While the demise of coal power in the U.S. due to economic forces has been well documented, there is no clear plan for the communities left behind. At the federal level, discussions center around Soviet-style financial interventions to save uneconomic coal and nuclear plants by paying their owners what’s needed to remain profitable. This month, we analyzed six soon-retiring power plants owned by Ohio-based FirstEnergy to show the potential to redirect those funds to the communities that stand to lose the most in the energy transition.
America’s Power Plan collects the latest research on smart energy policies from the leaders in America’s power sector transformation. In addition to our blog below, we also produce periodic newsletters (sign up here) on current topics to help policymakers and other stakeholders stay up to date on important questions.
In a May 2016 Trending Topics piece, we wrote that regulators can pursue either outcome-oriented or information-intensive approaches to solving the utility information problem, and get the most out of clean, distributed energy resources (DERs). Two years later, experimentation is happening and solutions are emerging, albeit relatively slowly, centering around integrated distribution planning and performance-based ratemaking. in Washington D.C., a new model has emerged as a possibility – vesting the authority for data sharing and distribution system optimization into a public third-party entity.
As the United States renewable energy market continues growing and our energy needs evolve and shift to cleaner sources, the way clean power is transmitted to our communities must follow the same responsible siting as the energy projects themselves. Wilderness-quality lands, important wildlife habitat, and cultural resources areas are not appropriate for transmission lines and energy development. Thankfully, an ongoing process shows how we can build regional transmission projects crucial to a clean, reliable, affordable energy future without sacrificing environmental stewardship.
ERCOT’s planning reserve margin is well below their target for resource adequacy this summer. To a naïve observer, the energy-only market structure’s test will be whether ERCOT can avoid shortfalls, i.e. a loss-of-load event. But no level of investment or reserve margin can entirely eliminate all risk or protect the grid from ever falling short. Instead, the true test of ERCOT’s market design is whether strong investment signals, i.e. higher prices, spur investment to drive the system back from acceptable risk to a more desirable level of risk. Fortunately ERCOT looks capable of meeting this subtler test, and it should stay the course to avoid expensive capacity markets.
Mark Ahlstrom, President of the Energy Systems Integration Group, lays out a creative solution that just might be the power market fix we’ve all been waiting for. He observes that we are having so much trouble making the markets work for the wave of new grid technologies upon us – but maybe that is because we set up the markets with a limited view of future options.
If you’re a utility regulator, you’re undoubtedly hearing about new regulatory models, more specifically, performance-based regulation. But regulatory processes can constrain the ability to get policies designed well in the implementation and incentive design phase. Experience shows it pays to get out in front of this movement and start the conversation now with stakeholders in your state.
We launched America’s Power Plan five years ago under the premise that renewables growth would soon accelerate, and therefore we needed to proactively examine and reform institutions that impede a high-renewables, low-cost, reliable grid. Updated levelized cost of energy (LCOE) data and forecasts from international energy analysts show that renewable energy costs keep falling, making changing outdated institutions more urgent than ever.
Offshore wind has always seemed just out of reach in America, but the offshore wind boom has officially arrived in Northeast Atlantic states – to the tune of 8,000 MW of planned capacity. In fact, the U.S. offshore wind industry is in a similar situation to Europe’s ten years ago. If they follow the same consistent path, Northeast consumers, local economies, and investors all stand to benefit.
Three often-used market terms – price suppression, capacity payments, and price spikes – that contain hidden biases against good market design and clean energy have become accepted into the market vernacular. It’s time to re-examine these terms, refine them, and reframe the conversation about designing markets for a clean, affordable, reliable electricity future.
For specific insights, we asked experts in the field, many of whom have been involved in America’s Power Plan from the beginning, to comment on changes they are witnessing in the field and what they are hopeful about for 2018. We focused on five topics: the implications of the changes in relative costs of electricity technologies, new utility models, wholesale power markets, transmission policy, and customer rate design. Here’s what we heard from some of our nation’s brightest minds.