracts for the state’s largest utilities,” while solar is “decentralized on residential and commercial rooftops and therefore … cuts into electric utilities’ revenues,” the report said.

The report said that, in terms of the climate legislation they support, utilities appear to be the most successful lobbyists of the active groups in the state during the study period.

“The bills [National Grid and Eversource] opposed were most likely to fail, while they also saw the most success in getting bills passed that they supported,” the report said.

An Eversource spokesperson said in a statement that the report oversimplifies the challenges of creating a clean energy future.

“We are actively involved in collaborating with legislators and stakeholders to share views on how we can create an affordable, clean energy future,” the spokesperson said. “That legislative process, designed to generate ideas and debate, often means a large number of bills are introduced at the start, with a few that end up being adopted.”

The study researchers noted that solar, hydro and wind energy companies were active on legislation specific to their industries but rarely lobbied for broader bills to tighten greenhouse gas reduction targets and institute a carbon tax.  “Only two solar companies, and no hydro or wind companies, recorded any lobbying on these bills.”

Utilities’ control over the electric grid, “can act as a deterrent against public opposition from renewable energy companies,” the report said. “Utilities were cited by renewables developers as threatening delays in hook-ups if green energy firms took positions contrary to theirs.”

A National Grid spokesperson told RTO Insider in a statement that, as a regulated utility, the company abides “by the multistep interconnection guidelines overseen by the Massachusetts Department of Public Utilities.”

Recommendations

The report recommends increasing the legislature’s transparency by making committee hearings and written testimony accessible via the Internet, requiring more detailed reporting of lobbying activities and requiring floor votes be conducted by roll call.

Clean energy organizations should increase their own lobbying efforts while utilities should be restricted, the authors said. “These are state-regulated monopolies, who should not be able to use ratepayer funds to lobby at the Statehouse.”

The spokespersons for Eversource and National Grid said the companies’ lobbying expenses are not paid for by customers.

Scrutiny of utilities’ lobbying is not new. Some utilities that sought to recover Edison Electric Institute (EEI) membership dues have been challenged in their rate cases because of EEI’s lobbying activities.

A 2017 Energy and Policy Institute (EPI) report recommended that regulators demand that utilities demonstrate how ratepayer funds used for lobbying or political influence benefit ratepayers. The Paying for Utility Politics report points to the National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners as the appropriate place for oversight of lobbying costs allocation among utilities. (See Public Affairs Activism: Astroturf, Secret Donors and ‘Swampetition’.)

Matt Kasper, research director at EPI, and a co-author of the report, told RTO Insider that there has not been a unified effort from regulators on the recommendations made in the report. “It’s been a piecemeal approach,” he said.

In 2019, the California Public Utilities Commission refused to allow Southern California Edison to shift nearly $2 million in EEI dues to ratepayers. Regulators said the company did not provide enough evidence to determine how much EEI’s services should cost ratepayers.

Posted on

Massachusetts Lawmakers Pass Climate Bill, Again

Lawmakers in Massachusetts on Thursday passed a climate bill identical to one vetoed by Gov. Charlie Baker (R) in mid-January.

The vetoed bill was passed by the House of Representatives and Senate at the tail end of the last legislative session. In his letter vetoing the bill, the governor said he did not have enough time to review the bill and make suggestions for changes. (See Baker Vetoes Mass. Climate Bill.)

“Although the refiled bill is the same as what was filed last session, there are opportunities for compromise with the Baker administration because the timing is different,” David Cash, dean and associate professor at the University of Massachusetts Boston’s McCormack Graduate School, said in a statement to RTO Insider. “Not constrained by the imminent end of the session, the administration can offer amendments and negotiate. But the legislature can also override a future veto, something it did not have time to do in the last session.”

The bill now goes to Baker, who has 10 days to sign or veto it. If he signs it, the law will put Massachusetts on a path to reducing emissions 85% below 1990 levels by 2050, with interim targets of 50% by 2030 and 75% by 2040. It also will set emissions limits across state power sectors and allow for an additional 2,400 MW of offshore wind power solicitations.

“The commonwealth has an opportunity to advance its leadership with bold legislation, and if it does so now, it will have the added benefit of getting significant tailwind from the Biden-Harris administration,” Cash said.

Speaking in the Massachusetts Senate on Thursday, Sen. Michael Barrett (D) pointed to the aggressive stance on climate that the Biden administration has taken in its first days as a reason to move quickly on the goals of the bill. He said that the numbers in the bill would stand up to new federal emission-reductions targets that could come later this year.

Posted on

Xcel Excels with ‘Stellar’ 2020 Earnings

In what its CEO said was “truly a stellar year,” Xcel Energy on Thursday reported year-end earnings of $2.79/share, a 15-cent increase from its 2019 performance.

“Last year was certainly a challenging year,” Xcel CEO Ben Fowke told financial analysts during an earnings conference call. “But our employees came through delivering on our financial and operational objectives while mitigating the impacts of COVID and helping our communities.”

Fowke highlighted the Minneapolis-based company’s environmental, social and governance (ESG) performance, telling analysts Xcel estimated it has reduced carbon emissions by about 50% from 2005 levels. Xcel has 3.8 GW of wind capacity; it is converting a Texas coal plant to natural gas; and it has proposed closing Colorado coal plants by 2024.

Eliminating the last 20% of carbon emissions will take technologies becoming commercially viable, Fowke said, because “this transition is based on economics.”

“You get a lot of bipartisan support when economics can drive the decisions,” he said. “Could we go faster than our goal of 2050? It’s possible. But I think that would mean that those technologies that we refer to — whether it is the next-generation nuclear; whether it is the development of hydrogen; whether it is carbon capture working economically; whether it is long-term storage — they have to come into the money much sooner than I think they will.”

Fowke said completely moving away from fossil fuels will require “an incredible emergence and acceleration of technologies,” reminding listeners that “2035 is like tomorrow in utility land as far as technologies go.”

“I have always said we will move as fast as the speed of technology, and that is what we will do,” he said. “We support 100% carbon free. We are aligned with that. I think under the Biden administration, you will see an acceleration of [electric vehicles] and an acceleration of transmission build. I think you will see an acceleration of R&D and the technologies that we need to achieve those goals, whether it is 2035, 2040 or 2050.

“Nobody would have thought that we would be where we are today as an industry, and certainly not at Xcel Energy, just five years ago, so I’m excited about what the future possibilities hold,” Fowke said.

Xcel’s quarterly earnings came in at $288 million ($0.54/share), in line with Zacks Investment Research’s consensus estimate. Xcel reported earnings of $292 million ($0.56/share) for 2019’s fourth quarter.

Wall Street reacted to the earnings announcement by driving Xcel’s share price to $65.15 in mid-afternoon trading, following Wednesday’s close of $63.82. Xcel was trading at $63.64 in after hours.

Posted on

Report: Southeastern US Straggling in Energy Efficiency

Utility disregard and an absence of state policy is holding back energy efficiency in the Southeastern U.S., the Southern Alliance for Clean Energy (SACE) said this week.

The advocacy group released its third annual “Energy Efficiency in the Southeast” report and hosted a webinar with its policy analysts Wednesday to discuss how Southeastern states can improve.

SACE reported that in 2019, the Southeastern states — Alabama, Tennessee, Florida, Mississippi, Georgia and the Carolinas — were once again “solidly at the bottom” of the U.S. in energy efficiency efforts. The states achieved just 0.26% annual savings during 2019, less than half the national average and well below Northeastern states’ average of 2.15%, according to the report. SACE gauges energy savings as a percentage of prior-year retail sales.

The group said just three utilities account for nearly 75% of all efficiency savings in the Southeast, “while some of the biggest utilities do almost nothing.”

“We have a handful of states delivering the vast majority of savings,” SACE Energy Efficiency Director Forest Bradley-Wright said during the webinar.

SACE Energy Policy Manager Heather Pohnan said Southeastern states typically trail other parts of the country in efficiency performance.

“In fact, [the region] usually comes dead last in rankings,” Pohnan said. She said that in 2019, North Carolina was the only Southeastern state to near the national average of 0.67% energy savings.

SACE also found that South Carolina and Georgia also did better than their Southeastern peers, but they are still below the national average.

“Florida and Mississippi continue to drag the regional average down, while Tennessee and Alabama now deliver virtually no utility efficiency savings for residents,” Pohnan said.

SACE Executive Director Steve Smith said energy savings have become even more “critically important” during the climate crisis and the economic downturn from the COVID-19 pandemic. “This is clearly more important than ever. … The greenest electron is one that you never use.”

The report singled out the Tennessee Valley Authority and Florida Power & Light for excising their efficiency programs to “almost nothing.”

“Because these are such large utilities, their lack of efficiency savings effectively drag the entire Southeast average sharply downward,” SACE said.

Bradley-Wright said that in 2019, TVA engaged in a “near total abandonment” of energy efficiency measures. The federally owned utility, however, could execute an about-face.

“There could be big changes on the horizon for TVA,” he said, referencing new President and CEO Jeff Lyash and the possible installation of new board members who place more urgency on addressing climate change. “You could see Tennessee Valley Authority become a climate leader. … It’s something to keep an eye on.”

Bradley-Wright said TVA faces pressure to become leaner and cleaner from Memphis Light, Gas and Water, which is pursuing alternative, cheaper energy sources. (See Memphis Moves Closer to Breaking from TVA.) MLGW is TVA’s largest customer, accounting for about 10% of load and paying about $1 billion annually for power.

Pohnan said Duke utilities in the Carolinas account for more than half of energy savings in the Southeast alone. The report also said Georgia Power, Tampa Electric and Dominion Energy performed better than the Southeast’s regional average.

Bradley-Wright said the gap between Duke companies’ efficiency portfolio and Florida utilities can be chalked up to state policies.

“Policy is a huge factor in utility efficiency programs,” he said. “Florida Power & Light does nothing more than meet the minimum requirements.”

However, he said Florida is in the process of revamping its Energy Efficiency and Conservation Act, first rolled out in 1980. “If we see a change, it’s going to come from Florida embracing more modern and standard [goals].”

Bradley-Wright also noted that South Carolina regulators recently rejected Dominion’s integrated resource plan, directing them to include at least 1% energy savings, among other directives.

“It’s not very often that you see IRPs rejected by public service commissions,” he said, adding that it could become more common.

“This is a time of transition in the Southeast. … The region is finally beginning to reckon with its aging fossil fuel fleet,” Bradley-Wright said. “The Southeast has historically lagged behind other regions, but examples of clean energy leadership are emerging in the region.”

Because the report draws on 2019 numbers — the latest available — it doesn’t include the pandemic’s impacts on energy efficiency programs. Bradley-Wright said 2020 efficiency numbers will likely be an anomaly because the pandemic “ground programs to a halt” in early March.

“The pandemic has had a devastating impact on families who were already struggling. … Energy efficiency has an important role to play,” Bradley-Wright said, adding that efficiency programs can lower bills and could even “play a role in debt forgiveness” for families who have racked up unpaid bills. He said that temporary moratoriums on shutoffs don’t do enough to address customer debts.

Posted on

Regional State Committee Keeps MISO Liaison Committee Alive

SPP state regulators agreed Monday to keep up their collaboration with MISO regulators for the foreseeable future, saying the effort is pressuring the RTOs to resolve their seams issues.

“I’d hate to see us pull back at this point,” said the Missouri Public Service Commission’s Scott Rupp during the Regional State Committee’s (RSC) quarterly get-together. “It would be like Christopher Columbus seeing land and saying, ‘Cool. Land,’ and then turning around and going home.”

Rupp spoke for most on the RSC, which supplies four of its members to the Seams Liaison Committee (SLC), where they work alongside counterparts from the Organization of MISO States (OMS).

The SLC recently drafted a list of recommendations to improve operations along the SPP-MISO seam. However, RSC members are not yet ready to sign off on the proposals, which prioritize resolving rate pancaking and adding a category for smaller interregional projects. (See MISO, SPP Regulators Call for Pancaking Fix, Smaller Projects.)

“I am feeling like this [recommendation] document could be improved,” said Texas Public Utility Commission Chair DeAnn Walker, who leads the SLC’s RSC representation. “Maybe I could work … to come up with a document that’s a little bit clearer and presents things where we could move on.”

“If it wasn’t for the Seams Liaison Committee, many of these issues would not be moving forward,” said fellow SLC member Geri Huber, who chairs the Iowa Utilities Board. “I think its’s important to work with the OMS and put together a proposal. … I think we as commissioners should take the lead in pushing MISO and SPP in addressing all these issues we see as a priority.”

Confusion set in over a document drafted by OMS Executive Director Marcus Hawkins. The document attempts to lay out the SLC’s seven recommendations to improve seams operations, but also re-ordered a previous document drafted by Arkansas’ Ted Thomas.

The RSC agreed that the majority of the proposals are being handled by the RTOs’ market monitors or will be addressed by the SPP-MISO joint transmission study, which is only now taking shape. Members agreed that leaves them with little to do besides monitoring progress and encouraging collaboration.

“The two live wires become rate pancaking and [smaller interregional projects],” Thomas said. “When you reduce the pancaking, that leaves a hole in the [transmission] revenue requirement that needs to be filled. There isn’t a solution we can adopt.”

Thomas said he would like to see the RTOs sit down with each other and stakeholders and negotiate, but added, “We can’t compel people to negotiate.”

He said the SLC’s role in developing smaller interregional projects should be “facilitation.” The proposal is based on the Targeted Market Efficiency Projects used by MISO and PJM.

“MISO folks that see the value have to come up with the mechanism that shares benefits,” Thomas said.

The committee agreed to set aside time to further discuss the recommendations during the public portion of a conference call on Feb. 12.

RSC Approves CAWG Recommendations

The RSC unanimously approved a pair of recommendations brought forward by its Cost Allocation Working Group:

      • a proposed tariff change (RTWG RR436) that removes all facilities associated with an interconnection study performed by the Integrated System prior to it joining SPP in 2015. SPP had subsequently completed a study that resulted in different network upgrades.
      • endorsement of a Supply Adequacy Working Group SPP MOPC Briefs: Oct. 13-14, 2020.)

The committee also once again engaged accounting firm Landmark to audit the RSC’s 2020 finances.

Posted on

New FERC Rules Sought on Transmission Planning

A group of former FERC chairs during a virtual panel discussion on Wednesday said the commission should issue new transmission planning rules to help decarbonize the U.S. and provide resilience and energy security.

Pointing to the success of previous landmark FERC orders, the former chairs said that while the specifics of what new rules might look like are not clear, the reasons for them are.

Former Chair Elizabeth Moler told the panel that she is proud of helping launch open transmission access with Order 888, but the transmission system has “changed dramatically in the intervening 25 years.”

FERC, she said, “should take the steps necessary to facilitate more access for new actors, new players, new types of resources, and interregional transmission, and encourage further development of an even more robust interdependent and new generation of power supply.”

The panel was hosted by Americans for a Clean Energy Grid (ACEG) for the release of its new report, “Planning for the Future: FERC’s Opportunity to Spur More Cost-Effective Transmission Infrastructure.” The report calls for FERC to issue a new rulemaking to reform planning, cost allocation and review of transmission in a manner that will support more regional and interregional power exchange for national energy security, reliability, resilience, cost-effectiveness and economic competitiveness.

“A decade after Order No. 1000’s issuance, the nation faces new challenges, and it is clear that neither the current infrastructure nor the rules governing its development match this need,” the report said.

The report supplements ACEG’s Jan. 12 report that alleged RTO policies assigning most costs of large network upgrades to interconnection customers violate FERC’s “beneficiary pays” principle and are no longer just and reasonable. (See ‘Participant Funding’ Violates FPA, Grid Groups Say.)

As part of the report, ACEG makes sweeping recommendations for how FERC could move forward with the rulemaking, but panel members did not specifically endorse the policy details of the report.

They were, however, generally supportive of the idea that proactive planning of regional and interregional transmission infrastructure is necessary in the near term.

“I believe [the grid] will need to double in size to accommodate electrification, transportation, heat and other industrial processes,” said former Chair James Hoecker, who formerly headed the transmission trade organization WIRES. “Even taking into account [distributed generation] and energy efficiency, the doubling of electricity from wind and solar between now and 2035 augurs very strongly for major expansion of the grid.”

Building on Success

Greg Wetstone, CEO of the American Council on Renewable Energy, also joined the panel discussion, saying that there has been no interregional transmission development using the Order 1000 process.

“I’m hopeful [FERC] will be able to address these issues with a new rule that will help modernize and expand our outdated and congested power grid,” Wetstone said.

The failure to bring new interregional transmission to development isn’t for a lack of trying. 4th Time No Charm for MISO-SPP Interregional Study.)

Former FERC Commissioner Nora Brownell said inconsistency between and among regions makes it difficult to make decisions in the planning process. She said that the industry has better data now than it had when she was at FERC in the early 2000s, and it could be better applied to planning.

“I’d love to see FERC not only broaden the data set by encouraging new transmission technologies but also working with [the U.S. Department of Energy] to analyze data to make sure that we are being consistent in how we apply things,” she said.

The ACEG report offers suggestions for how to build on the success of FERC Orders 888, 2000, 890 and 1000, allowing for the lessons learned from their implementation to expand development of “region-spanning and interregional transmission capacity,” with an eye toward cost effectiveness.

In the report, the vision for a new planning process takes shape under four suggestions.

      • Best Available Data: Planning processes would use the best available data and forecasting methodologies to ensure projects address future needs and scenarios. Planning entities would have to evaluate needs based on a range of factors that could influence long-term power demands and the resource mix.
      • Consider Benefits Together: Planning authorities would need to consider all the benefits of transmission together to avoid a siloed approach. The report says classifications of projects by reliability, public policy or economic status can overlook their multiple benefits.
      • Evaluate All Solutions: Transmission planning entities would be directed to evaluate all available solutions — including new physical infrastructure options and grid-enhancing technologies — within regional transmission plans. This approach, the report said, ensures that lower cost or better performing options are included in planning.
      • Plan with Portfolios: Transmission planning entities would select a portfolio of solutions for each regional and interregional transmission plan that is likely to maximize aggregate net benefits. The report said that FERC should encourage innovations to ensure accurate quantifications of transmission-related benefits to support portfolio planning.
Posted on

NRG Extends Petra Nova’s Mothballing Indefinitely

NRG Energy notified ERCOT Wednesday that it intends to indefinitely mothball its gas-fired Petra Nova Power generating unit, a change from its earlier determination to seasonally sideline the plant.

The move becomes effective June 26. NRG previously told ERCOT in September that Petra Nova would be operated annually on a seasonal basis, June 1 through Sept. 30. (See NRG to Mothball Petra Nova CCS Plant.)

The facility is part of the Petra Nova Project, the world’s largest carbon-capture facility. NRG suspended carbon-capture operations at the site in May, citing the “current status” of oil markets.

The project captured CO2 from the plant’s flue gas and funneled it through an 80-mile pipeline to a nearby oil field. There, the captured CO2 was injected into a depleted oil reservoir, softening up the residual oil and improving its flow.

Petra Nova became uneconomical when oil prices plunged last year as the global economy shut down in the face of the COVID-19 pandemic. West Texas Intermediate crude for March delivery settled at $52.85/barrel Wednesday on the New York Mercantile Exchange; $50/barrel is considered the breakeven marker.

The plant has a summer capacity of 71 MW.

ERCOT market participants have until Feb. 17 to file comments on whether the resource is necessary for reliability reasons.

Wind Farm to be Shut Down

ERCOT has also received a notification of suspension of operations for the 120-MW Sherbino 1 Wind Farm in West Texas. The facility ceased operations because of a forced outage and will be decommissioned and retired permanently on Feb. 1, the grid operator said.

Constructed in 2008, Sherbino 1 was a joint venture between NRG and BP Wind Energy North America. Castleton Commodities International acquired the wind farm in 2019.

Posted on

MISO Annual Transmission Spending Tracks Downward in 2021

The cost of MISO’s 2021 Transmission Expansion Plan is set to ring in substantially below last year’s spending level, the RTO revealed during its South subregional planning meeting Tuesday.

Proposed investment for MTEP 21 stands at $2.85 billion for 350 projects, substantially below MTEP 20’s final $4.05 billion spend for 493 projects. The relatively modest numbers do not include any possible projects under the grid operator’s long-range transmission plan, which will rely on MTEP 21 futures. (See MISO Begins Longterm Tx Modeling.)

Broken down, the draft MTEP 21 contains $723 million worth of baseline reliability projects, $331 million in generator interconnection projects and nearly $1.8 billion spend in the “other” project category, which includes other reliability projects, load growth projects, age and condition-based projects and projects driven by other local needs.

“All of this is preliminary. More information and details will be coming up,” Senior Manager of Expansion Planning Edin Habibovic said.

MISO will finish power flow modeling for MTEP 21 in late spring. After collecting transmission owners’ planning criteria last year, the RTO is now conducting assessments of proposed reliability projects to ensure they’re the most cost-effective solutions. It will also study member-submitted alternatives to project proposals, an effort expected to continue until May.

Making a Case for Long-term Transmission

RTO executives appeared before state regulators to bolster justification for its long-range transmission plan. The first such projects could be approved under MTEP 21.

“Roughly 85% of the footprint has some kind of clean energy goal,” Executive Director of System Planning Aubrey Johnson told state regulators during an Organization of MISO States teleconference on Monday. “This is not going to be achievable without some kind of transmission.”

Clean energy pledges from MISO states and utilities are accumulating quickly. Minnesota this week accelerated its 100% carbon-free electricity pledge by a decade, to 2040. However, the state’s two largest utilities, Xcel Energy and Minnesota Power, are still targeting 100% carbon-free goals by 2050.

MISO expects renewables to account for 25% of its capacity by 2039.

“The question becomes do you have sufficient arteries to deliver this power,” Johnson said.

Americans for a Clean Energy Grid this week compiled studies concluding that grid capacity should double or triple in the near future to reliably accommodate an evolving resource mix.

Johnson said MISO will consider lessons learned from its last long-term planning effort, the 2011 Multi-Value Project portfolio, in which projects were analyzed for benefits as a bundle, not individually. MISO has said projects resulting from its newest long-term plan will be assessed on an individual basis, though there is a chance that some complementary projects could be paired up and considered as one.

“It’s not lost on us the regulatory challenges of a portfolio of projects — some that didn’t get regulatory approval until 2019,” Johnson said, referring to the $492 million Cardinal-Hickory Creek line from southwest Wisconsin to Iowa, the last of the 17-project Multi-Value portfolio in line for a groundbreaking ceremony.

During a subregional planning teleconference on Jan. 27, Clean Grid Alliance’s Natalie McIntire said she’s interested in how MISO will avoid “corridor fatigue” with the long-term package, where the general public tires of dealing with new routes and construction.