.

jpmorgan_miso

“MISO” trademark owned by… JPMorgan Chase!

But seriously folks!  JPMorgan got caught with its hand in the cookie jar again, CAISO and MISO have filed claims of abusive practices at FERC.  Here’s the short version of what they allegedly did (it’s allegedly for now, but just you wait!) — from the second article below:

In the Midwest, the alleged manipulation involved day-ahead margin assurance payments, under which generators are compensated for situations when their real-time dispatch falls below the level set by the day-ahead dispatch schedule. As in California, traders found a flaw where they could force the market to make “inappropriate or excess” payments by placing lowball bids in the day-ahead market – as low as negative $500 per megawatt-hour – and much higher bids in the real-time market, Miso said.

Here’s the Amended CAISO Petition against JPMorgan Chase:

CAISO Petition

Still looking for the MISO Petition and FERC’s legendary Constellation Order.

In the news:

JPMorgan Chase Manipulation Scandal Raises Specter of Enron

JPMorgan probe highlights FERC power trading crackdown

JPMorgan’s Role in Power Market Comes Under Scrutiny

In the STrib:

E-mails sought in U.S. probe of JPMorgan, electricity sales

A federal judge ordered JPMorgan Chase & Co. on Thursday to explain why it shouldn’t be compelled to turn over e-mails sought by U.S. regulators in a probe of potential electricity market manipulation in the Midwest and California.

U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly in Washington gave JPMorgan until the end of the day on July 13 to respond. The U.S. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) sued JPMorgan on Monday to release 25 e-mails in an investigation of possible manipulation of power markets in the Midwest and California by J.P. Morgan Ventures Energy Corp.

FERC is examining efforts by Houston-based J.P. Morgan Ventures to extract excessive payments or above-market prices from Midwest Independent Transmission System Operator (MISO)and California ISO, Thomas Olson, a lawyer in the FERC investigating division, said in a court document. He said the probe focuses on winning inflated “make-whole” payments, which the grid operator pays when a power plant’s output isn’t needed as anticipated.

In court papers, FERC said JPMorgan’s bidding techniques in the Midwest and California resulted in at least $73 million in improper payments. FERC opened the probe in August after complaints from Midwest and California grid operators that JPMorgan’s bidding practices were abusive, according to the agency’s initial court filing.

MISO oversees the electric grid in parts of 11 midwestern states, including Minnesota and Wisconsin, and Manitoba.

“We believe we have complied in all respects with the law, as well as FERC rules and applicable tariffs, governing this market,” Jennifer Zuccarelli, a JPMorgan spokeswoman, said in an e-mail. “We stress that this investigation is ongoing and that no conclusions have been reached or findings adjudicated.”

She said “we welcome the court’s assistance in resolving this dispute over documents.”

JPMorgan’s commodities business owns or has the right to output from several electricity generating facilities. Only one power plant, an unnamed facility in Michigan, is mentioned by FERC in court papers.

It remains unclear whether utilities and power generators in the region were hurt by the bank’s alleged market manipulation. Xcel Energy, based in Minneapolis, said in a statement that it was aware of the investigation “but at this point, we don’t have information about the allegations or if we may be impacted.”

FERC has accused the bank of improperly using attorney-client privilege to withhold or redact 53 e-mails subpoenaed in April. The company has since released 28 of the e-mails.

In a three-page order, the judge said that “JPMorgan shall address why it should not be required to produce the 25 at-issue e-mails in unredacted form or to submit them to the court for in-camera review.”

Grid operators solicit bids from electricity suppliers each day to meet expected demand. Typically, 90 percent or more power consumed is secured in what is known as the day-ahead market. Any supply shortfalls because of weather or unexpected plant shutdowns are met through bids placed in real-time.

Star Tribune staff writer David Shaffer contributed to this report.

It’s the 4th of July

July 4th, 2012

I’ve been noticing this for a while now, people may laugh, dismiss it, but it’s very real.  CORN IS GETTING BIGGER FASTER, sooner in the year, because they’re planting earlier, and by the time the 4th rolls around, the corn is way high.  Now I realize this is off a bit, because we took this on June 30th, so imagine it a bit taller today:

dsc00859

Does that look knee high to you?

Alan Muller had a few more minutes of recognition for his work against incinerators.

The MPCA made its decision at the Board’s June 26 meeting, Alan’s testimony is kick-ass as usual, starting around 2:47. The Cottage Grove part starts about an hour into the webcast:

CLICK HERE TO WATCH THEM APPROVE THE 3M INCINERATOR PERMIT

This time, it’s the Cottage Grove 3M Incinerator in Huffington Post this week:

Incineratorsign

(that’s a NAB sign out in front of our house, Barn Bluff visible way down the hill in the distance…)

3M Incinerator Can Burn Outside Hazardous Waste, Minnesota Says In Defeat For Residents

Bets Thorkelson’s opposition to 3M Co.’s hazardous waste incinerator began in the mid-1990s, when she learned that four moms of boys on her sons’ hockey team had breast cancer.

“About the same time, I had also noticed that many people on my street were starting to die of cancer, including a young boy from a form of lymphoma,” said Thorkelson, who lives in what she describes as a blue-collar neighborhood in Cottage Grove, Minn., about two miles from one of the St. Paul-based mega-corporation’s factories.

Her distrust of 3M grew when she received a diagnosis of breast cancer herself a decade later. And it mounted further when she heard about the company’s plans to truck in additional hazardous waste to use as fuel for an incinerator.

Last week, after three years of public meetings, petitions and pleas from Thorkelson and other residents, the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency approved a permit to burn non-3M waste, as well as materials confiscated by local law enforcement agencies, allowing the company to save as much as $2 million in natural gas. Neighbors said they fear it will add lead, mercury and other toxic pollutants to the air they breathe — on top of the water and soil contamination already blamed on the company.

No link has been proven between past 3M pollution and cases of cancer. However, the state of Minnesota is suing 3M over claims that the company polluted groundwater and surface water for more than 50 years with perflurochemicals, which scientific studies have suggested may cause cancer.

“The [incinerator] decision is very disappointing, though not surprising,” Thorkelson said. “Our community has now become the toxic dumping ground for U.S. industries.”

Knowing the permit would be controversial, the state Pollution Control Agency decided to involve residents in discussions concerning the permit, according to the agency’s Jeff Smith. “At the heart of the issue was whether the public felt like they were enough part of the process so that they were informed and had a say,” Smith said. “Over 15 additional restrictions that might not otherwise have been required were negotiated between citizens, the city and the company. At end of the day, we overachieved in involving the public.

“There will be no additional increases in pollutants beyond what 3M has been permitted to emit,” added Smith.

Representatives from 3M also emphasized that the air pollution coming out of their incinerator with the additional hazardous waste would not rise above historic levels , thanks mostly to updated equipment that traps most of the particles.

But are the regulatory limits enough to protect Cottage Grove children from developmental problems, asthma, even cancer? And were 3Ms historic pollution levels ever safe?

Alan Muller, who once promoted incinerators for DuPont, said he shares the community’s concerns over uncertain answers to both questions. He now helps advise opposition groups, including the Coalition of Concerned Cottage Grove Citizens.

“For every pound of lead that goes into the incinerator, a pound comes out,” said Muller. Toxic metals can’t be broken down like other particles, he explained, so they will either spew from the smokestack, end up in the ash that’s trucked to a landfill, or get treated with the plant’s scrubber water before winding up in the Mississippi River.

A little lead can potentially cause a lot of harm, especially to a child’s developing brain. The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recently acknowledged the risks by lowering the threshold for lead poisoning.

“It’s not that hard to find out hazardous waste incinerators are a bad scene. But this is a political, not a tech, issue,” said Muller. “The idea of weakening environmental regulations to revive the economy is not localized. Unfortunately, the same bogus arguments continue to be made all over the country.

“I never had a feeling that MPCA was acting in good faith on this,” Muller added. “Whenever you have a powerful corporation, with a lot of clout in the state, it’s hard for regulators to stand up to them.”

Fred Luden, a resident of Cottage Grove and a former 3M employee, returned from vacation in time to share his concerns at last Tuesday’s final hearing. He told the MPCA that it struck him while sitting on a lake with his grandkids just what a pristine environment he enjoyed while growing up in Minnesota, and how contaminated parts of the state have become today.

“You’d like to see at some point in time the ball go back the other way, to an environment that you can pass down to your children, grandchildren, great-grandchildren — hopefully,” said Luden, a member of the board of directors for the Coalition of Concerned Cottage Grove Citizens. “And that they will enjoy the same ability to drink the water, breathe the air, grow what they want in a garden and eat the fish again.”

That’s little comfort for some families who currently live in what they said is a contaminated environment.

“I have some peace of mind,” said Thorkelson, “knowing my grandchildren do not live within a 10-mile radius of the incinerator.”

Somebody kill this thing!!!  It just won’t die…

silverbullet

So here we go again — check out our exhibits:

Comment – mncoalgasplant.com

So what were we commenting on this time?  Excelsior Energy says it wants to build a gas plant, and use all the permits and perks it got as a “coal gasification” project.  Over my dead polar bear!

Initial Excelsior Request – May 31, 2012

Commerce Comments

Excelsior’s Response to Commerce IRs June 26, 2012

Can’t we just shut the door on this, lock it tight, and GO HOME?

… and what a downer it is:

Opinion – Unpublished

Question – given this is the first ever ruling about Minn. Stat.216F.081, why is this unpublished?

And, as I commented on the STrib site, what struck me was the court’s misplaced reliance on the Renewable Energy Standard as energy policy in MN.  Xcel holds the 2 PPAs for this project.  Whether they build this 78MW project does not make or break Xcel Energy’s compliance with the RES, Xcel is already ahead of the game, in compliance for years into the future.  Compliance with the state’s RES is not at issue here!  That’s a red herring.

Here’s the Coalition for Sensible Siting’s take:

CSS Appellate Decision Press Release

Here are some articles:

StPPP – Minnesota court of appeals throws out county obstacles to Goodhue wind project

STrib – Wind farm doesn’t have to follow setback rules

RochPB – Appellate court rules in favor of AWA Goodhue wind project

MPR – Court ruling green lights Goodhue County wind turbines

KSTP – Wind Turbine Project in Goodhue County Will Move Forward