Legalectric

We all know “need” for electricity is down, down, down:

PJM 2009 3rd Quarter State of the Market

Take a few minutes and scan that report — it’s telling it like it is.  Prices down 40+ % and demand down at least 4+% this year so far (that’s what they’ll admit to, and I figure it’s a lot worse than that!).

Decreased demand was a reason for cutting out the Indian River – Salem part of the MAPP line…

HOT OFF THE PRESS, decreased demand is the reason coal plants are being shut down in Pennsylvania, FOUR coal plants in Pennsylvania:

Exelon to close 4 Penn. generating units by 2011

December 2, 2009

COLUMBUS, Ohio (AP) — Exelon will shut four 50-year-old power generating stations near Philadelphia in 2011 that the power generator says are no longer economic to operate and are unnecessary to meet shrinking demand for electricity in the region.

About 280 jobs will be eliminated, but the company said Wednesday that it is looking for ways to reduce that number through such efforts as putting workers in other open jobs and buyouts.

Exelon, based in Chicago and one of the nation’s largest power companies, said it will record pretax charges totaling $258 million related to the shutdowns through 2011.

The company will close two units at the Cromby Generating Station in Phoenixville and two units at Eddystone Generating Station in Eddystone effective May 31, 2011.

“Decreased power demand, over supply of natural gas and increasing operating costs, has led Exelon Power to retire these units,” Doyle Beneby, senior vice president of Exelon Power, said in a statement.

The announcement comes a day after Progress Energy said it will close 11 coal-burning power plants in North Carolina that do not have scrubbers by 2017. The units represent about 30 percent of the company’s power generation from coal.

The company will continue to operate three coal-fired plants in North Carolina after 2017 that are equipped with emission controls at a cost of more than $2 billion.

The plan was prompted by state regulators ordering the company to provide retirement plans for the coal-burning plants that lack scrubbers to reduce emissions. Some of the plants are more than 50 years old.

For Exelon, one unit at Cromby operates on coal and the other on either natural gas or fuel oil. They were put into operation in 1954 and 1955. The station will close when the units are retired.

The Eddystone units were put into operation in 1960 and both operate on coal. Two other units that run on either natural gas or coal and four oil-burning units will continue to operate at the station.

Alan says that the Eddystone ones are a couple of the first supercritical coal plants around, they’ve been running for ages.  But that they’d close down the coal and keep oil-burning units?  What gives?  Peaking power?  Or???  Doesn’t make sense to me.  It doesn’t get much dirtier than burning fuel oil.  Those have to go too…

It’s warm here in New Jersey, unseasonably.  We’re slogging through the hearing.

The good news is that we’ve gotten pretty much everything in the record that we need, including, well not quite, got the 2Q State of Market, and last night I found that the 3Q was released November 13:

(great, can’t upload here, grrrrrrrrrr)

PJM – 2009 3Q State of the Market Report

Page 9 will tell you all about decreased peak demand:

2005          133,761

2006          144,544

2007         139,428

2008         129,481

2009         126,805

Down 2,676 MW this year, down 9947 from 2007 to 2008.  Down every year since 2006!

Here’s a report of yesterday’s festivities:

State told power plan pros, cons

By SETH AUGENSTEIN
saugenstein@njherald.com

NEWARK — Power grid experts testified about the need for the 500-kilovolt Susquehanna-Roseland power line Thursday in front of a dozen attorneys at the offices of the state’s Board of Public Utilities.

The four experts — three from grid operator PJM Interconnection, one from power company PSE&G — stated their case in proposing the power line, which will double the height and power of the existing line from Susquehanna, Pa., to Roseland, in Essex County, cutting through the southern half of Sussex County along the way.

Testimony surrounding routing and construction of the project was put on the record at evidentiary hearings earlier this week by PSE&G experts and engineers. The PJM-dominated needs panel will complete its input today, and will be followed by the objector’s experts. The need issue is considered to be the main question determining the future of the controversial power plans before the BPU.

PSE&G, the state’s largest electric utility, said it needs to build the line and have it operating by 2012 to meet the electricity demands and reliability requirements expected for the region in the coming decades.

Opponents have rallied around several issues, including safety and health issues stemming from having a 500-kilovolt system on the same pole with a 230-kilovolt system, the potential environmental damage the construction project will do, the visual and property value impact of the towers and whether bringing in electricity generated in other states meets New Jersey’s own goals of increasing so-called “green” and renewable sources of power.

Thursday’s seven hours of question-and-answer testimony included hypertechnical engineering explanations, staccato series of acronyms involving state and federal regulatory agencies and figures spanning all details of the $750 million project.

The PJM experts conceded regional power demands have decreased the last three years, but maintain their forecasting models predict increasing power needs beginning in 2012, which could induce brownouts if the line is not built.

“We don’t use actual loads, we use forecasts of loads,” said Steven Herling, PJM’s vice president of planning.

“I can only characterize it as a significant increase,” added John Reynolds, a senior economic analyst at PJM.

Four attorneys cross-examined the experts, with few breaks.

Carol Overland, a lawyer specializing in power grids, represented the Fredon-based citizens group Stop the Lines. Overland peppered the four-man panel with questions for about three hours, with detailed points about the methodology of deciding upon the lines as a power solution.

Catherine Tamasik, the attorney representing a seven-town coalition opposing the lines, followed with questions about determining the need through the peak demand of electricity during hot summer days.

Julia LaMense, the lawyer representing four environmental groups, including the Sierra Club, called into question the pressing need of the lines, as her clients have done since the plan was proposed last year.

Henry Ogden, New Jersey’s assistant deputy public advocate, finished the cross-examination by asking about the strategic routing of the lines, which could coincide with the much-publicized closing of a Bergen County power plant.

Joseph Fiordaliso, Board of Public Utilities commissioner, presided alone over the hearing. He occasionally urged the board’s experts to answer the questions succinctly, and to avoid “dissertations.” He had similar advice for the attorneys.

“I would appreciate it if you would just ask a question,” he said.

Karen Johnson, spokeswoman for PSE&G, said the experts had done an efficient job of presenting what the power company considers an energy necessity.

The opposition attorneys said they were getting the job done.

“We got on the record what we wanted on the record,” Tamasik said.

The hearings are expected to continue today. The state has set aside hearing times through Tuesday, if necessary. The board expects to reach a final decision in January.

The decline continues, of course, of course…

Xcel’s 3rd Quarter investor conference call was this morning.  I really enjoy these calls, because I get to hear them forced to tell bad news.  And the bad news for me this morning was that it wasn’t as bad as I’d hoped it would be.

You can listen to the call on Xcel’s site:

3rd Q 2009 Xcel Energy Earnings Conference Call

You can also get a transcript of the call at Seeking Alpha:

Transcript – will show up here soon

Today I actually listened to it, and Krie, who sits next to me most of the day, got all fired up, and jumped off the couch and started in on her “squeaky bark,” not the bit #100 lb. German Shepherd “something’s going on down on the street” roar, or her frantic “I see a cat and I want LUNCH!” lunge, buther “squeaky bark,” sounding like a Pomeranian, too cute, and each time David Sparby said something, she start squeaky barking, like she does when she hears puppies on a Doggyspace video… hilarious.  But I wonder what she was saying… or what she was hearing!

Anyway, here’s the real poop:

Xcel 3rd Quarter

or at the SEC site:

SEC – Xcel 3rd Quarter Earnings

It’s down, down, down, but … well, I want to see it down even more!!

Note the massive decrease in electric revenues, but that’s offset by an equal drop in fuel and purchased power, so the bottom line looks better.  What I care about is sales, though, not the bottom line, and it’s good news to see Electric Revenues drop by 955 in 2009 thus far, or a tadbit under 15%.  Works for me!!!

Looks to me like it’s down 3%!  Need, schmeed, there isn’t any…

Capitalism happens — let the market decide!!

Last night, Rep. Steve Drazkowski and Rep. Tim Kelly (who wasn’t there!) hosted a meeting about CapX 2o2o.

But Rep. Randy Demmer, 29A was.

As one person said, he had a “deer in the headlights” look as he sat in the front of the room.  Did he have any idea what he’d be in for?  I’d talked with him a bit when he came in, and he said he hadn’t heard from many constituents about CapX… oh… OK, well, we can do something about that!  And it’s good he showed up to find out what was going on and hear the word on the streets and in the fields.

Short version of the meeting:

• Bill Glahn gets roasted for MOES “Minnesota_Resource_Assessment” report, which is utter crap, the report, that is… the roasting was well-deserved.

• PUC, Commerce, and DOT show up en mass and toady for process and project.

• Rep. Drazkowski utters words of placation, but did not promote Nov. 4 joint committee hearing on repeal of Minn. Stat. 117.19.  HE’S ON ONE OF THE COMMITTEES, EARTH TO MARS!!!

• Affected landowners don’t buy it,  they get that fundamentally CapX 2020 is not needed and are pissed-off at the crap (see above).

• CapX said they were not going through or around Rochester.

There were two things I let slide, can’t take on everything:

1.Their statements about Big Stone were odd, theywell knows that Big Stone could not interconnect without CapX, and I have the electrical studies which prove it, which after trying 5 times to make it work with a line to nowhere (Granite Falls) then assumed CapX in try #6…   But I also wonder whether CapX Brookings (hence all of CapX) can go forward without Big Stone.

2. They kept saying “this is all about local load” and denying the LaX to Mad line, and kept talking about Rochester as the driver, yet they did not note, of course, the new gas plant at West Side sub or the four 161kV lines that are planned.

Overland’s Scorecard (concept stolen from Deb!):

CapX:     0
PUC:     -5
DOT:       1
Commerce:   -4
The People: +1

Longer version, bigger photo:

The people did a good job of expressing their displeasure and disbelief.

Bill Glahn brought up the Minnesota Resource Assessment Survey!  Bad move…  He  got one of my awards for that Minnesota Resource Assessment Survey, and here’s Maccabee – Presentation to LEC 10/23/09 , another voice saying it’s outrageous.  Last night  Alan Muller got him good about it, told him” it was  an unsatisfactory report, basically just a regurgitation of the business plans of MN… no independent thinking and not in the interests of the citizens of Minnesota …”  Alan does have a way with words.  When asked for a response Glahn looked abashed and admitted that he knows many people are unhappy with it.  AS WELL HE SHOULD!  I mean really… to use as an example that phony “chart” of Steve Rakow’s on p. 6:

… with no ID of meaning of X or Y axis, it’s deceitful, but they pulled that in CapX when faced with decreased demand, entering this chart, then citing its entry in the CapX 2020 Certificate of need record as if it means something.  Oh, pleeeeeeeeze…  We’re way below the 2004 actuals, and this forecast, for the Blue Lake expansion, it’s CapX 2020 era forecasts, we’re about 1,500MW down and growing, down 15% so far, down 2.5% in 1&2Q 2009, SEC 3Q filing and investor call due any second now will take it down further:

After last night’s meeting, Bill Glahn is certainly under fire, but I also got the feeling due to the cadre of state employees stumping for CapX, that it’s their perception that it’s in trouble.  It could be something as simple as they have no financing to do it, that demand is so far down that it makes no sense even to PUC and applicants to build it, or …  The DOT was distancing itself, there’s been a lot of pressure on DOT.  The DOT has its “Policy of Accomodation” (at issue in Chisago Transmission Project III, or IV, the last round, where Xcel stuck poles, BIG poles, right in the middle of the new plan for US Hwy. 8, in one example, right next to and over a business), and here it is:

DOT Policy on Utility Accomodation

…and I don’t think they’re going to change that anytime soon.  At the Legislative Energy Commission meeting in September, there was mention of an October 13 meeting with the DOT, but Dave Sykora, DOT, mentioned that was cancelled, and instead they met last week.  There were no specifics disclosed, but the feeling I got from what was said was that it didn’t go the way legislators wanted it to, DOT didn’t cave.  Legislators are looking, from Rep. Drazkowski’s statements last night, and from Rep. Westrom’s comments at the LEC meeting, for a way to do the project with minimal landowner pain.  I don’t think that’s doable, and it’s sure not desirable.   CapX 2020 is a project that shouldn’t be built, and if it is, it will cause considerable pain, for landowners, applicants and legislators!

Also noteworthy last night was the general failure to accept “need” and a high level of understanding, and for the most part, people are getting the broader picture.  (there was an odd comment by Burl Haar that if there were questions about the appeal of the CapX decision, that they post most things on the docket, and to check with him!).  So is the PUC’s argument that this belongs at the District Court, and not the Appellate Court (despite what Cupit says) on display in the docket for the world to see?  I doubt it, but I’ll check.

Last night, Drazkowski kept referring to efforts to alter the eminent domain law, but he was evasive and didn’t disclose important info, like the upcoming November 4 hearing before Energy & Civil Justice (he’s on Civil Justice!) (Upcoming hearing on repeal of eminent domain exemptions), and he didn’t advise on how to advocate for change, dropped the ball, wouldn’t even pick it up.

Here’s the info on the hearing:

WEDNESDAY, November 4, 2009
10:00 AM
Joint Meeting of the Energy Finance & Policy Division and Civil Justice Committee
Room: 5 State Office Building
Chairs: Rep. Bill Hilty, Rep. Joe Mullery
Agenda: Informational hearing on HF1182 (Bly) Public service corporation exemptions repealed.

Anyone wishing to testify should contact Andy Pomroy at andy.pomroy [at] house.mn
Last night’s meeting in Mazeppa on CapX 2020  follows on the heels of one last Monday night in Chisago, about an 855MW gas plant proposed by LS Power, the Sunrise River Energy Station.  Click here for  Report on Monday Chisago meeting.  They’ve  proposed at least three gas plants before at that site, and they didn’t go far, this is the biggest, and most public, and will need mega transmission, BUT LS Power’s Blake Wheatley admitted at the Chisago meeting that they don’t have a plan, don’t have a PPA, don’t have anything but a tax exemption (est. $9-10 million) from legislators who should have known better than to sell out their constituents for nothing, and then after being caught, for a very small “Host Fee.”  At that meeting, Mike Bull said Xcel won’t need any power for a long time, 2016-2017 (and if he’ll admit that at long last, we know it’s really a lot further out).  As with last night’s meeting, at the Chisago meeting there was, despite heavy lobbying and presence of unions like IBEW and Building & Trades, a clear understanding that the LS Power plant is not needed, and that peak demand is down.  Granted LS Power made the mistake of walking into an energy educated community, but even Bob Cupit was surpirsed by the turnout, said he’d never seen such a large crowd, ~500, standing room only in a hockey rink sized room (Also, FYI, Bob stated to the audience that “If citizens feel the system still failed to consider issues, the decision of the PUC can be appealed to the state Court of Appeals.“)

There is a theme.  Minnesota doesn’t need more transmission, and we won’t, in the words of Xcel’s Mikey Bull, need an generation anytime soon.  Am I paraphrasing correctly, Mike? (Duck & cover — the You Tube of that is forthcoming!!!)  The MOES Minnesota_Resource_Assessment is a crock.

Here are the LEC members — it’d be good to contact all of them, and let them know what you think about “need” for generation and transmission, decreasing demand, and CapX 2020 in particular:

http://www.commissions.leg.state.mn.us/lec/members.htm
Here’s Senate member info:
http://www.senate.leg.state.mn.us/members/index.php?ls=#header
Here’s House member info:
http://www.house.leg.state.mn.us/members/hmem.asp

And about CapX and eminent domain, contact:

rep.steve.drazkowski [at] house.mn

rep.tim.kelly [at] house.mn

rep. randy.demmer [at] house.mn

Once more with feeling — Get thee to the House Energy and Judiciary Committee meeting:

WEDNESDAY, November 4, 2009
10:00 AM
Joint Meeting of the Energy Finance & Policy Division and Civil Justice Committee
Room: 5 State Office Building
Chairs: Rep. Bill Hilty, Rep. Joe Mullery
Agenda: Informational hearing on HF1182 (Bly) Public service corporation exemptions repealed.

Today’s the day that the Legislative Energy Commission meets to hear about MOES Resource Assessment Study.  Focus is on the horse’s ASS of Assessment, it is deserving of one of these guys:

Here it is:

Minnesota Resource Assessment

The LEC meeting starts in 10 minutes — hammer down!

FRIDAY, October 23, 2009
12:30 PM
Room: 200 State Office Building

And when you get there, hammer on them, there’s no excuse for a report like this.  Look at their forecasts, they admit the system peak was 2006, folks, it’s been downhill from there, that’s more than a “blip” and when you add in the 1.5% conservation mandate, where are we?  They’ve not addressed this.

If you look at where Xcel thought we’d be, in their 2004 forecasts for Blue Lake, we’re below where they said we’d be in 2004.  Hmmmmmmmmm, take a look at Xcel’s forecast:

And Xcel’s peak demand reality:

And very graphically:

We’re down at least 2-2.5% in 2009 from SEC filings.  At this rate, how long before we’re at the 2004 forecasted 9,100MW?  MOES, how stupid do you think we are?  If I were on the LEC, I’d be outraged!  I’m not on the LEC so I’m just … just… lacking in words…  If I produced something like this, I’d be fired.